Appeal 3303596
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
removal of existing side lean to and replace with two-storey side extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for removal of existing side lean to and replace with two storey side extension at [site address] , [site address] , Hertfordshire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/00596/FHA, dated 22 February 2022, subject to the following conditions: (1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. (2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the following approved plans: [name] 21016 AL (0) 001 (Location Plan), 21016 AL (0) 003 (Proposed Site Block Plan), 21016 AL (0) 110C (Proposed Ground Floor Plan), 21016 AL (0) 111D (Proposed First Floor Plan), 21016 AL (0) 112A (Proposed Roof Plan), 21016 AL (7) 001A ([name]), 21016 AL (7) 002A ([name]) and 21016 AL (0) 120D ([name] and Rear). (3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development permitted shall match those used in the existing dwelling as indicated on the approved drawings. These materials shall also be applied to the side elevation of the development facing the boundary with No [address] and the render and brick course on the side elevation shall align with the materials on the approved front and rear elevations.
Section 03
[name]
No existing or proposed side elevations were before the Council when it made its decision nor have any side elevation drawings been provided as part of this appeal. However, the proposed roof plan, floor plans and front and rear elevations provided give sufficient detail to understand the scale, form and appearance of the side elevation. Therefore, the absence of a side elevation has not prevented me from reaching a decision in this instance.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
[address] is characterised by mainly two-storey detached, often substantial dwellings which are set within generous plots. Dwellings are of a variety of designs and are set back from front boundaries. Gaps usually exist between the side elevations of neighbouring dwellings although the extent of these gaps varies. Mature landscaping is common within gardens and often lines front boundaries. These factors give the area an attractive appearance and an overriding spacious and verdant character.
The appeal dwelling has been previously extended. Its side elevations sit close to the side boundaries of the site. Even so, the relative alignment and gaps between neighbouring dwellings, the spacious frontages and the mature planted front boundaries ensure that the dwelling and its neighbours complement the defining characteristics of the area.
The proposal would give the front elevation of the host dwelling a pleasant degree of symmetry. I accept that it would increase the bulk of the dwelling at first floor level in close proximity to the boundary with No [address]. Even so, the extension would be clearly distinguishable from the dwelling at No 18 due to the contrasting designs and the relative alignment of these dwellings to the street. The spacious frontages to this section of the street and the subservient design means that the extension would not have an imposing presence in the street scene. In addition, the planting along [address] would also heavily filter views of the development. The generous spacing between the side elevations of the host dwelling and No 18 would also remain evident to passers-by, particularly in views through the access point to No 18.
Taking all the above factors into account, the development would effectively assimilate into the street scene.
I conclude, the development would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. In that regard, it would comply with the design and character requirements of Policies CS11 (Quality of [name]) and CS12 (Quality of Site Design) of the Dacorum Borough Council Core Strategy (2013) (CS) and [name] 3 and 7 of the Dacorum Borough Local Plan (2004). For the same reasons, the proposal would also accord with the requirements to achieve well-designed placed in the National Planning Policy Framework.
Section 06
Conditions
I attach the standard timescale for implementation as well as a condition listing the approved drawings in the interests of certainty. I have also attached a condition requiring the external materials to match the existing dwelling. In the absence of a side elevation, it is necessary to include a requirement for the materials on the side elevation to align with and match those on the front and rear elevations in the interests of protecting the character and appearance of the host dwelling and its surroundings.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the reasons given, 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 121No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 15 May 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 8 March 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3303596
- Application reference
- 22/00596/FHA
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Dacorum Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000096
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
- 16 m²
- Number of residences
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- Yes
- 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 July 2022
- Valid date
- 21 July 2022
- Start date
- 7 December 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 27 May 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 15 May 2023
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
- 32590
- 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