Development Intent
Planning AtlasHammersmith And FulhamDC4
PolicyPoliticalCommitteeOfficersAgents & developersViabilityMapAppeals
Hammersmith And Fulham · Local Plan · Policy

DC4 — High standard of design for alterations and extensions.

How Hammersmith And Fulham actually applies DC4: who leans on it, where it bites hardest, and how often it's invoked. The policy text is the rule; this is the behaviour.

DC4 is a published Hammersmith And Fulham planning policy. This page records where it appears in the council's published planning decisions.

Cited under: Hammersmith And Fulham Local Plan (adopted)

Hammersmith And Fulham · DC4
Where DC4 is quoted — by ward
Fewer ~0
More citations ~24
Showing
re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
211
times cited
in parsed decision notices
72%
appeal survival
70 dismissed · 27 allowed at appeal
29 of 31
officer reach
94% of officers recorded in this period
Munster
top hotspot ward
24 citations
What it means in practice

Not filled in yet. This will hold how officers actually argue DC4 case by case, classified from their decision reports — the classification pass hasn't run. Nothing is paraphrased in its place.

What the published record shows

DC4 appears most often in Munster, Palace And Hurlingham, Fulham Town. It appears across 29 of 31 officers recorded in this period. The map shows the pattern for the selected period.

Who cites it — case-officer spreadfrom parsed decision notices · click an officer
Who leans on this policy — and how often — is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Why it is cited — and what follows
97%
in approvals
204 citations
2%
in refusals
5 citations

This shows the decision reports in which DC4 appears. It does not yet claim that the policy caused those outcomes; 2 citations sit outside the approval/refusal split.

Reason · role · consequence

Not filled in yet — the classification pass over the citing passages hasn't run. When it has, this shows why DC4 was used, whether it supported approval or refusal, and what changed as a result. No conclusion is shown until that classification has been checked.

Why this policy is cited, and what follows, is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Does it hold up? — appeal performance
72% survival
70 dismissed · 27 allowed97 PINS appeal decisions cite DC4

From Planning Inspectorate decision letters that cite DC4. Dismissed = the council's refusal stood, the policy held; allowed = overturned. The tighter join — this borough's own refusals citing DC4 traced to their specific appeals — is still to come.

Related — follow the thread
Hammersmith And Fulham
Back to the borough policy record
Open →
Committee record
What reaches members, and what they do with it
Open →
Case officers
Hammersmith And Fulham's decision-makers
Open →
Citations, officer spread, ward and application-type counts parsed from published Hammersmith And Fulham decision notices (high-confidence parses, approvals and refusals), joined to the canonical application record. One citation = one decision citing the policy. See the policy overview for every policy cited.

Atlas intelligence summarises patterns and observations from published planning records. Past decisions do not indicate how any future application will be determined. Every application is assessed on its own merits, having regard to the proposal, site, evidence and policies applying at the time. This information is provided for general information only and is not planning, legal, financial or professional advice.