Appeal 3327799
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 ‘proposed single storey rear extension’.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Appeal Procedure
The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.
Section 04
Preliminary Matters and Main Issue
Whilst the description of development was changed by the Council, I can see no formal agreement therefore. I have used the description as it was originally set out on the application form which, in any case, adequately identifies the development to which the appeal relates.
The provisions of the aforementioned legislation set out, amongst other things, that development is not permitted if the enlarged part of the dwelling would extend beyond a wall forming a side elevation of the original and would exceed 4 metres in height; have more than a single storey, or have a width greater than half the width of the original dwellinghouse. This forms the main issue of the appeal.
Section 05
Reasons for the Recommendation
The appellant contends that the proposal would project solely from the rear elevation and not any side elevations as these face north and south, forming the main structure of the dwelling, whilst the rear elevation faces west. For the purposes of the GPDO, side and rear elevations of the original dwelling are interpreted as any such elevations that form part of that building. This is clear from the language used which refers to a side elevation and not the side elevation (my emphasis).
In this case the appeal dwelling has an original single storey rear bay window. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government publication ‘Permitted Development Rights for Householders – Technical Guidance’ (2019) (the Technical Guidance) diagrammatically illustrates what is meant by a wall forming a side elevation. It shows a series of side elevations, all of which are interpreted as such. The Technical Guidance notes that where an extension is beyond any side wall the restrictions in A.1(j) will apply. It is clear that the side wall of the bay window comes within the definition of a side elevation and A.1(j) would apply. Therefore, given the proposal would be the full width of the appeal dwelling, the preclusion at A.1(j)(iii) would apply.
The rear extension would be greater than half the width of the original dwelling, and it would extend beyond a wall forming a side elevation thereof. Considering the preclusions stated in the GDPO 2015 Class A paragraph A.1(j), the single storey rear extension cannot be considered as development permitted thereby.
Section 06
Conclusion and Recommendation
For the reasons given above I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.
Section 07
Inspector’s Decision
I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis 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 1895No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 20 December 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 7 December 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3327799
- Application reference
- 23/2938/PNH
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Barnet
- Planning authority code
- E09000003
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
- 3. Refused prior approval of permitted development rights
- 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
- 41 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
- 14 August 2023
- Valid date
- 14 August 2023
- Start date
- 7 November 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 9 August 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
- 44047
- 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