Appeal 3328865
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
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
a two storey side and garage extension with steps without complying with a condition attached to planning permission Ref 23/00901/HOUSE, dated 23 June 2023.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
[name]
The extension has been completed, including the first floor rear facing window. However, the window is not obscure glazed and is openable. I shall make my decision against the plans submitted with the application and as listed on the original decision notice.
Section 04
Background and Main Issue
The appeal site comprises a detached two-storey dwelling. Planning permission has been granted under reference 23/00901/HOUSE for a two-storey side and garage extension with steps, subject to conditions. This included, at condition 3, that the first floor window in the east facing rear elevation shall be obscure glazed and non-opening below 1.7 metres. An application to removed condition 3 was refused under reference 23/01852/CONVAR.
The main issue is whether the condition is reasonable and necessary having regard to the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties, with particular regard to privacy.
Section 05
Reasons
The development extends towards the side boundary of the site. The land rises from the neighbouring properties at Meadway towards the site resulting in the adjacent gardens sitting at a lower level than the host dwelling. The neighbouring gardens are small in size and provide only limited private space for occupants of these properties.
The window in the first floor rear elevation of the extension provides unobstructed views towards the private amenity space immediately adjacent to the neighbouring dwellings. The overlooking is accentuated by the difference in land levels and the limited size of the private spaces serving the neighbouring properties. Consequently, the window results in considerable overlooking and a significant loss of privacy for the occupants of these dwellings.
The appellant suggests that the retention of the condition would set a precedent that would require all rear facing windows to be obscure glazed and fixed shut. However, the condition is reasonable and necessary to safeguard the privacy of neighbouring residents given the particular circumstances of this development, including the orientation and proximity of the window to the neighbouring properties. Moreover, each development should be considered on its individual merits and with appropriate regard to the development plan and any material considerations, which is what I have done in this case.
The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) states that any conditions should only be imposed where they meet the six tests, as set out in Paragraph 57 of the Framework. As such, due to the specific circumstances at the site and the positioning of the window, I conclude that the condition requiring the window to be obscure glazed and non-opening below 1.7 metres is reasonable and necessary and meets the six tests set out in the Framework.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above the appeal should be 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 20880No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 18 March 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 4 March 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3328865
- Application reference
- 23/01852/CONVAR
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Sevenoaks District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000111
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
- 2. Refused permission to vary or remove a condition(s)
- Appeal reason
- Appeal Against Conditions
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Other
- 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
- Yes
- 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
- No
- 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
- 4 September 2023
- Valid date
- 11 September 2023
- Start date
- 4 December 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 22 August 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 18 March 2024
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
- 48374
- 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