Appeal 3354924
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
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
a single storey front porch.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Preliminary Matters
At the time of my site visit the porch had been constructed. However, there is some discrepancy between the porch as built, which is finished in grey render, and the submitted documents which state that the render is to be off-white. Where an appeal is submitted, it is made against the decision of the Council to refuse permission for the specific development proposed at the application stage. It is not the purpose of the appeal process to amend or evolve a scheme but to consider whether the Council’s decision to refuse a particular proposal was justified. Where the built elements of the proposal differ from what is shown on the submitted drawings that were before the Council when the original application was determined, I have determined these elements on the basis of the submitted drawings.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a semi-detached dwelling with a two-storey side extension. The first floor of the original house is slightly set back from the ground floor, with a mono-pitch roof between the ground and first floor. The depth of the porch combined with the set-back of the first floor, particularly when viewed from the east, gives the porch an uncomfortably large and bulky appearance. This is exacerbated by the ridge height and the front gable design of the porch, which is also inconsistent with the design of the other properties in the street.
Some other properties nearby have porches, including 12 and [address]. However, these porches have hipped or mono-pitched roofs which lessen their visual impact and, furthermore, these properties do not have the first floor set back from the ground floor. As such these other porches are not directly comparable to the appeal scheme and do not justify it.
Overall, the porch is an incongruous addition to the dwelling as a result of its bulk, scale and design and, consequently, it causes harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the area. The porch therefore conflicts with Policy JP-P1 of the Places For Everyone Joint Development Plan Document (2024), insofar as it requires development to respect the character of the locality including in terms of design, size and scale.
Section 06
Conclusion
The development conflicts with the development plan and the material considerations do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it. The appeal is therefore dismissed.
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 5869No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 28 February 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 11 February 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3354924
- Application reference
- HOU/353324/24
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000004
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
- 4 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 3 November 2024
- Valid date
- 3 November 2024
- Start date
- 19 November 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 25 October 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 28 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
- 65450
- 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