Appeal 3319908
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 dropped kerb.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in this appeal is the effects of the proposal on the safety of those using the adjacent highway, including the pavement and the cycle lane.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal relates to this 2 storey mid-terrace property. It is located adjacent to Forest Road which is a busy classified road (A503). There is a 20mph speed limit, double yellow lines and a cycle lane which is demarked by bollards separating it from the main part of the carriageway. The carriageway here is divided by a central reservation.
The property has a hard-surfaced frontage, which the appellant alleges has been present for some time. I noted that some other properties within the terrace have parking areas on their frontage, with dropped kerbs, although many have planted front gardens.
The proposed parking area is of insufficient size to allow a vehicle to turn within the site. This would inevitably mean that a vehicle would either enter or leave the site by reversing. Taking account of the number of vehicle movements along this section of the road that I observed, and the presence of the cycle lane, I consider that such a reversing manoeuvre would be likely to be hazardous and would be likely to pose a risk to pedestrians, cyclists, other road users and the driver of the vehicle entering/leaving the appeal site. It would also be likely to disrupt the free flow of vehicles on the road.
The appellant has made reference to other crossovers nearby, which I observed at my site visit. The Council has indicated that these have been in place for some time and prior to the changes to the cycle lane. I note that they would have been considered prior to the Council’s current planning policies. Therefore, I do not see these examples as compelling precedents in this appeal. The appellant also refers to access to the property from the rear as being problematic and I noted this at my site visit.
Policy DM16 of the Development Management Policies Local Plan 2013 (LP) states, amongst other things, that proposals which hinder pedestrian movement or prove injurious to highway safety, will be resisted. In my consideration of all the factors relevant to this appeal, I conclude that the proposal would be likely to have a prejudicial effect on the free and safe use of the adjacent highway, for the reasons set out above. This is not outweighed by any other matters, including the appellant’s difficulty using the rear access to the property.
Section 05
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, the appeal is 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 188No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 12 June 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 15 May 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3319908
- Application reference
- 222219
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Waltham Forest London Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E09000031
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
- 5 April 2023
- Valid date
- 5 April 2023
- Start date
- 24 April 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 24 March 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 12 June 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
- 33882
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:27
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21