Appeal 3278419
Public case and site metadata stored from the official casework database, including fields that were empty in the source release.
A clearer next step
See how Inspectors approached issues like yours
Bring your planning decision into a private workspace. We separate the disputed points, then match them with source-located Inspector reasoning from similar appeals.
- See which issues the decision appears to turn on
- Compare the facts and open the full appeal records
One private comparison
How the refusal review worksOne-off service · No subscription
Similar appeals are evidence to inspect, not a prediction of your outcome.
Official decision document
The decision, section by section
4 sections
Read the development description and the Inspector’s text from the official decision PDF in source order. Source headings are retained where available. Personal and contact details are removed by an automated privacy filter; this is source material, not Rules for You analysis.
Section 01
Development description
the construction of a single storey front porch.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site is on a small housing estate, comprising detached two storey houses constructed in the late 20th century. No 4 is built in a ‘neo Georgian’ style, and is located on the inside of a bend in [address]. It is a very prominent dwelling on the road, with the south-west facing side elevation being particularly so, as it is clearly visible when turning the corner into the main section of [address].
The proposed porch has been reduced in size since the application was first submitted. However, it would still be over 3 metres deep in total, with over 2 metres of that depth being enclosed. In this location, a porch of this depth would appear as an incongruous and unduly prominent feature. No 4’s front garden is relatively shallow, and the proposed porch would project nearly halfway to the back edge of the pavement. Its depth would make it appear as out of scale with No 4, whilst its location in a prominent position on a corner would cause it to harm the character and appearance of this part of the estate.
The appellant has drawn my attention to other large porches in the Borough. However, none of them share the combination of excessive depth and prominent location on a corner that exists at the appeal site. Each case must be determined on its own merits, and the existence of these other porches does not alter my view of the appeal proposal.
I conclude that the proposal would have an unacceptably adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area, contrary to Policy CS4 of the Reigate and [name] (2014) and Policy DES1 of the Reigate and Banstead Development Management Plan (2019). These policies seek, amongst other things, development that takes direction from the existing character of the area, and that has due regard to the layout of the surrounding area. The proposal would also be contrary to the advice contained in the Council’s Householder Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Guidance (2004), which advises that porches should reflect the appearance of the existing property, including in its style and proportions.
Planning inspector and document dates
The official casework attribution is grouped under a one-way keyed hash and shown only by its local identifier. Decision-letter dates and page references are extracted by fixed first-page rules and checked against that authoritative record.
Appeal Decision
- Extracted inspector · page 1
- Inspector attribution ID 1850No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 8 October 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 4 October 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3278419
- Application reference
- 21/00455/HHOLD
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Reigate and Banstead Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000211
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Householder developments
- Appeal type reason
- 1. Refused planning permission
- Appeal reason
- Refusal
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- Not recorded
- Floor space
- 7 m²
- Number of residences
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- No
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Not recorded
- Historic building grant made
- Not recorded
- Relates to a conservation area
- Not recorded
- Flooding is an issue
- Not recorded
- Site within an AONB
- Not recorded
- Site within an SSSI
- Not recorded
Decision and dates
The published outcome and every imported case date.
- Official decision
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 6 July 2021
- Valid date
- 6 July 2021
- Start date
- 21 September 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 10 May 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 8 October 2021
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- No
- Bespoke
- No
- Date recovered
- Not recorded
- Date not recovered or derecovered
- Not recorded
- Call-in date
- Not recorded
- Costs applied for
- No
- Enforcement grounds count
- Not recorded
- Enforcement grounds
- Not recorded
Source and catalogue history
When this record appeared in the rolling official release and when the catalogue stored it.
- Source
- Planning Inspectorate casework database
- Source data system
- Horizon
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 4444
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:25
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21