Appeal 3312116
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
5 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 storey side extension and a single storey rear extension
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host building and the surrounding area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property is a 2-storey house with an attached garage to the side. It forms one end of a terrace of 6 houses featuring a hipped roof and prominent bay windows. The neighbouring part of South Park Crescent comprises short terraces of similar age and appearance. Many of these have been extended to the side to either form additional dwellings or to enable the enlargement of end-of-terrace houses.
The proposal would comprise the demolition of the garage and the erection of a 2-storey side addition combined with a part single and part 2-storey addition to the rear. The front elevation of the extension would be set slightly behind the main front elevation of the terrace and a hipped roof would be formed with a ridge set slightly below that of the main roof.
The proposal would extend to the side boundary of the appeal site, next to which there is a lane. The remaining gap between the appeal property and the neighbouring end-of-terrace house would be similar to gaps elsewhere in the area and the neighbouring terraces would still remain distinctly separate buildings. As the terrace of which the appeal property forms part has already been extended at the northern end, and its original symmetry already lost, the proposal would not disrupt the appearance of the frontage of the terrace.
However, the proposal would extend a significant distance beyond the rear elevation of the terrace. This double-storey rearwards protrusion would be at odds with the appearance of the terrace and the pattern of development in the area. The long 2-storey flank elevation would also significantly and detrimentally enclose the lane.
For these reasons I conclude that, due to its height, bulk, siting and depth, the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the host building and the surrounding area. It therefore fails to accord with Policy 15 of the [name] (2011) and Policies DM30 and DM31 of the Lewisham Development Management Local Plan (2014). Amongst other matters these policies seek to ensure that developments are of a high standard of design and integrate with the local area. The proposal also conflicts with the aims of Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) and the Council’s Alterations and Extensions Supplementary Planning Document (2019).
Section 05
Conclusion
For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should fail.
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 246No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 29 March 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 3 March 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3312116
- Application reference
- DC/22/128241
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Lewisham
- Planning authority code
- E09000023
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
- 60 m²
- Number of residences
- 0
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- No
- 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
- 29 November 2022
- Valid date
- 29 November 2022
- Start date
- 7 December 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 4 November 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 29 March 2023
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
- 30493
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:26
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21