Skip to main content
Official casework recordAllowedCurrent release

Appeal 3354796

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

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

a front boundary brick wall.

  1. Section 02

    Decision

    The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a front boundary brick wall at [site address] , Havering, Hornchurch, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P0980.24, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:

    The development to which this permission relates must be commenced not later than three years from the date of this decision.

    The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan PL- 6216_11, Proposed Site Plan BR- 6216_13, [name] 6216_14, [address] [name] 6216_15.

  2. Section 03

    Main Issue

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

  3. Section 04

    Reasons

    The appeal site is on a short length of road, which has a character that is visually distinct from the main part of The Sheilings. This is due to a sharp bend in the road followed by a change in house styles along the remainder of the street. This short stretch of road incorporates runs of tall close board fencing and brick and railing boundary walls. It is also viewed partly within the context of the corner properties on [address], due to the proximity with the road junction. Hence, while open aspects do feature further into The Sheilings, this is not the only feature of the road, and the presence of boundary treatments along its progression is notable.

    The appeal site comprises a detached dwelling set back behind a hard-surfaced front driveway. At present it does not have a front boundary treatment but given the immediate context, my observations were that this was not intrinsically important to the overall qualities of the street scene at this point. The appearance and arrangement of the appeal property generally contributes towards the overall pleasant residential character of the area.

    Whilst the site frontage is wide, the proposed boundary treatment incorporates good quality design features and materials that would break-up its massing, including brick piers, railings, and splayed entrances. The railings would also provide views towards the front of the dwelling, thereby retaining a degree of openness. Furthermore, the overall height reflects the prevailing character of the streetscape at this point. Hence the proposal would reinforce the prevailing pleasant residential character of the street scene and would not detract from the openness of the main part of The Sheilings. This would accord with the design principles within the [name] and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document, adopted 2011.

    It is highlighted that the neighbouring property, no 1 The Sheilings, has an open and pleasant character, in common with no’s 4 and 6 The Sheilings. However, the appeal property differs as it has the only frontage that aligns with the run of taller boundary features that I have already identified. Notwithstanding the Council’s concern that the boundary treatment directly opposite may have required planning permission, and that the corner properties on [address] should be discounted, they nevertheless form part of the context of the appeal site. On that basis, their presence is relevant to my consideration.

    For the above reasons, I conclude that the proposed front boundary wall would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area. Accordingly, I find no conflict with Policy 26 of the Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 (adopted November 2021), which requires new development to respect local character and distinctiveness through high quality design.

  4. Section 05

    Conclusion

    For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.

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 5239No official casework-database value to compare
    Extracted decision date · page 1
    18 February 2025Matches the official casework database
    Extracted site visit dates
    10 February 2025 (page 1)

Reference and authority

Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.

Case reference
3354796
Application reference
P0980.24
Lead case reference
Not recorded
Planning authority
London Borough of Havering
Planning authority code
E09000016

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
0 m²
Number of residences
0
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
Allowed
Decision category
Allowed
Received date
31 October 2024
Valid date
31 October 2024
Start date
14 November 2024
Planning authority decision date
10 September 2024
Appeal decision date
18 February 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
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
64808
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