Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

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 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

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.

  1. 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

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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