Appeal 3275799
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
a two storey side extension and front entrance porch.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on character and appearance.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property is a two storey semi detached dwelling with a small single storey side extension, located in a residential area.
The appeal property sits within a residential cul-de-sac characterised by the presence of detached and semi detached two storey dwellings set back from the road behind short gardens and/or parking areas, with longer gardens to the rear.
Along with the set-back of the houses, the presence of gardens and trees provide for a sense of spaciousness. Further, the presence of similar design features, including modest original porchways set back behind bay features and similar materials, including white render and tiling, affords this part of [address] a distinctive and attractive sense of uniformity.
During my site visit, I observed that many dwellings along [address] have been altered and/or extended and that such changes tend to appear in keeping with host properties and the area’s shared characteristics.
The proposed development would introduce a large two storey side extension. The addition would extend to a width considerably greater than half of the width of the original property and would be set forward of the original entrance door at ground floor level. I find that this would result in an unduly dominant form development of such scale and prominence that it would fail to appear subservient to the host property.
In addition to the above, the proposal would introduce a large porch that would project well forward of the property’s original bay. As such, it would appear as a visually intrusive addition, out of character with the identified attributes of the area. It would also add to the overall scale of the proposal, which I find, would draw attention to itself as a visually overwhelming addition and detract from the area’s spacious qualities.
[name] note that there are other extended dwellings in the area, none appear to have been extended in the same way as the proposal the subject of this appeal. Notwithstanding this, I have found that the proposal would result in harm to local character, leading to the decision below. 10.Taking all of the above into account, I find that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to London Plan (2021) Policy D3; to Local Plan1 policies DH1 and DH(a); and to the Council’s Housing Design Supplementary Planning Document: [name], Basements and Conversions Guidance (2018), which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.
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 601No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 29 September 2021Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 14 September 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3275799
- Application reference
- 21/0197/HD
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Royal Borough of Greenwich
- Planning authority code
- E09000011
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
- 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
- Not recorded
- Number of residences
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- No
- Affects setting of a listed building
- No
- Historic building grant made
- No
- Relates to a conservation area
- No
- Flooding is an issue
- No
- Site within an AONB
- No
- Site within an SSSI
- No
Decision and dates
The published outcome and every imported case date.
- Official decision
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 25 May 2021
- Valid date
- 25 May 2021
- Start date
- 13 August 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 15 March 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 29 September 2021
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
- 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
- Horizon
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 3984
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:25
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21