Appeal 3304563
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
a new 'Mansard' roof construction with new bedroom and en-suite within new space over existing first floor and first floor existing dormer.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and the surrounding area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site relates to two-storey, terrace dwelling adjoined by other properties of differing size, form and detailing. It is located in a street scene that is predominantly residential in nature.
I saw at my site visit that houses in the area have predominantly pitched roofs, and contain small dormer windows or skylights facing the public domain. Within this context, alterations to the roof of the appeal property in principle need not appear incongruous.
However, the new mansard-style scheme would be a substantial and discordant feature when viewed against the traditional pitched roofs of the adjacent properties. Furthermore, the steeper pitch would protrude forward of the roof slope of [address]. This would be prominent, particularly when approaching the locality from the north, and introduce an awkward, disjointed relationship that would not be cohesive with the existing dwelling and its neighbour, creating visual confusion and detracting from the appearance of the existing properties.
I acknowledge that the locality comprises houses of varying scale and design. Moreover, I am aware that the development would not project over the original footprint of the building and would provide enlarged accommodation for the appellant and his family. However, none of these points could justify the harm I have identified above. _________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________
I also appreciate that there are other mansard roof forms in the region; however the example given in the [address] photo in the grounds of appeal shows a detached building, and as such this is not comparable to the appeal scheme before me.
I consider that the proposal would result in harm to the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and the surrounding area. It would be contrary to Policies SP17, DM30 and DM32 of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan October 2017 and the Council's Residential Extensions Guidelines Supplementary Planning Document (2009), which collectively seek to secure new development of acceptable scale and appearance.
Section 05
Conclusion
Having regard to the above and all other matters raised, I conclude that the 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 212No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 16 February 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 24 January 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3304563
- Application reference
- 22/502139
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Maidstone Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000110
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
- 38 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 4 August 2022
- Valid date
- 1 September 2022
- Start date
- 18 October 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 6 July 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 16 February 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
- 28331
- 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