Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3291167

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 works

One-off service · No subscription

Similar appeals are evidence to inspect, not a prediction of your outcome.

Official decision document

The decision, section by section

9 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

‘Conversion of existing garage to habitable space with associated changes to fenestration and installation of 1 no. rooflight. Erection of single storey rear and side extensions’.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for ‘Conversion of existing garage to habitable space with associated changes to fenestration and installation of 1 no. rooflight. Erection of single storey rear and side extensions’ at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/03496, dated 01 November 2021, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule.

  2. Section 03

    Application for Costs

    An application for costs was made by [name] against Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames Council. This application is the subject of a separate

  3. Section 04

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the road network and highway safety.

  4. Section 05

    Reasons

    The appeal site is a semi-detached dwelling with an attached garage, situated within [address], a small, planned estate. Properties in [address] and the immediate surroundings benefit from either a single-width garage or an off-street parking space. Each dwelling generally has only a single space or garage and, as such, there is strong demand for on-street parking in the vicinity.

    The appeal proposal seeks to convert the attached garage of the appeal site into additional residential accommodation. In doing so, the garage space would no longer be available for parking and a single additional vehicle would therefore be parked on the road. Despite there being localised parking stress, a single additional vehicle could be accommodated within the existing street network and estate, as [address] is not subject to controlled parking. In the vicinity there are the usual parking restrictions at junctions, corners and on the busier main road, which would ensure any additional vehicle parked on the street would not create unsafe conditions for road users and pedestrians. As such, a single additional vehicle would not pose a risk to highway safety.

    Whilst a single vehicle increase in on-street parking might result in some inconvenience, it would not have a severe residual cumulative impact on the road network in respect of congestion.

    For these reasons, the appeal proposal would accord with policies DM9 and DM10 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (CS), adopted in 2012, and the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework). These policies seek, amongst other things, development of a high-quality standard of design which has regard to local traffic conditions, and which does not have an unacceptable impact on highway safety or a severe cumulative impact on the wider road network.

  5. Section 06

    Other considerations

    The Appellant’s grounds of appeal outline that the appeal proposal seeks to provide additional accommodation within the dwelling for an older person. The appeal proposal thereby seeks to meet the existing and future health, housing and welfare needs of an older person. This weighs further in favour of the proposal.

    An extant planning permission, Council Ref.19/00240/HOU, exists for conversion of the garage into residential accommodation at the appeal site. Since planning permission has been granted for that scheme and there is a reasonable likelihood the development would take place as permitted, the permitted scheme constitutes a realistic ‘fallback’ position and a material consideration. The parking space within garage would also be lost under this permitted scheme. [name] reached an alternative conclusion in respect of the relevant policies of the development plan, this consideration would have indicated that the appeal should be determined other than in accordance with

  6. Section 07

    Conditions

    I have imposed the standard conditions in respect of time limit and plans, to ensure the development is undertaken in a timely manner and in accordance with the approved plans. The Council has also requested an additional condition relating to secure cycle storage; given the nature of the proposal, I consider this condition to be necessary and reasonable given the nature of the development proposed.

  7. Section 08

    Conclusion

    For these reasons, the appeal proposal accords with the relevant policies of the development plan, in so far as they are consistent with the Framework. The appeal is accordingly allowed.

  8. Section 09

    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 Plan 19-001-001, [name] 19-001-003, [name] 19-001-004.

    Prior to beneficial occupation of the development hereby approved, details of secure cycle parking facilities to serve the development to which this permission relates shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The cycle parking facilities shall be provided prior to the occupation of the development and thereafter retained for the use of cycle parking.

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 254No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    8 March 2022Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    21 February 2022 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3291167
Application reference
21/03496/HOU
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames
Planning authority code
E09000021

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
8 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
Allowed
Decision category
Allowed
Received date
21 January 2022
Valid date
21 January 2022
Start date
4 February 2022
Planning authority decision date
13 January 2022
Appeal decision date
8 March 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
Yes
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
11953
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