Planning application · Newham
26/00654/HH.
95 Plashet Grove East Ham London E6 1AA
Householder at 95 Plashet Grove East Ham London E6 1AA — refused on 9 Jun 2026 (delegated, Muniba Tariq).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationNewham profile →
Refused
Outcome
9 Jun 2026
—
Decision time
submission → decision
—
Conditions
not captured
15
Documents
15 linked
1
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Newham planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Erection of single storey ground floor side infill extension and part first floor rear extension.
Reference
26/00654/HH
Type
Householder Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
E6 1AA
Council
Received
—
Validated
15 Apr 2026
Decision date
9 Jun 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Council register
Reference
26/00654/HH
Type
Householder Application
Show all 14 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
E6 1AA
Council
Received
—
Validated
15 Apr 2026
Decision date
9 Jun 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Newham portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 9 Jun 2026, delegated decision by Muniba Tariq.
Timeline
Date
Event
15 Apr 2026
Application validated
9 Jun 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Muniba Tariq
15 Apr 2026
Application validated
9 Jun 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Muniba Tariq
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed first floor rear extension, by reason of its excessive bulk, scale, and depth would fail
to integrate with the host property and would appear an overly dominant and incongruous
addition. The development would not reflect the established pattern of development in the
surrounding area, where rear extensions are generally more modest in scale and predominantly
single storey. The application is therefore contrary to:
• The National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, December 2024);
• Policy D4 of the London Plan (2021);
• Policies SP1 and SP3 of the London Borough of Newham Local Plan (2018).
The above policies can be viewed online via the respective government websites ie. the Council's website
www.newham.gov.uk the GLA’s website www.london.gov.uk and the www.gov.uk website.
1
The proposed first floor rear extension, by reason of its excessive bulk, scale, and depth would fail
to integrate with the host property and would appear an overly dominant and incongruous
addition. The development would not reflect the established pattern of development in the
surrounding area, where rear extensions are generally more modest in scale and predominantly
single storey. The application is therefore contrary to:
• The National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, December 2024);
• Policy D4 of the London Plan (2021);
• Policies SP1 and SP3 of the London Borough of Newham Local Plan (2018).
The above policies can be viewed online via the respective government websites ie. the Council's website
www.newham.gov.uk the GLA’s website www.london.gov.uk and the www.gov.uk website.
Policies cited
D4SP1SP3NPPF
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.