Appeal 3341275
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
the construction of two dormer windows to front elevation.
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
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons for the Recommendation
The site is located within a residential estate characterised by buildings that share a similar design style. The appeal dwelling forms part of a row of houses with pitched roofs sloping towards the street that are bookended by dwellings with gables. There is much consistency in design within the dwellings facing on to [address] including in terms of their materials, window proportions, canopies above the front doors and their mostly plain front roof slopes. Though there are rooflights on the front elevation of the appeal property, they have a discreet presence and do not detract from the overriding order and cohesive appearance of the streetscene.
I acknowledge that the dormers would be set in from the eaves, sides and ridgeline of the host roof with a gap between the dormers and matching materials proposed. Each dormer would also only marginally exceed the guidance in The Havering Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (2011) which specifies that the width of dormers should be no greater than 1.2 metres. Even accounting for these factors, the dormers would be uncharacteristic features that would appear incongruous within the otherwise plain front roof slopes facing on to [address]. As a result, the proposal would unacceptably detract from the cohesion and consistent design style across the front elevations of this group of dwellings.
The appellant has drawn my attention to a front dormer window at a nearby property and I observed this on my site visit. Even so, from what I saw, front dormers are not common on the wider residential estate. Furthermore, that particular example is located on a different road and is not seen within the context of the group of properties in which the appeal dwelling sits. It is also a single dormer of a more modest scale and so is not comparable to the appeal scheme which proposes two larger dormer windows.
Overall, the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area. It would conflict with Policies 7 and 26 of the Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 (2021) which require that residential development is of a high design quality and that proposals respect, reinforce and complement the local streetscene.
Section 06
Conclusion and Recommendation
The proposed development would be contrary to the development plan. For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.
Section 07
Inspector’s Decision
I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s recommendation 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 121No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 11 July 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 27 June 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3341275
- Application reference
- P1839.23
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Havering
- Planning authority code
- E09000016
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
- 1
- 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
- 24 March 2024
- Valid date
- 27 March 2024
- Start date
- 17 May 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 8 February 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 11 July 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
- 53871
- 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