Appeal 3354336
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
5 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 single storey front extension.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
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.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal property forms part of a terrace of six 2-storey mid-twentieth century houses with relatively long front gardens. When originally built these houses, and those in the nearby terraces, would have had a very unified appearance. Over the years windows and roofs have been replaced, some frontages have been rendered and small porches with pitched roofs have been added. Despite this, the overall form of the terraces remains largely intact.
The proposal would comprise the erection of a single-storey front extension. Unlike the nearby porches, which extend across roughly half the width of the frontage of each house, the proposed addition would be full-width. As such, due to its siting, bulk and width this would be an incongruous addition in this context and would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the host building and the surrounding area.
For these reasons the proposal is contrary to Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) and Policies SP1 and SP3 of the London Borough of Newham’s Local Plan (2018). Amongst other matters these policies require high quality development that enhances local context, delivering buildings and spaces that positively respond to local distinctiveness. The proposal also fails to accord with the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework (2023) and the Council’s Altering and [name], Supplementary Planning Document (2018).
The Council’s reason for refusal refers to [name] D1, D4 and D8 and [name] S6 and SP8. These do not directly relate to the matters before me. Consequently, there is no conflict with these policies.
Section 05
Conclusion
For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should fail.
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
- 18 December 2024Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 6 December 2024 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3354336
- Application reference
- 24/01223/HH
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Newham
- Planning authority code
- E09000025
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
- 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
- 23 October 2024
- Valid date
- 23 October 2024
- Start date
- 4 November 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 9 August 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 18 December 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
- No
- 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
- 61955
- 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