Appeal 3338514
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
formation of additional storage at lower ground floor front light well and bin storage to front garden with enhanced planting without complying with a condition attached to planning permission [name]/21/06865, dated 14 December 2021.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for Formation of additional storage at lower ground floor front light well and bin storage to front garden with enhanced planting at [site address] in accordance with the application [name]/23/07216 dated 2 November 2023 without complying with condition No 2. set out in planning permission [name]/21/06865 granted on 14 December 2021 by The Council of The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea, but otherwise subject to the conditions set out in [name].
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is whether or not the amended condition would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Pembridge Conservation Area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site comprises a four storey mid-terraced building located on [address]. It lies within the Pembridge Conservation Area. The Conservation area covers a large part of the local area. It is characterised by predominantly residential buildings. I also saw that within the wider conservation area there are a number of low walls facing the highway – some with just capping stones and others with capping stones; with railings either inserted or placed upon.
Put simply, the Appellant wishes to ‘vary’ the original drawings approved in 2021 so that the boundary wall to the front of the building is raised. This would be to a height of no greater than 950mm (as shown on drawing JCA- 0759-100-PE-FR) with railings on top.
The Council’s points out their view that the height of the existing front boundary walls within the terrace are consistent, with slight variation associated with the natural slope in the road. The proposed increase in the height of the front boundary wall at No. 14 would disrupt this uniformity, which would be further exacerbated with the addition of the proposed disproportionate, shorter, squat railings above. This would cause the front boundary to appear incongruous, visually obtrusive, and at odds with the prevailing pattern of development along this terrace, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the street scene and conservation area.
[name] note that the proposed wall would be higher than those directly adjacent, this is not an uncharacteristic feature of the wider conservation area or the locality more generally. As such, at the very least, it would preserve the character and appearance of the Pembridge Conservation Area, the duty to which is set out in s72(1) of the PLBCAA.
Accordingly, the proposal would accord with Policies CL1, CL2, CL3, CL6 and CL11 of the Local Plan 2019, which, amongst other aims seek to ensure that alterations and additions do not harm the existing character and appearance of the building and its context. It would also accord with the aims of the Pembridge Conservation Area Appraisal which indicates that ‘For all buildings identified here as positive buildings, change must be managed to conserve and, where appropriate, enhance their significance in accordance with national and local planning policies’. The proposal would also accord with the Policies of the National Planning Policy Framework, including those set out in Chapter 16 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment.
Section 05
Conclusion
For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should succeed. I will grant a new planning permission without the disputed condition, but substituting it with the drawings listed on the refused decision notice of 2023, and restating those undisputed conditions that are still subsisting and capable of taking effect.
Section 06
[name]
[name]. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason - As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to avoid the accumulation of unexercised Planning Permissions.
Compliance with approved drawings. The development shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on submitted plans JCA-0759-001-[name] P1, JCA-0759-002-[name] P1, JCA- 0759-100-[name] P1, JCA-0759-101-[name] P1. Reason - The details are material to the acceptability of the proposals, and to ensure accordance with the development plan.
Planting and replanting. All tree and shrub planting forming part of the plans and details approved through this planning permission shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the first occupation of the development or the completion of the development whichever is the sooner. Any trees or shrubs which, within a period of five years from the first planting and seeding season referred to above, die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. Reason - To protect the appearance and amenity of the area and to accord with policies of the development plan, in particular policy CR6 of the Local Plan 2019.
Black painted railings and gate. The front boundary railings and gate shall be painted black, and so maintained. Reason - To preserve or enhance the appearance of the building and/or the character of the area, in accordance with policies of the development plan in particular policies CL1, and CL6 of the of the Local Plan 2019.
Materials - To match existing. All work and work of making good shall be finished to match the existing exterior of the building(s) in respect of materials, colour, texture, profile and, in the case of brickwork, facebond and pointing, and shall be so maintained. Reason - To preserve or enhance the appearance of the building and/or the character of the area in accordance with policies of the development plan in particular policies CL1, CL2, CL3 and CL6 of the Local Plan 2019.
Porous surfaces. All external hard surfacing in the development shall be constructed using porous materials and so maintained thereafter. If any permeable surfaces are removed, they must be replaced only with permeable surfaces. Reason – To reduce flood risk and to contribute to sustainability in accordance with policy CE2 of the Local Plan 2019
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 5458No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted site visit dates
- 28 May 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3338514
- Application reference
- PP/23/07216
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
- Planning authority code
- E09000020
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
- 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
- 0 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
- 9 February 2024
- Valid date
- 25 February 2024
- Start date
- 25 April 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 4 January 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 29 May 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
- 51741
- 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