Teignbridge District Council appeal evidence
Refused over neighbour privacy in Teignbridge?
See the privacy, outlook and living-condition findings in selected Teignbridge appeals.
Recently refused?
Create a free account for a private planning workspace.
No payment at signup. Refusal-review ordering may not be open.
- Matched locally
- 31 of 88
- eligible decision families
- Allowed
- 11
- matched appeal records
- Dismissed
- 20
- matched appeal records
- Householder
- 29
- of 31 matched records
AI-assisted. Cited sources and wording were checked before publication. Based on 5 source-linked examples shown below. Review method and limits.
Planning Data area point: Teignbridge LPA (50.606374, −3.593749). This is the published representative point for the authority boundary, not a town hall, camera position or appeal site.
Teignbridge District Council appeal findings
Teignbridge neighbour privacy and outlook findings
The displayed examples have a different outcome mix from the matched local set. Dismissed extracts in appeals 89028, 82876 and 80002 give conclusions only; 89028 is at the issue’s edge because it also covers site location.
Counted against appeals
Teignbridge privacy and living-condition conclusions
Privacy harm was the conclusion
The Inspector concluded that the proposal would harm neighbouring occupiers’ privacy.
Roof raising harmed living conditions
The Inspector concluded that the roof-raising proposal would have an unacceptable impact on occupants’ living conditions.
Helped or needed
Teignbridge privacy and outlook no-harm findings
Balcony changes did not reduce privacy
The revised decking, new window and first-floor balcony were not found to significantly reduce No 11’s privacy.
Rear extension did not harm outlook
The rear extension was found not harmful to neighbouring occupiers’ outlook or privacy.
Your refusal notice
Check these details
- Does the refusal identify a specific loss of neighbour privacy?
- Does it explain any harm to outlook as well as privacy?
- Does it identify which occupiers would face unacceptable living conditions?
Appeal 89028 includes a location issue, and its extract does not say how privacy was assessed. These decisions do not predict another result.
Appeal evidence examples
Compare allowed and dismissed appeal reasoning
Each example separates the development, the Inspector-stated issue that selected it, and the reasoning from the decision. Compare the facts as well as the outcome: these examples do not predict how a different proposal would be decided.
Allowed appeal examples
2 examples
27 September 2021 · Allowed
Development described in the decision
a ground floor lounge extension with first floor balcony over plus lower ground floor extension to provide additional facilities.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address] with respect to privacy.
Paragraph 2 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
To my mind, neither the revised decking, the new window nor the new first floor balcony would lead to any significant reduction to the privacy of the occupiers of No 11. There would therefore be no conflict with policies WE8 or S1 of the Teignbridge Local Plan 2013-2033, both of which, amongst other things, require that development does not reduce the level of privacy enjoyed by the occupiers of neighbouring property.
Paragraph 10 · Source page 2
26 November 2021 · Allowed
Development described in the decision
first floor rear extension (over existing ground floor extension).
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers at No [address], with particular regard to outlook and privacy.
Paragraph 2 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
For the reasons above, the proposal would not be harmful to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers at No [address], with particular regard to outlook or privacy effects. The proposal would therefore comply with, in particular, Policies S2 and WE8 of the Teignbridge Local Plan 2013 – 2033 (adopted 2014). Amongst other things, these Policies seek to protect the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers and avoid the undue loss of outlook, light or privacy and ensure that new extensions do not have a dominant or overbearing impact on neighbouring properties or the streetscene.
Paragraph 9 · Source pages 2, 3
Dismissed appeal examples
3 examples
19 May 2026 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
described on the planning application form as ‘add additional storey to dwelling to form self-contained dwelling unit’.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issues are: • whether the appeal site is in a suitable location for the proposed dwelling having regard to the development plan and the appeal site’s proximity to services and facilities; and • the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of existing occupiers with particular regard to privacy.
Paragraph 3 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
The proposed development would be contrary to the development plan. The limited weight I have given to other considerations, do not outweigh this conflict. Consequently, with reference to Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the appeal is dismissed.
Paragraph 19 · Source page 3
16 January 2026 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
the partial raising of existing roof to provide additional living space.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issues are: • The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the appeal site and the surrounding area; and • The effect of the development on the living conditions of the occupants of 17 and [address] and [address].
Paragraph 3 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
The development would have an unacceptable impact on the living conditions of the occupants of 17 and [address] and [address]. It would therefore be contrary to Policies GP1 and H12 of the emerging Local Plan, which taken together seek to ensure that development does not have an unacceptable impact on the living conditions of nearby residential occupants.
Paragraph 22 · Source page 3
19 November 2025 · Dismissed
Development described in the decision
partial raising of existing roof to provide additional living space.
Issue identified by the Inspector
The main issues are the effect of the proposed development on: • the character and appearance of the area and host property, and • the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers with regard to privacy.
Paragraph 2 · Source page 1
Reasoning from the decision
I therefore conclude that the proposed development would harm the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers with regard to privacy. It would be contrary to Policy WE8 of the LP which amongst other things, seeks to ensure that development would not reduce the level of privacy enjoyed by neighbouring properties.
Paragraph 11 · Source page 2