Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3348797

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

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

construction of a ground floor rear glazed link extension, the siting of air conditioning units to the flank wall and a front porch at [site address] , Hounslow [postcode] .

  1. Section 02

    Reasons

    The link constructed between the host property and the outbuilding to the rear is no wider or taller than the existing rear flat-roofed extension. With fully glazed sides and roof with frames that match the windows in the host property, the link is an innocuous addition which is barely identifiable from public or private spaces. Whilst providing additional floorspace, the usability of the link as living accommodation is restricted by its width and depth. It has a functionality more similar to that of a corridor and, in so doing, maximises the use of the outbuilding. Whether the outbuilding has been constructed under permitted development rights or does not benefit from planning permission is not a matter for this decision.

    The porch constructed to the front of the host property projects further than the frontage of the bay window and is of a width that encroaches on it, contrary to the guidance set out in the Council’s Residential Extension Guidelines SPG 1. However, its design and use of matching materials to other porches in the street combine to create an addition that does not dominate the character of the host property or the street scene. 1 Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Appeal Decisions APP/F5540/D/24/3348797, APP/F5540/D/24/3350093

    As the air conditioning (a/c) units are sited towards the rear of the property on the side elevation, they are not readily identifiable from the pavement or road and, therefore, do not have a detrimental effect on the character and appearance of the street scene. Given other dwellings nearby have a/c units installed they are not alien features in the area.

    The development does not harm the character and appearance of the area and accords with the policies cited in the decision notice. Appeal A issue – the effect of the development on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers of [address] (No.12) with particular reference to noise.

    The nearest opening of the neighbouring property is a first-floor window in the rear elevation. This serves a bathroom. Other windows in the side elevation of No.12 are associated with the hall, stairs and landing. Therefore, the nearest opening serving a habitable room is located on the first floor, closer to the party wall between No.12 and [address].

    During my site visit one of the a/c units was operational and was barely audible when I stood in the passageway between No.12 and the host property, and significantly quieter and a more consistent sound than that of aircraft taking off or landing intermittently at [name] nearby. Based on these observations and combined with the distance between this noise source and the nearest window serving a habitable room at No.12, unacceptable disturbance to neighbouring occupiers would not occur when the a/c units are in operation. The lack of a noise assessment does not preclude such a conclusion being reached.

    The development does not harm the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers of No.12, with particular reference to noise, and accords with the policies cited in the decision notice. Appeal B issue – the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area

    The ridge height of the pitched roof of the first-floor rear extension has been constructed at a higher level than previously approved2. Nonetheless, the eaves of the modified roof align with those of the host property and the new ridgeline matches the height of the rear dormer. Although the resultant slope of the roof is steeper than previously approved, the lower ridgeline level, consistent eaves and use of matching materials ensures the extension is subordinate to the host property.

    The development does not harm the character and appearance of the area and accords with the policies cited in the decision notice.

  2. Section 03

    Conditions

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos: Unnumbered 1:1250 Location Plan; Unnumbered 1:500 Site Plan; 202 – [name]; 201 rev B – [name] and Elevations. Reason: to provide certainty. 2 Council Ref: 00266/14/P2, dated 15 September 2021 Appeal Decisions APP/F5540/D/24/3348797, APP/F5540/D/24/3350093 Appeal B:

    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos: Unnumbered 1:1250 Location Plan; Unnumbered 1:500 Site Plan; 202 – [name]; 301 rev A – [name]; 201 rev A – [name] and Elevations. Reason: to provide certainty.

  3. Section 04

    Conclusion

    The development complies with the development plan as a whole and nothing indicates a decision should be made otherwise.

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 3913No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    11 April 2025Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    2 April 2025 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3348797
Application reference
P/2023/3768
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
London Borough of Hounslow
Planning authority code
E09000018

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
Lead

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
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
Allowed
Decision category
Allowed
Received date
25 July 2024
Valid date
25 July 2024
Start date
30 August 2024
Planning authority decision date
3 May 2024
Appeal decision date
11 April 2025

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
67889
First seen
20 August 2026 at 14:25
Last seen
20 August 2026 at 16:28
Removed from release
Not recorded
Record created
20 August 2026 at 14:25
Record updated
24 August 2026 at 16:21