Appeal 3305551
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
6 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 erection of new two storey front extension and first floor side extension with rooflights.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of No. [address].
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site lies within a predominately residential comprising large detached properties. The appeal site is a large detached property with an irregular shaped rear garden.
During my site visit I observed the proposed development from both the appeal site and the rear garden of the neighbouring property No. 15.
The private rear garden of No. 15 extends to the rear of No. 13 at a lower level to the built form of the properties. The boundary with No. 15 is a mature hedge which screens the site to a degree.
There are existing windows at first and second floor on the rear elevation of the appeal site which offer opportunities of overlooking into the neighbouring garden. However due to the garden arrangement the proposed development would bring the property closer at first and second floor to the shared boundary which would be overbearing and would provide direct overlooking of the private rear garden of No. 15.
Whilst overlooking does exist between properties in this area; the scale, positioning and design of the proposed development would dimmish the levels of privacy currently experienced.
The Appellant has suggested a planning condition could be attached to control the installation and retention of obscure glazing to mitigate any overlooking. I am not persuaded that this would overcome my concerns, even with obscure glazing there would be a sense of being under surveillance which would significantly diminish the enjoyment of the adjacent property.
I find that the proposed development would harm the living conditions of the occupiers of No. [address].
There is conflict with Policy 72 of the St Albans District Local Plan Review (1994) which seeks amongst other things to ensure development respects the privacy and amenity of adjoining building.
There is also conflict with the Framework which seeks to ensure developments have high standards of amenity for existing and future users.
Section 05
[name]
The appeal site is within the Harpendon Conservation Area. In accordance with the statutory duty imposed by section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990; I am required to have special regard to the effect of the proposed development on the character or appearance of the area. The Council did not raise concern with regard to the character and appearance of the area and from the information I have before me I do not disagree.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the above reasons I conclude 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 126No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 10 February 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 12 January 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3305551
- Application reference
- 5/2022/0773
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- St Albans City Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000240
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
- 65 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 19 August 2022
- Valid date
- 19 August 2022
- Start date
- 16 November 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 1 June 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 10 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
- 27956
- 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