Appeal 3300658
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
5 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 erection of a second floor extension with crown roof and rear window.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
The site visit was originally scheduled to be undertaken on the basis of the appellant allowing access to the property. However, the site visit was undertaken on an unaccompanied basis and viewed from the available public viewpoints along [address].
For reason of clarity and brevity, the Council’s description of development has been adopted.
Section 04
Main Issue
It is considered that the main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area.
Section 05
Reasons
The proposed extension includes the erection of a roof extension above a 2-storey addition to the rear of a pair of 2-storey semi-detached dwellings. The rear elevations of these dwellings have already been altered by both rear additions and roof extensions. The scale of the alterations to No. 50 has already unbalanced the appearance of this pair of semi-detached dwellings when viewed from [address].
[address], the appeal scheme would not be such a conspicuous or prominent addition to the property so as to detract from the spacious and verdant character and appearance of the surrounding residential area. However, the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document Residential [name] (RDG) refers to rear extensions not looking too bulky and prominent compared to the size of the main building and garden to which they relate.
In this case, because of its design, scale and bulk the proposed development would appear to add a third floor to the existing 2-storey addition. The increase in the height of the rear extension would significantly detract from the character and appearance of the original 2-storey host property. This assessment is made notwithstanding the rear roof dormer which has been erected. Further, the cumulative size of the existing and proposed extensions would represent a prominent addition to the property rather than a subservient form of development.
Accordingly, it is concluded that the proposed development would cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the host property and, as such, it would conflict with Policy CS5 of Barnet’s Local Plan ([name]) (CS), Policy DM01 of Barnet’s Local Plan (Development Management Policies) (DMP) and the RDG. Amongst other matters, these policies refer to development representing high quality design. CS Policy CS1 is a strategic statement of intent rather than a development management policy and, as stated in the Planning Officer’s report, the property is not affected by local or national designations, including heritage assets, so the relevance of DMP Policy DM06 to the appeal scheme is unclear. Although these policies are not of direct relevance to the appeal scheme, this assessment does not alter the conclusion that this 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 1351No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 21 September 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 16 August 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3300658
- Application reference
- 22/0543/HSE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Barnet
- Planning authority code
- E09000003
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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 8 June 2022
- Valid date
- 8 June 2022
- Start date
- 22 June 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 1 April 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 21 September 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
- 20827
- 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