Appeal 3289747
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
7 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
described as “a 2-storey side and rear extension to existing dwelling and reconfiguration of internal building layout to provide ‘granny annex-style’ living accommodation for elderly family member with separate access to front, including new family areas suitable to modern living and improved relationship to rear garden”.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a 2 storey side and rear extension to existing dwelling and reconfiguration of internal building layout to provide ‘granny annex-style’ living accommodation for elderly family member with separate access to front, including new family areas suitable to modern living and improved relationship to rear garden at [site address] , [site address] , [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/04229/HSE, dated 11 August 2021, subject to the conditions within the attached schedule.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupants of [address] in relation to outlook.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property is set back behind the building line of its neighbours and its frontage slopes down to the road. To the rear the garden is stepped up to even out the slope. Until very recently there was a single storey garage between the flank elevation of the appeal property (wrongly annotated on the plans as the south elevation) and the boundary with [address]. No 108 extends up to the shared boundary and is set at a lower level then the appeal property. It too has a rear garden at a higher level and a single storey rear extension has been built up to the retaining wall of the garden.
The proposal would create a 2-storey side extension up to the boundary with No 108, with a single storey element to the rear. Due to the width of No 108 and the relatively open aspect and verdant nature of its rear garden and boundaries, the proposal would not harm the outlook from the rear facing first floor windows or from the garden. On visiting the site, it was evident that the rearward outlook from the ground floor of No 108 has already been heavily compromised by the proximity of the garden retaining wall which also limits views towards the appeal property. The proposal would therefore not be overly visible, nor would it contribute to the already enclosed nature of the ground floor windows as it would be positioned beyond the existing retaining wall and to the side. The proposal would not, therefore, harm the existing outlook from the ground floor windows.
The proposed development would not harm the living conditions of the occupants of [address] in relation to outlook for the reasons set out. As such it would comply with Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), Policies SP4 and DM10.6 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) and the [name] (2019) insofar as they relate to the protection of the amenity of occupiers of adjoining buildings through the design of new development.
Section 05
Conditions
In addition to securing commencement within the relevant statutory timeframe, I have also imposed conditions requiring adherence to the approved plans and that materials matching the appeal property should be used to ensure the proposal integrates acceptably.
The Council have suggested limitations to permitted development and this can commonly be addressed by condition. Given the nature of the proposed development I am satisfied that a condition preventing additional doors and windows in the flank elevations (condition 4) would be necessary and proportionate to protect the privacy of the occupants of adjacent properties. However, a condition preventing the use of the flat roof as a balcony or roof garden, is not necessary. Such an alteration would not be considered permitted development.
The proposed surface water drainage may be an improvement on the current situation. However, as it does not seem a specific problem and is not a matter on which the Council refused planning permission, a drainage condition would be unnecessary. This is because it would fall short of the tests set out in paragraph 56 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) (the Framework).
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, having considered the development plan as a whole along with all other relevant material considerations including the approach in the Framework, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.
Section 07
Schedule of 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: - Site and Location Plan 2336-CAL-XX-XX-DR-A-0100-S3-P1 - [name] 2336-CAL-XX-XX-DR-A-0110-S4-P3 - Proposed Roof Plan 2336-CAL-XX-XX-DR-A-0113-S3-P3 - [name] and North Section A-A 2336-CAL-XX-XX-DR-A- 0112-S3-P3 - [name] (Front) and West (Rear) Elevations 2336-[name]-0111-S3-P3
The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed in materials to match those used on the host dwelling.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no doors or windows/dormer windows other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be constructed on the south or north elevations of the development hereby permitted.
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 2199No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 29 April 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 29 March 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3289747
- Application reference
- 21/04229/HSE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Croydon
- Planning authority code
- E09000008
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
- 123 m²
- Number of residences
- 1
- 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
- 23 December 2021
- Valid date
- 23 December 2021
- Start date
- 10 January 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 6 October 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 29 April 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
- Not recorded
- 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
- 14536
- 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