Appeal 3289131
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
the conversion of an existing garage into a habitable room.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the conversion of an existing garage into a habitable room at [site address] , Thamesmead, Greenwich [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/2937/HD, dated 16 August 2021, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: PA1, PA2 and PA3.
The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed in the materials that match those used in the existing building.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in the appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host terrace and the surrounding area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site is occupied by a three-storey terrace dwelling with a single storey attached garage projecting from the front elevation. The dwellings within the host terrace and surrounding area are similar in scale and appearance, with a characteristic three-storey, flat roof style and a single storey projection to the front, giving the properties a relatively uniform appearance.
In the immediate area around the appeal site, including the host terrace, the garage doors have been retained on the properties. However, whilst commonplace, the garage doors themselves do not form a particularly distinctive feature and make a neutral contribution to the streetscene.
The proposed loss of the garage door, and its replacement with a window, would alter the appearance of the host dwelling. However, this alteration would be minimal and would not significantly change the properties visual contribution to the overall terrace. The scale and form of the building would remain as existing and the proposal would not impact upon the characteristic building style or general uniformity. As such, the loss of the garage door would not have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the terrace or the surrounding area.
Whilst the presence of a window, to replace the garage door, would deviate from the prevailing pattern of development, the size and design of the proposed window would be in keeping with the host dwelling and surrounding properties. It would therefore not appear as an incongruous addition within the streetscene.
Consequently, the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the host terrace or the surrounding area and would comply with Policies DH1 and DH(a) of the Royal Greenwich Local Plan: [name] with [name] (2014) and Policy D3 of The London Plan (2021). These policies collectively seek to ensure that all development is a high quality of design and of a scale appropriate to the building and locality, with development proposals responding to the existing character of a place.
Section 05
Conditions
In addition to the standard time period for commencement of the development, I have attached a condition requiring the development to accord with the approved plans, as this provides certainty and precision. A condition requiring the use of materials matching that of the existing building is also necessary to ensure an appropriate appearance for the development.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons set out above, having regard to the development plan as a whole and all other material considerations, the appeal is allowed.
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 3373No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 10 May 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 19 April 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3289131
- Application reference
- 21/2937/HD
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Royal Borough of Greenwich
- Planning authority code
- E09000011
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
- Not recorded
- 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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 15 December 2021
- Valid date
- 15 December 2021
- Start date
- 10 January 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 11 October 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 10 May 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
- 14960
- 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