Skip to main content
Official casework recordSplit DecisionCurrent release

Appeal 3348084

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

6 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

described on the application form as “Replacement of all existing single-glazed timber sash and casement windows (front and rear), and single- glazed timber door to the rear elevation with double-glazed uPVC sash and casement windows and double-glazed uPVC door”.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is dismissed in so far as the proposal relates the replacement of the existing single-glazed timber sash windows at the front of the property with new double-glazed uPVC sash windows.

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted in so far as the proposal relates to the works at the rear comprising replacement of single-glazed timber sash and casement windows and single-glazed timber door with double-glazed uPVC sash and casement windows and a double-glazed uPVC door at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2022/01637/FUL, subject to the following conditions:

    The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the information submitted with the planning application in so far as it relates to the development approved.

  2. 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.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal property occupies the upper parts of a converted 2-storey terraced house which forms part of a handsome terrace of Edwardian brick-fronted dwellings, most of which retain timber sash windows in their street frontages. Many, including the appeal property, also retain the original ornate arrangement of glazing bars within the upper sashes. These windows make a significant contribution to the character and appearance of the houses and are a key and important feature of [address] and the surrounding streets.

    The proposal would include the replacement of the 3 first floor front windows with a set of double-glazed uPVC sash windows. The illustrative material provided indicates that the upper parts of the windows would be divided into 6 panes and the lower part into 2. This arrangement would appear incongruous in the context of the neighbouring houses and, in combination with the use of uPVC, would result in unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area.

    For these reasons the proposal to install double-glazed uPVC sash replacement windows at the front of the property fails to accord with Policies DC1, DC4 and DC6 of the Hammersmith and Fulham Local Plan (2018) which, amongst other matters, require good design that is compatible with existing development.

    The proposal also includes the replacement of the 2 sash windows, a casement window and a glazed door at the rear of the appeal property. The illustrative material provided suggests that the replacement sash windows would to all intents and purposes replicate the existing upper level windows and in this particular location the use of uPVC would not be incompatible with the surroundings. The existing glazed door and associated casement window are not original features and they detract from the appearance of the property. The replacement with a similar door and window would not therefore result in harm.

    For these reasons I am satisfied that the proposed double-glazed uPVC sash and casement replacement windows at the rear of the property, and the replacement double-glazed uPVC door would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the appeal property and its surroundings. These aspects of the proposal therefore accord with the aforementioned policies. As these elements are clearly physically and functionally severable from the proposed windows at the front a split decision can be issued allowing the changes at the rear only.

  4. Section 05

    Conditions

    I have considered the conditions suggested by the Council having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. In addition to the standard time limit condition, and for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning, a condition requiring the approved development to be carried out in accordance with the material submitted with the planning application is imposed.

  5. Section 06

    Conclusion

    For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should fail in respect of the replacement of the windows at the front of the property and should succeed in respect of the replacement of the windows and glazed door to the rear.

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
    16 October 2024Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    27 September 2024 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3348084
Application reference
2022/01637/FUL
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham
Planning authority code
E09000013

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
1
Site in Green Belt
No
Agricultural holding
Not recorded
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
Split Decision
Decision category
Split decision
Received date
14 July 2024
Valid date
14 July 2024
Start date
26 July 2024
Planning authority decision date
24 April 2024
Appeal decision date
16 October 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
58544
First seen
20 August 2026 at 14:24
Last seen
20 August 2026 at 16:28
Removed from release
Not recorded
Record created
20 August 2026 at 14:24
Record updated
24 August 2026 at 16:21