Appeal 3318157
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
7 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
alteration to the existing front porch to increase the size.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for alteration to the existing front porch to increase the size at [site address] , Lewisham, London [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/22/129240, dated 13 November 2022, and subject to the following
Section 03
conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 22-72-PLO1, 2272-PLO2, 2272-SO1, and 2272-SO2.
The materials to be used in the alteration to the existing front porch, hereby permitted, shall match those used in the existing building.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host building and the local area.
Section 05
Reasons
[site address] is a two-storey, mid-terrace dwelling in a residential cul-de-sac. While the buildings are of a predominantly similar style, there is significant variation in the design, size and style of porches in the immediate area. Like many of its neighbours, the appeal site is set back from the road with an enclosed front garden. It is also positioned towards the end of the cul-de-sac with a low degree of prominence in the street scene.
The proposed porch would be inset from the boundary, set down below the first-floor window and of comparable height to the scheme at the neighbouring property, resulting in a development which would look proportionate and be visually subordinate to the host building.
The appeal scheme would be of similar materials to the existing porch, retain the existing position of the front entrance, and features an extensive use of glass in the design resulting in a visually lightweight structure which would not harm the form or architectural characteristics of the host property.
While the appeal scheme is different to others nearby, the extensive mix of porch treatments, including the scheme of comparable width at No. [address], mean that it would not look out of place in such a varied context.
The scheme would also be partially screened by the hard and soft boundary treatments that are typical of the vicinity, including at the appeal site. The length of the front garden at the appeal site, resultant set back from the road, partial screening and existence of an extensive mix of porch designs in the vicinity mean the scheme would not have a detrimental impact on the street scene.
I conclude that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the host dwelling or local area. It would therefore comply with Policy 15 [name] for Lewisham local development framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document June 2011, DM Policy 30 [name] and Local Character and DM Policy 31 Alterations and Extensions to [name] including [name] of the Lewisham Local Development Framework Development Management Local Plan, November 2014. These policies seek to ensure - amongst other matters - that developments are of high quality and standard of design and are appropriate to their setting. It would also align with the objectives of the Lewisham Local Plan Alterations and Extensions Supplementary Planning Document 2019, which seeks to ensure - amongst other matters – that developments do not unbalance a building, create undue prominence and/or disrupt the continuity of a terrace or group.
Section 06
Conditions
I have attached the standard time limit condition and a plans condition to provide certainty, as well as a materials condition to ensure it reflects the character and appearance of the area.
Section 07
Conclusion
For the reasons given above and having taken all the matters raised into account, I conclude that the proposed porch would comply with the development plan as a whole and 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 4148No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 7 July 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 6 June 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3318157
- Application reference
- DC/22/129240
- 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
- Unknown
- 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
- 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
- Allowed
- Decision category
- Allowed
- Received date
- 8 March 2023
- Valid date
- 16 March 2023
- Start date
- 5 April 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 29 December 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 7 July 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
- 35313
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:27
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21