Appeal 3282010
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
7 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
new driveway together with external alterations.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a new driveway together with external alterations at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/21/0161, dated 13 January 2021, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is whether the proposed development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of Lindfield Conservation Area.
Section 04
Reasons
The appeal site falls within Lindfield Conservation Area (CA). The CA has a core centred around the high street, where there are many buildings of architectural interest. Although representative of a variety of periods, there are a number of buildings of medieval origin and the Georgian period. Towards the periphery of the CA the pattern of development is more spacious with more established landscaping.
The appeal property is located on [site address] , only a short distance from the junction of [site address] with the [address]. Whilst the appeal property is set back from [site address] , there are other buildings in the immediate vicinity that have little or no set back from the road frontage resulting in the area having a more built-up character. Whilst the property opposite the appeal site has a high hedge adjacent to the road frontage, boundary treatments along this stretch of [site address] typically comprise of low walls, some with fence panels above and landscaping beyond. At my site visit I also noted that several nearby properties benefit from accesses and off-street parking, particularly where they are set back from the road frontage.
Policy DP35 of the Mid Sussex District Plan (2018) (DP) states (among other things) that development in a conservation area will be required to conserve or enhance its special character, appearance and the range of activities which contribute to its. It also seeks to protect gardens, landscaping and boundary features that contribute to the special character of the area. Any new landscaping or boundary features should be designed to reflect that character.
Furthermore, Section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) is concerned with preserving and enhancing the historic environment. The Framework at paragraph 199 requires that the decision taker should give great weight to the conservation of heritage assets.
The front boundary of the appeal site currently comprises a low, relatively newly planted hedge along most of its frontage, together with brick priers adjacent to the pedestrian access. Other than for the path, most of the front garden is laid to lawn. I note from the representations that historically there was a high hedge along the front boundary although the appellant clarifies that this was removed over two years ago.
The site is already relatively open and exposed to [site address] . The proposed new driveway would be centrally located within the width of the frontage, with a low brick wall proposed on either side as well as a new palisade pedestrian entrance gate between the brick piers. In my view, a low brick wall and pedestrian gate in this part of the CA would be in keeping with other boundary enclosures in the vicinity of the site. Moreover, the proposed site plan indicates that a generous amount of landscaping would be provided adjacent to the front wall and around the driveway. This planting would soften the visual appearance of the new driveway such that I am satisfied that the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the CA.
The statutory duty in Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 is a matter of considerable importance and weight. I am however satisfied that proposed would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area and that the character or appearance of Lindfield Conservation Area would be preserved. The proposal would therefore comply with Policy DP35 of the DP which reflects the thrust of the statutory duty, as well as Section 16 of the Framework.
Section 05
Conditions
I have had regard to the Council’s suggested conditions. In addition to the standard implementation conditions, the plans condition is imposed for clarity. A condition relating to materials is required in order to ensure a satisfactory external appearance in the CA. Further conditions relating to the construction of the access and visibility are necessary in the interests of highway safety.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the reasons given, and having regard to all of the matters raised, the appeal is allowed.
Section 07
Schedule of Conditions
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: 213.PL.01/A [name] - Proposed plans, elevation, location & block plan; [name]; and [name].
The use of the access and parking area shall not commence until such time as the vehicular access serving the development has been constructed in accordance with the details shown on drawing no. 213.PL.01/A [name].
The use of the access and parking area shall not commence until the car parking area has been constructed in accordance with the approved drawing no. 213.PL.01/A [name]. These spaces shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated purpose.
The use of the access and parking area shall not commence until visibility splays of 2.0 x 30.5 metres south and 2.0 x 60.3 metres north have been provided at the proposed site vehicular access onto [site address] in accordance with the approved drawings. Once provided the splays shall thereafter be maintained and kept free of all obstructions over a height of 0.6 metre above adjoining carriageway level or as otherwise agreed.
No development shall be carried out unless and until samples and a schedule of materials and finishes to be used for the walls and gates of the proposed development have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority in writing.
Prior to the commencement of construction, full details of a hard and soft landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. These works shall be carried out as approved prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years from the completion of development, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.
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 334No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 11 January 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 13 December 2021 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3282010
- Application reference
- DM/21/0161
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Mid Sussex District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000228
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
- 40 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 August 2021
- Valid date
- 31 August 2021
- Start date
- 27 October 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 17 June 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 11 January 2022
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
- Not recorded
- 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
- 8716
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:25
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21