Appeal 3348734
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
rear first floor extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
[name]
A revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) has been published since the planning application was determined by the Council. I have had regard to the revised Framework in reaching my decision.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue raised by this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the adjoining occupiers at No.[address].
Section 05
Reasons
The occupiers of neighbouring properties should reasonably expect to enjoy an acceptable outlook as part of their residential lives. The addition of a second storey to the existing single storey rear extension would create a development of significant size and height in close proximity to No.3. The resulting two storey rear projection would be extremely dominant in the outlook from the rear habitable living space within the neighbouring property, as well as from their outdoor living space and conservatory at the rear of the dwelling. The visually overbearing impact of this addition in such close proximity to the adjoining property would diminish the enjoyment of the residential living environment for the neighbouring occupiers. This would harm the enjoyment the existing occupiers should reasonably expect to enjoy.
The Council also raises concern within the officer’s delegated report with regard to overshadowing but this issue has not been specifically referred to in the Council’s reason for refusal. The extension would be positioned east of No.3. Taking into account the orientation of the sun some overshadowing of No.[address] but this would only be for a relatively short period of the day. I do not consider overshadowing would be so substantial as to cause harm to the living conditions of the existing neighbouring occupiers.
I have been directed to other examples of two storey extensions that are said to have been granted planning permission at properties nearby. The acceptability of those other developments will depend on the individual circumstances of those sites. Other two storey development in the locality does not justify other development where harm would result. This proposal can and should be considered on its own individual merits.
For this reason, I conclude that the proposed development would be harmful to the living conditions of the adjoining occupiers at No.[address]. The proposal would, therefore conflict with Policy BAS BE12 of the Basildon District Local Plan 2007 and the provisions of the Framework. That policy seeks, amongst other matters, residential development, including alterations and extensions of existing buildings, not to cause material harm as a result of over-dominance.
Section 06
Conclusion
Having regard to the above findings, 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 309No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 17 January 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 6 January 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3348734
- Application reference
- 24/00414/FU
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Essex County Council
- Planning authority code
- E10000012
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
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- 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
- 24 July 2024
- Valid date
- 25 July 2024
- Start date
- 28 August 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 8 July 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 17 January 2025
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
- 63045
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:28
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21