Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 6000086

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 works

One-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

new rear dormer to include bedroom with ensuite and associated front dormer to accommodate new internal stair.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for new rear dormer to include bedroom with ensuite and associated front dormer to accommodate new internal stair at [site address] , Barnet, Edgware [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 24/4369/HSE and subject to the following conditions:

    This development must be begun within three years from the date of this permission.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and drawings: Site Location and Layout Plan – Drawing: MiL-PL-001A [name]; [name]: Drawings: MiL-PL-004A Rev 01 and MiL-PL-005A Rev 01 and [name] – Drawing: MiL-PL - 006A, Rev 01.

    The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed in materials that match those of the existing building.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal property comprises a semi-detached dwelling. The surrounding area is characterised by similar two-storey semi-detached dwellings and some detached dwellings.

    Most of these properties include front projecting gables, which incorporate entrances and a mock Tudor finish. These provide a degree of symmetry between pairs of dwellings and a general cohesiveness to the street scene.

    However, some of these properties, including the appeal property and the adjoining semi-detached dwelling have been subject to some alterations and extensions to the sides. As such, and beyond the projecting mock Tudor gables there are some differences in respect of the front elevations, including the roofs of these properties. From the rear garden of the appeal property, I observed that nearby dwellings have also been altered along their rear elevations and some feature sizeable rear dormers.

    Consequently, the appearance of the appeal property and other nearby dwellings has been personalised to some extent, which also informs the character and appearance of the area.

    To facilitate the proposed bedroom with ensuite, the main elements of the proposal include front and rear dormer extensions.

    The front dormer would only extend about halfway down the front roof slope of the appeal property and is designed to be setback from this. Although this dormer would result in an increased ridge height, this would be limited to only part of the roof and does not exceed the existing maximum ridge height of the appeal property. In terms of its appearance, this dormer would largely be finished in tiles to match the existing roof and features a relatively small window.

    Therefore, and despite being visible from Green Lane, because of its modest size and acceptable appearance, the front dormer would be a subordinate and subtle addition to the roof of the appeal property. This would not unduly detract from the overall form and appearance of the appeal property or unacceptably compromise the extent of symmetry between this and the adjoining semi-detached dwelling. Consequently, and although front dormers are not a prevalent feature of the immediate area, due to its considered scale and design, the proposed front dormer would not undermine the wider street scene.

    Whilst the proposed rear dormer would also increase the ridge height of part of the main roof, this would also not extend above the maximum ridge height of the appeal property. Furthermore, this rear dormer would be set in from the sides and eaves of the rear roof and marginally exceeds half the width of the existing roof. This width of the rear dormer aligns with the windows below. Also, its half hipped form limits its massing and would complement the contemporary design of a planned ground floor rear extension.

    Due to the above siting and design considerations, the rear dormer would be a proportionate addition to the appeal property, which would assimilate with its rear roof form and elevation.

    Consequently, the siting, scale and appearance of the proposed dormers would not detract from the character and appearance of the appeal property or area. In undertaking my assessment of the appeal scheme and reaching my conclusion, I have had regard to the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance: Residential Design Guidance, which includes advice on the design of dormer extensions.

    For the above reasons, the proposal accords with Policy DM01 of Barnet’s Local Plan (Development Management Policies) Development Plan Document, September 2012. Amongst other things, this Policy says that development proposals should be based on an understanding of local characteristics. That proposals should preserve or enhance local character and respect the appearance, scale, mass, height and pattern of surrounding buildings, spaces and streets.

  4. Section 05

    Conditions

    In imposing conditions, I have had regard to the requirements of the Planning Practice Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework. In addition to the standard timescale condition for the implementation of the planning permission, I have imposed a condition specifying the approved plans and drawings in the interests of certainty.

    To ensure that the development positively contributes to the appeal property and the character and appearance of the area, I have specified a condition requiring that the external materials for the proposal match those of the appeal property.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusion

    For the above reasons, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.

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 196No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    5 June 2025Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    9 April 2025 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
6000086
Application reference
24/4369/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
477 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
Allowed
Decision category
Allowed
Received date
20 January 2025
Valid date
20 January 2025
Start date
22 January 2025
Planning authority decision date
19 December 2024
Appeal decision date
5 June 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
70647
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