Appeal 3312115
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
described as demolition of existing boundary walls to the front garden. New boundary walls to form shed with new metal gates and planter.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for demolition of existing boundary walls to the front garden. New boundary walls to form shed with new metal gates and planter at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/03858/HSE, dated 16 September 2022, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following
Section 03
conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans, drawings: FOX-30001 P2, 31000 P7 and 30000 P1.
Section 04
Main Issue
I consider the main issue to be the effect of the proposed outbuilding on the street scene and thereby the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property, [site address] , is a semi-detached house, located in a residential area comprising detached and semi-detached dwellings along with three storey flatted developments. The appeal site has previously been sub-divided to facilitate new residential development to the rear.
The appellant proposes the demolition of the existing boundary walls to the front and side of the front garden and the erection of new 0.6 metre high boundary walls. The front wall would be in the form of a planter for a hedge with the side wall having metal railings on top. A 2.5 metre high flat roof brick cycle shed is proposed behind the front wall/planter and hedge. 2.15 meter metal gates are planned to the new drive, located deep into the site.
The Council raise no objection to the proposed front and side walls, planters, gates and hedge. From what I have seen and read I would not form a contrary view.
The proposed shed which would be of a simple contemporary uncluttered design would be 4.5 metres deep and 3.5 metres wide and 2.5 metres high. It would be well screened from public view by the soft landscaping approved for the neighbouring development and the new hedges proposed here.
I appreciate that there are no other front garden buildings in the gardens of neighbouring properties close to the appeal site. Nevertheless, such outbuildings and garages are typical features of residential development. On balance and as the building would be part of a comprehensive development scheme and would be well screened, I do not consider that this modest structure would cause harm to the street scene or wider area.
I therefore conclude in respect of the main issue that the proposed development would, in my judgement, overall make a positive contribution to the street scene and surrounding area. It would therefore accord with the objectives of Policy D3 of the London Plan ([name] 2021) and Policies SP4 and DM10 of the Croydon Local Plan 2018 (Adopted 27 February 2018) as they relate, amongst other things to the quality of development and the need to create well defined and designed private spaces.
Section 06
Conditions
The conditions follow from those suggested by the Council. To ensure a high quality development, I shall include a condition about the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building.
In the interests of certainty, I shall impose a condition requiring the development to be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans.
Section 07
Conclusions
For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be 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 1184No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 2 February 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 5 January 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3312115
- Application reference
- 22/03858/HSE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Croydon
- Planning authority code
- E09000008
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
- Unknown
- 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
- 15 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
- 29 November 2022
- Valid date
- 29 November 2022
- Start date
- 14 December 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 14 November 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 2 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
- 27563
- 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