Appeal 6000017
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
4m first floor rear extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area and host property.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal building is a two storey, detached dwelling that is located within a predominantly residential area. The appeal site, as well as properties nearby tend to occupy large plots. There is also a track next to the appeal site which gives access to the rear of a number of properties that have outbuildings. The large plot sizes, combined with open frontages and gaps between properties results in an open and spacious character and appearance.
The Councils Local Plan Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guidance October 2016 ([name]) provides guidance on rear extensions. In particular, it states that two storey rear extensions which are closer than 2 metres to a neighbouring boundary and project more than 3 metres in depth are not normally considered acceptable.
While the [name] states that on widely spaced detached houses, there may be more scope for larger rear extensions it would still be required to not cause harm to the character and appearance of the area and host property.
The proposed extension would be 4m in depth and occupy the entire width of the property. The spacious character of the area and track next to the appeal site means that there would be clear views of the development. The result, when combined with the other works already taking place to extend the property would be a bulky and dominant addition to the dwelling which would be unsympathetic to the modest proportion of the host property and result in an incongruous feature within the street scene.
I therefore conclude that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area and host property. I find conflict with Policy D3 of the London Plan 2021, Policies CS1 and CS5 of Barnet’s Local Plan ([name]) Development Plan Document September 2012, Policy DM01 of Barnet’s Local Plan (Development Management Policies) Development Plan Document September 2012 and guidance contained within the [name]. Amongst other things, these seek to ensure that development responds to an existing character of a place, create buildings of high quality design and preserve of enhance local character.
Section 05
Other Matters
The Council have found that the proposed development would not harm the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers with regard to daylight, sunlight and outlook. [name] have no reason to conclude otherwise, this a neutral matter.
The proposal would provide additional living accommodation for the occupiers with the appellant says is much needed, however, this is a private benefit that does not weigh in favour of allowing the appeal.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given above 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 4347No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 2 May 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 22 April 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 6000017
- Application reference
- 24/2074/HSE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Barnet
- Planning authority code
- E09000003
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
- Not recorded
- Appeal reason
- refused
- Type detail
- No Application Type Assocaited
- Jurisdiction
- No Jurisdiction Associated
- Link status
- Not recorded
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- 0 hectares
- Floor space
- 426 m²
- Number of residences
- Not recorded
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- Not recorded
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Yes
- 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
- 13 November 2024
- Valid date
- 20 November 2024
- Start date
- 25 November 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 20 September 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 2 May 2025
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- Not recorded
- Bespoke
- Not recorded
- 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
- Back Office
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 68918
- 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