Appeal 3335235
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
the erection of a first-floor side extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is Dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect the extension would have on the character and appearance of the host property and on the local street scene.
Section 04
Reasons
The street scene on the southeast side of [address] North is made up of a varied series of semi-detached and terraced houses, many with side extensions reducing the spacing between them. However, these past alterations have together maintained reasonable harmony, avoiding any serious visual clash of built form within the street frontage.
In marked contrast, the side extension proposed in this case would not only virtually remove the space between No 356 and its neighbour up to eaves level when viewed from the front, but would add an incongruous, hipped roof addition to the existing upright gable end of the building.
Even though the roof of the extension would reflect the sloping roof of the adjacent house, I consider that the overall effect would be of a jarring and intrusive clash of built form, adversely affecting the character and appearance of the otherwise harmonious local street scene. It would also create the impression of a terrace at a point where semi-detached pairs of dwellings predominate.
I recognise there is nothing objectionable in principle to extensions making more efficient use of existing dwellings and that the one proposed in this case would be set back from the main front elevation, in line with adopted design guidance.
However, I conclude overall that, due to its adverse impact on the street scene, the development would be in overriding unacceptable conflict with Policies 7.4 and 7B of the adopted Ealing Development Management Development Plan Document with respect to local character and the quality of design, and that therefore this appeal should be dismissed.
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 1576No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 7 May 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 8 April 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3335235
- Application reference
- 233421HH
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Ealing
- Planning authority code
- E09000009
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
- 25 m²
- Number of residences
- 1
- 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
- 15 December 2023
- Valid date
- 3 January 2024
- Start date
- 12 February 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 13 October 2023
- Appeal decision date
- 7 May 2024
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
- 50574
- 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