Appeal 3278920
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
6 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
an upward extension of an additional single storey, maximum height of 2.8 metres.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
The description of the appeal proposal above has been taken from the Councils decision notice as it is more concise than that on the application form. I also note that the appellant has adopted this description on their appeal form.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is whether the proposal is permitted development.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a bungalow which has been previously extended to include two dormer windows as part of the use of the roofspace for living accommodation. These dormer windows are located to the side and rear of the property.
The appeal proposal seeks to add an additional floor of accommodation together with further residential accommodation within the new roofspace, including a new dormer window to the rear.
Class AA of Schedule 2 Part 1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (the GPDO) allows the enlargement of a dwellinghouse consisting of the construction of one additional storey, where the existing dwellinghouse consists of one storey 1. 1References to “storey” does not include any accommodation within the roof of a dwellinghouse, whether comprising part of the original dwellinghouse or created by a subsequent addition or alteration.
However, this permitted development right is conditional (amongst other criterion) on the roof pitch of the principal part of the dwellinghouse (following the development) being the same as the roof pitch of the existing dwellinghouse.
The GPDO defines the principal part of the dwellinghouse as the main part of the dwellinghouse excluding any front, side or rear extension of a lower height, whether this forms part of the original dwellinghouse or is a subsequent addition. In this case, when assessing whether the proposed roof pitch is the same as the existing dwellinghouse, this must exclude the existing dormer windows.
Whilst it is clear that the main part of the roof of the proposal is the same pitch as the existing dwelling, it is significant that the appeal proposal also includes a new dormer window. As a result, the proposed dormer would not be consistent with the roof pitch of the existing dwelling when the definition of such in the GPDO specifically excludes such additions when assessing whether the roof pitch of a proposal would be the same as the existing dwellinghouse.
Consequently, when taken as a whole, the development cannot benefit from the permitted development rights given by Class AA and therefore planning permission is required for the entirety of the proposal. Therefore, the appeal must be dismissed.
Given the above, it is not necessary for me to consider the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address].
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.
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 2894No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 9 June 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 24 May 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3278920
- Application reference
- 0840/21
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Redbridge
- Planning authority code
- E09000026
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
- 3. Refused prior approval of permitted development rights
- 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
- 16 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
- 13 July 2021
- Valid date
- 13 July 2021
- Start date
- 14 October 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 11 May 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 9 June 2022
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
- 16157
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:26
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21