Appeal 3344709
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
loft conversion to facilitate 2 additional bedrooms and a bathroom. Brickwork, tiles and windows to match existing building. Roof profile to match neighbouring properties.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a loft conversion to facilitate 2 additional bedrooms and a bathroom. Brickwork, tiles and windows to match existing building. Roof profile to match neighbouring properties at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/00043/HOU, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule of conditions.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property is a two-storey dwelling with front and rear facing shallow gables. The surrounding area comprises mostly of a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced Victorian and Edwardian period properties. Many of the dwellings in [address] and in nearby [address] have undergone various extensions and alterations, including large roof extensions.
The proposal is for a loft conversion, involving the raising the roof and the erection of hip to gable and rear roof extensions. The hip to gable extensions would reflect the design and appearance of the neighbouring dwellings and the resultant ridge height would also be similar. The proposed gable roof would slope away from the front facing original gable so that other than for its roof shape, the existing dwelling would retain much of its original character and appearance when viewed from the front, including its distinctive decorative front gable and bay window. The proposed development would not be harmful to the character and appearance of the existing dwelling or the surrounding area in this regard.
The proposed extensions would add considerably to the scale and bulk of the host dwelling and would incorporate a flat roof and a vertical rear elevation, giving the appearance of a three storey flat roof dwelling when viewed from the rear. The proposal would not, in this respect, comply with the Council’s non-statutory design guidance set out in their Residential Design Supplementary Planning Guidance (2013) (SPD).
The side profile of the proposed extensions including the flat roof section would be glimpsed from [address]. However, many of the dwellings along [address] have been extended in a similar way and the side profile of the proposed development would be the same as that which is commonplace along [address] and neighbouring [address], including that of the neighbouring dwellings at Nos 18 and [address]. I therefore conclude that the proposal would not be harmful to the street scene in this regard.
Whilst some of the nearby roof alterations incorporate large box-like tiled dormers with little or no set back from the eaves, others are visible with brick faces which are of a similar design to the appeal proposal. I acknowledge that some of the extensions may have been carried out in accordance with permitted development rights, however the appellant has highlighted several examples nearby where the Council have granted planning permission for extensions of a similar design and appearance, including at [address] and [address], which are visible from the appeal site through the gap to the side of [address], and at [address]. Whilst the rear elevation of the proposed development would be visible from neighbouring gardens, it would be viewed in the same context as other extensions and alterations of a similar scale and design along [address].
I therefore conclude that the proposed development would have not a significant harmful effect on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling or the surrounding area. It would comply with Policy DM10 of the [site address] [name] (2012) and the National Planning Policy Framework 2023 which, amongst other matters, require development to ensure that the character and local distinctiveness of a street or area is respected, maintained or enhanced.
Section 05
Conditions
The Council has suggested a list of planning conditions in the event that this appeal was to be allowed. I have incorporated most of the suggested conditions, with some adjustments for clarity.
In addition to the standard implementation condition, the approved plans condition is imposed for certainty. The condition controlling materials is necessary to protect the character and appearance of the dwelling and the local area.
I have imposed a condition to control the insertion of additional windows and other openings in order to protect the living conditions of surrounding occupants.
The Council confirm that a [name] was not submitted with the application. I shall therefore impose a condition requiring the submission of a suitable [name] in the interests of safety of all users of the building.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.
Section 07
Schedule of Conditions
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan; [name] (#1i,2a); Existing & [name], Floor and [name] (#1h,1j,1k,2a,2b); Site Plan – Existing and [name] (#1e); Site Plan – Existing & [name] (#1e); and Site Plan - [name] (#1e).
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the materials specified on the approved plans and on the application forms unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no windows shall be inserted nor any other openings formed (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) at first floor level in the proposed western flank elevation unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Prior to any above-ground works of the development to which this permission relates, a [name] shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Fire Safety Strategy shall demonstrate how the development will achieve the highest standards of fire safety and shall include the following details:
Suitable positioned outside space for the fire appliances /and evacuation assembly point;
Appropriate fire alarm systems;
Passive and active fire safety measures;
Appropriate construction details to minimise the risk of the fire spread;
Provision of suitable access and convenient means of escape / an evacuation strategy;
Provision of suitable access and equipment for firefighting which is appropriate for the size and use of the development. The Fire Safety Strategy shall include a statement of competence. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Strategy and thereafter maintained. The required [name] shall reference the London Plan Guidance Fire Safety (February 2022) where applicable and a [name] (RES) shall be submitted in relation to those fire safety requirements which the applicant does not consider to be relevant. END
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 334No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 6 September 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 27 August 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3344709
- Application reference
- 24/00043/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
- 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
- 39 m²
- 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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 20 May 2024
- Valid date
- 20 May 2024
- Start date
- 13 June 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 4 March 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 6 September 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
- 56731
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:28
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21