Appeal 3349990
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
8 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
described as ‘Erection of single storey side/rear extension. Fenestration change to anthracite grey aluminium frames on existing house and to porch entrance. Application of smooth render to all external walls.’
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of a single storey side/rear extension; fenestration change to anthracite grey aluminium frames on existing house and to porch entrance, and application of smooth render to all external walls at [site address] , Tolworth, [name] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/01163/HOU, subject to the conditions set out in the schedule below.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of occupants of no.[address], with particular regard to outlook.
Section 04
Reasons
The northern side of [address] comprises predominantly two storey semi detached properties with a slightly staggered building line and the ground levels fall gently from west to east. No.161 adjoins the appeal site to the south west. It has a single storey side extension which runs along the boundary with no.163 and has a window in its rear elevation close to the boundary. Although there is not evidence before me to suggest the use of the room which that window serves, I have no strong reason to believe that it does not serve a habitable room, and contributes to the outlook enjoyed by its occupants. That window has outlook over the rear garden of no.161 and is enclosed to the east by the existing closeboard timber fence which runs between the two properties. There is also a change in ground level either side of the boundary, which the appellant reports to be approximately 40cm lower on the side of no.163.
The proposed extension would project alongside the boundary with no.161 and beyond its rear elevation. It would have an eaves level of 2.45m and a relatively shallow pitched roof which would slope away from the shared boundary. As such, part of the new flank wall and roof of the proposed extension would be likely to be visible from the nearest window of no.161 and it would enclose the eastern side of part of its garden. However, given the height of the proposal against the boundary, taken together with the effects of the existing boundary treatment and change in ground levels, its effect on the outlook from no.161 would not be overbearing.
Overall, the proposal would not cause harm to the living conditions of occupants of no.161 in terms of outlook. The proposal would comply with Policy DM10 of the Council’s Core Strategy 2012 which requires, among other things, that developments have regard to the amenities of occupants and neighbours, including in terms of outlook, and with Policy D3 of the London Plan 2021 insofar as it requires appropriate outlook, privacy and amenity.
Section 05
Other Matters
The proposal includes other alterations to the property to which the Council have raised no objection. This would include rendering over the existing brickwork at the front ground floor level which is a traditional characteristic of the street and matches the attached property. Nonetheless, having regard to the character and appearance of the street more generally, which includes a number of alterations and extensions to properties, overall the other alterations proposed are acceptable.
Section 06
Conditions
The Council have set out conditions which it considers would be appropriate in the event that the appeal were allowed. I have considered these in light of the advice in the Planning Practice Guidance. In addition to the standard time limit condition, a condition is necessary to list the approved drawings to provide certainty to the parties. Given the provisions of London Plan Policy D12 and given the fire statement submitted with the appeal is in draft, a condition is necessary to secure details of final fire safety provisions. As materials are annotated on the approved plans it is not necessary to condition them further.
Section 07
Conclusion
The proposal would comply with the development plan and the appeal is allowed.
Section 08
Schedule of Conditions
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos: ‘Location Plan’, P.M.400 Rev.A, P.M.500 Rev.A, and P.M.600 Rev.A.
Prior to the commencement of development above the damp-proof course of the extension hereby approved, a [name] shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. This shall include details of: - suitably positioned unobstructed outside space for fire appliances to be positioned on, and appropriate for use as an evacuation assembly point; - appropriate features which reduce the risk to life and risk of serious injury in the vent of a fire including fire alarm systems and passive and active fire safety measures; - construction means to minimise risk of fire spread - suitable and convenient means of escape, and associated evacuation strategy for all building users and a strategy for evacuation; - suitable access and equipment for firefighting which is appropriate to the development hereby approved. Those details shall have regard to the relevant London Plan Fire Safety Guidance and the development shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with those approved details. End of Schedule
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 494No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 23 January 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 21 January 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3349990
- Application reference
- 24/01163/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
- Not recorded
- 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
- 13 August 2024
- Valid date
- 13 August 2024
- Start date
- 16 September 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 12 July 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 23 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
- No
- 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
- 63370
- 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