Appeal 3326972
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
to “demolish an existing ground floor side extension and S erection of a proposed 2floor side extension.”
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in the appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and on the wider area.
Section 04
Character and appearance of [name] and Wider Area
The appeal property is a bungalow with additional accommodation provided by two side dormers in the roof. It has a single storey attached garage which has a dual pitched gable end roof and is sited slightly forward of the main frontage of the dwelling. The dwelling has a rear conservatory and a landscaped rear garden. It has a tiled roof and white boarding to the external surfaces of the elevations including the side dormers.
The dwelling is set back from the road with a gravelled and vegetated front forecourt area. To its east is a detached house with a side facing pitched roof dormer in its west roof (fitted with obscured glass). To the west of the appeal site is a bungalow.
The proposal includes demolishing the garage and erecting a two storey side extension to a similar overall height as the main roof. The ground floor would be a games room and the first floor would be a study which would be accessed via a new staircase from the games room. The proposal would have a dual pitched roof with a gable end similar to the existing garage roof. It would stand forward of the front elevation of the dwelling and extend further back than the existing garage. A ground floor bathroom window would be lost by the extended depth.
The proposed development would not blend in well with the host dwelling. It would appear as a segregated add-on to the main dwelling and would fail to integrate with the existing design of the dwelling. There would be an incongruous gap between the proposed first floor and the main roof and the resulting roof profiles, being visually close together, would also be unsympathetic and very varied. The height, depth and width of the proposal would result in an overly dominant extension which would fail to appear sufficiently subservient to the main dwelling. The form of the original dwelling would be lost.
The proposed development would be visible in the streetscene and its incongruity would adversely affect the harmony of the wider residential area, making a negative contribution to the public realm.
Consequently, I conclude that the proposed development would seriously harm the character and appearance of the host dwelling and would be detrimental to the streetscene. It would be contrary to policies SP4 and DM10 of the Croydon Local Plan 2018 and policy D3 of the London Plan 2021.
Section 05
Conclusion
Having taken into account all representations made, for the reasons given above, I dismiss the appeal. [name].C.
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 4043No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted site visit dates
- 13 October 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3326972
- Application reference
- 23/01450/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
- 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
- Not recorded
- 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
- 29 July 2023
- Valid date
- 29 July 2023
- Start date
- 23 August 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 18 July 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 31 October 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
- 41182
- 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