Appeal 3323024
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
4 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 first-floor extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
[name]
I consider the main issues to be the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding streetscene.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property is a single-storey studio dwelling situated in a primarily residential area in a prominent location. It is part of a block of four dwellings and is attached to two of the two-storey dwellings, similar to a back-to-back pattern of development. The fourth dwelling is also single storey but of a different design to the appeal dwelling which has a distinct cat slide roof. The properties in the surrounding area are of different design, primarily two-storey terraces and semi-detached properties.
The proposal includes a dual pitched roof over a first-floor extension. Where there is new fenestration, it is aligned with existing ground floor fenestration. From my observations, the proposed dual pitch roof design would be out of character with the host dwelling and the appearance of adjoining neighbouring properties. The scale, form and design of the proposed roof would appear as an incongruous addition to the overall building, to the detriment of the character and appearance of both the host dwelling and building. In such a prominent position, for the same reasons, this would have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding streetscene.
I note that the proposal would create a two-bedroom dwelling and I have been referred to the housing need for such properties in the Borough. I have taken note of the Appeal Decision on this matter that has been brought to my attention Ref: APP/V1505/W/22/3298599. This is a material consideration. Due to the harm I have identified above and bearing in mind that one two - bedroom dwelling would not make a significant increase in the supply of such dwellings, I have attributed some weight to this matter but it does not outweigh the harm I have identified above in my determination of this appeal.
In reaching my conclusion, I have had regard to all matters raised including support from the Town Council and examples of other development in the vicinity. None is directly comparable to the proposal before me, which I have determined on its individual merits.
For the reasons stated above, I conclude that the proposal would have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding streetscene. Thus, the proposal would be contrary to saved Policy BAS BE12 in the Basildon Local Plan Saved Policies (2007) where it seeks to ensure that new residential development does not harm the character of the surrounding area. I consider this policy to be broadly in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, particularly where the Framework seeks to ensure good design that is sympathetic to local character.
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 1172No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 9 August 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 20 July 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3323024
- Application reference
- 23/00013/FULL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Basildon District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000066
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
- 26 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
- 26 May 2023
- Valid date
- 26 May 2023
- Start date
- 15 June 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 6 March 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 9 August 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
- 36874
- 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