Appeal 3375059
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
4 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 erection of a double garage.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal relates to a large, detached property to the west side of [address] within a residential area. The property sits amongst a group of large dwellings along this stretch; all set on a uniform building line behind fairly deep and often landscaped frontages. These features contribute to a spacious and semi-rural feel to the immediate locality. This side of the road has a markedly different character to the east side, where the detached properties appear noticeably more prominent as features within the street scene being laid out in a staggered echelon pattern with generally more shallow frontages.
The proposal seeks to replace an existing garage to the side of the dwelling with a detached double garage to the front, with a pyramidal apex roof.
The Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance [name] & Alterations 2004 (SPG) recognises that garages in the front garden of a property tend to look out of place in the street scene. In this case, the garage would sit within the existing front garden to No 3, set back from the plot’s front boundary by over 6m, forward of the dwelling’s front face by a similar margin and around 7m from the boundary with No 5 to the north. Due to its position away from the dwelling and boundaries of the site, and prominence within land that is currently open, I find it would appear as an awkward and isolated building within its setting, and typical of one the SPG specifically advises against. Notwithstanding any form of enclosure to the front boundary, the garage would not be out of sight and would be seen standing alone as an incongruous feature and detrimental to the spacious qualities to this side of [address].
The appellant has directed me to garages to the front of Nos 2 and [address]. These sit within a different context where they are seen as neither isolated nor incongruous but rather as features that appear as an integrated part of the development pattern to this side of the road. The circumstances here do not alter my findings as they relate to the site specific context of the proposal at No 3.
Overall, by failing to respect the character of the surrounding area, including the open and spacious visual appearance of the immediate street scene, the proposed garage would fail to achieve the high quality of design that is required by Policy DES1 of the Reigate & Banstead Local Plan Development Management Plan 2019. Accordingly, 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 286No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 5 December 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 26 November 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3375059
- Application reference
- 25/01561/HHOLD
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Reigate and Banstead Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000211
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
- Unknown
- 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
- 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
- 27 October 2025
- Valid date
- 3 November 2025
- Start date
- 4 November 2025
- Planning authority decision date
- 13 October 2025
- Appeal decision date
- 5 December 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
- 80977
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:29
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21