Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3327698

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 works

One-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

erection of single storey rear conservatory extension and alterations to patio.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of single storey rear conservatory extension and alterations to patio at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/00796/HOU, dated 24 March 2023, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions set out at the end of this decision letter:

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    I consider the main issue to be the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of occupiers of [address] in terms of its potential to result in a sense of enclosure, have an overbearing impact and cause loss of outlook.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal property, [site address] is a semi-detached two storey dwelling.

    The appellant proposes a single storey full width, flat roof rear conservatory extension together with alterations to the patio. It would project between some 3.6 to 4.0 metres from the rear wall of the host property and roof level would be about 3.0 above the original ground level.

    The Council do not consider, due to the existing rear extension at Number [address] that the proposed development would impact on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers at number 127. From what I have seen and read I would not disagree.

    In respect of number 123 the Council is concerned that, despite complying with the standard 25 and 45 degree rules, due to the depth and height of the conservatory it would result in an increase sense of enclosure, loss of outlook and appear overbearing for the occupiers of that property.

    I note that number 123 has a narrow rear outshot with French doors and windows facing the common boundary to number 125. It is located on the north-east corner of the property and therefore is some distance from the boundary to number 125. Accordingly, I do not consider that the proposed conservatory would have any significant harmful impact in the terms identified by the Council or the third-party objector to the proposal.

    The rear garden of number 123 is relatively long and faces south-east. The conservatory would only be about a metre or so taller than a typical close boarded garden boundary fence. In addition, the appeal site is located in an existing built-up suburban area. For all these reasons I do not consider that the proposal would appear so overbearing, result in such an increased sense of enclosure or have a significant harmful impact on outlook as to cause harm to the living conditions of the occupiers of number 123.

    I therefore conclude in respect of the main issue that the proposed development would not cause significant harm to the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers. It would therefore accord with the aims D3 of the London Plan 2021 and Policies CS8 and DM10 of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames Local Development Framework–[name] ([name] 2012).

  4. Section 05

    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.

    To ensure the privacy of the occupiers of number 123 I shall require privacy screens to be erected along the north-east boundary. Furthermore, for the occupiers of both neighbouring dwellings I will control the insertion of any additional windows in the side elevations of the conservatory.

    To mitigate the risk of flooding I shall control the finished floor level of the proposed addition.

    In the interests of fire safety, I will require a [name] to be submitted to the local planning authority and approved before the first occupation of the development herby approved.

    In the interests of certainty, I shall impose a condition requiring the development to be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusions

    For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.

    The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3years from the date of this decision.

    The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be those specified on the approved plans and application form unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans, drawings: UA-KIN-08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and UN-125-LAM-03.

    The extension hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of privacy screening at a height of 1.7 metres (as measured from the finished level of the raised patio hereby approved to the top of the screen) along the north-east elevation of the raised patio has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and once installed the screen/s shall be retained thereafter.

    Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no window shall be inserted, nor any other openings formed (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) at ground floor level in the side elevations of the conservatory hereby approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

    The finished floor level(s) of the conservatory hereby permitted shall be no lower than those of the existing building(s) and any electrical sockets or other electrical fittings within the conservatory shall be installed no lower than 750mm above finished floor level.

    The building hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a [name] (FSS) shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The FSS shall demonstrate how the development will achieve the highest standards of fire safety and shall include the following details:

    identify a suitable outside space for fire appliances and an evacuation assembly point;

    design and layout of a suitable fire alarm system, where appropriate;

    as appropriate passive and active fire safety measures;

    construction details and finishes to minimise the risk of fire spread;

    an evacuation strategy incorporating a suitable and convenient means of escape, and;

    provision of suitable access for and equipment for firefighting appropriate for the size and use of the conservatory. End of Schedule

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 site visit dates
    28 November 2023 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3327698
Application reference
23/00796/HOU
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames
Planning authority code
E09000021

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
35 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
11 August 2023
Valid date
11 August 2023
Start date
19 October 2023
Planning authority decision date
19 May 2023
Appeal decision date
20 December 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
44046
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