Appeal 3356680
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
for a single storey rear extension with flat roof construction.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and approval is granted under the provisions of Article 3(1) of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (GPDO) for a single storey rear extension with flat roof construction at [site address] , Redbridge [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2903/24 and subject to the standard conditions set out by paragraphs A.3(a) and A.4(11b) of the GPDO.
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 whether or not the proposed development would extend beyond the curtilage of the dwellinghouse.
Section 05
Reasons for the Recommendation
The crux of the matter is whether or not the curtilage to the rear of the appeal property is angled relative to its neighbours. Curtilage can be described as land which forms part and parcel with the house. Usually, it is the area of land within which the house sits or to which it is attached such as the garden in this case. Class A of the GPDO is only concerned with development within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse.
I have not been provided with any evidence to suggest that the rear boundaries have altered. The existing boundaries are constructed as per the HM land registry document provided and do not appear to be angled. If there is any slight angling to the boundaries, they are not obvious to the naked eye. I have no evidence before me to suggest that the existing fencing would not define the curtilage. Therefore, the proposed development would be within the confines of the existing boundary fencing as per the other plans I have seen and thus, in the absence of anything compelling to the contrary, the curtilage of the dwellinghouse. There are therefore no reasons set out before me as to why prior approval should not be granted with all matters under the relevant class and for prior approval considered acceptable.
Section 06
Conditions
Prior approval is granted subject to the conditions set out by paragraphs A.3(a) and A.4(11b) of the GPDO which are concerned with materials and the development being carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Section 07
Conclusion and Recommendation
For the reasons set out above, the proposal would accord with the GPDO and comply with the description of permitted development. Subject to the aforementioned conditions, I recommend that the appeal should be allowed, and prior approval granted.
Section 08
Inspector’s Decision
I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed, in the terms set out above.
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 1895No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 5 June 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 27 May 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3356680
- Application reference
- 2903/24
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Redbridge
- Planning authority code
- E09000026
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
- 3. Refused prior approval of permitted development rights
- 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
- 20 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
- 3 December 2024
- Valid date
- 3 December 2024
- Start date
- 30 December 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 28 November 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 5 June 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
- 70583
- 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