Appeal 3280698
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
first floor side extension and single storey rear extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
This is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and local area.
Section 04
Reasons
The main parties agree that the main area of dispute relates to the first-floor rear extension. Based on the evidence before me I find no reason to take a different view.
Policy LP26 of the Local Plan (2018) seeks high quality development that is well integrated and has regard to and respect for the surrounding area. More specifically, Policy LP30 seeks extensions to residential dwellings that complement the character of the building and are subordinate in terms of size, scale or height. The Housing Design, Supplementary Planning Document (2019) gives more specific guidance, stating that the first-floor element of an extension should generally be no more than half the width of the original rear elevation.
The first-floor rear extension would be more than half the width of the original rear elevation. Although the extension at this level would not impact on the amenity of the neighbouring occupiers, because of its size it would appear unduly dominant and disproportionate to the host dwelling. In turn, the development would appear unreasonably large and incongruous alongside the neighbouring houses that appear modest in form and scale.
The rear elevation of the host property is clearly visible in views from [address]. Given the form and scale of the extension, it would appear discordant in wider views and therefore would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area.
Altogether, therefore, I find that the development would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and local area contrary to Policies LP26 and LP30 of the Local Plan (2018).
Section 05
Other matter
It is not within the remit of this appeal to comment on the events that led the Council to its decision. Any grievances the appellant has in this regard should be directed to the Council.
Section 06
Conclusion
The proposal conflicts with the development plan when considered as a whole and there are no material considerations, either individually or in combination, that outweighs the identified harm and associated development plan conflict. For the above reasons, the appeal is 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 295No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 27 October 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 19 October 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3280698
- Application reference
- 1539/21
- 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
- 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
- 54 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
- 10 August 2021
- Valid date
- 10 August 2021
- Start date
- 4 October 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 20 May 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 27 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
- 5185
- 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