Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3352572

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

a front porch.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a front porch at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application reference 24/0128/HHO, subject to the following condition:

    The development hereby permitted relates to the following approved plans: Location Plan; and Elevations and [name].

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

    The main issue is the effect on the character and appearance of the area.

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The proposed porch has already been completed. This dwelling and its neighbours are of a relatively uniform appearance. The new porch, although of greater scale than most in the vicinity, has been designed to reflect the detailing of the relatively new roof and windows with regards to materials and colour. It sits forward of the building line of neighbouring porches and as a result it is more prominent within the street scene, particularly in longer views. However, it complements and uplifts the appearance of the property and adds interest to it, without detracting from the wider area.

    As this development complements and uplifts the appearance of the property and does not result in harm to the character or appearance of the area, it does not conflict with the aspiration of achieving quality design, which is a requirement of policy ENV 2 of the Pendle Local Plan Part 1: [name] 2011-2030 (2015). Policy ENV 1 is not directly relevant to the specifics of this proposal. www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate Appeal Decision: APP/E2340/D/24/3352572

    The Design Principles: Supplementary Planning Document 2009 (SPD) advises that front porches with matching material and a pitched roof will be acceptable if extending no more than 1.25 metres forwards. This proposal would exceed these dimensions and include some alternative materials. It therefore falls to be considered against the specific design guidelines. I am satisfied that the style, design, materials and scale respect the character of the house and are not out of keeping in this residential area. The guidelines advise that small porches and canopies of a satisfactory design and materials, projecting in front of the building line, will normally be permitted. I am satisfied that this proposal is not overly large given its height and its depth in comparison to the depth of the frontage forecourt. It retains sufficient space for parking in front of it. Whilst the extension may be larger than anticipated by the SPD as suggested by the council, I am satisfied that it generally meets its design aspirations.

    Policy CNDP3 of the Colne Neighbourhood Development Plan 2022-2030 (2023) requires that the design of new development should be informed by and retain and enhance the defining characteristics of the Settlement Focus Area of Colne (as set out in the Colne Neighbourhood Development Plan Design Code) within which it is located. The property lies within the Settlement Focus Area D: Northern suburban residential area. The council have not identified the conflict that results with this policy or the design code. I have not found that the proposal conflicts with its objectives.

    The proposal similarly does not conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework 2024 as it is likely to function well and adds to the overall quality of the area.

    Although there have been concerns raised about this development setting a precedent, I am not satisfied that, given the character of this area, that other well designed porches, built in good quality materials, would result in harm to the character or appearance of this particular area or indeed the wider Settlement Focus Area. [name] have had regard to the council’s concerns and the limited disparity with the SPD, I have not found these matters to weigh significantly against the proposal. I therefore allow the appeal.

    As the building works are complete and the porch is of a high standard with regard to materials, there is no need for conditions relating to the commencement of development or the materials to be used. I have made reference to the details of the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

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 341No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    2 January 2025Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    11 December 2024 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3352572
Application reference
24/0128/HHO
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
Pendle Borough Council
Planning authority code
E07000122

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
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
No
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 September 2024
Valid date
7 October 2024
Start date
29 October 2024
Planning authority decision date
10 July 2024
Appeal decision date
2 January 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
62335
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