Appeal 3283878
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
the erection of a fence.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a fence at [site address] , Raunds [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/21/00539/FUL, dated 23 March 2021, subject to the following 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 plans: Location Plan; Block Plan; CA1216/001 [name] an CA1216/002 [name].
Section 03
Procedural Matter
The description of development refers to moving a fence. However, for reasons of clarity the development would be the erection of a fence.
Section 04
Main Issue
It is considered that the main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the streetscene.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a corner plot located within a primarily residential area and is situated at the junction of [address] and [address]. The proposed development includes the erection of a 2 metre high fence to the rear of an existing 1 metre high hedge which delineates the boundary between the property and the footway along [address]. The hedge currently encloses an area of semi-private amenity space located to the side of the property which is separated from the rear garden by an existing wall.
The streetscene along [address] is varied comprising a mix of front and side elevations of dwellings facing the road together with boundary features comprising hedges, walls and fences of varying heights. These boundary features enclose both private and semi-private amenity spaces. At some of the corner plots the side boundaries are sited close to the footways and, as such, there is not the type of open character and appearance along the streetscene which the Council claim.
There would be a change in the character and streetscene associated with the erection of the proposed fence and the enclosure of the semi-private open space located to the side of the property. However, because of the context of other means of enclosure sited adjacent to the footways along [address] the degree of change would not be so significant so as to cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the streetscene.
Further, the retention of the existing hedge would assist with assimilating the proposed fence into the varied streetscene. By reason of being sited no further forward than the property’s front elevation, there would be no material harm to the streetscene along [address] caused by the appeal scheme.
For the reasons given, it is concluded that the proposed development would not cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the streetscene and, as such, it would not conflict with Policy 8d(i) of the [name] and Policy R2(a & b) of the Raunds Neighbourhood Plan. Amongst other matters, these policies require development to respond to the site’s immediate and wider context and seek the preservation and enhancement of the locally distinctive built environment.
Section 06
Other Matters
Reference has been made by a number of residents and the Parish Council to the potential for the proposed fence to obstruct visibility for vehicles and pedestrians, including children attending the near-by school. However, the Council has not objected to the proposed development on highway safety grounds and, based upon the observations made during the site visit, there are no reasons to reach a different assessment.
Section 07
Conditions
The Council has suggested several conditions in the event this appeal succeeds which have been assessed against the tests in the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance. For reasons of clarity and certainty, a condition is required to ensure that the appeal scheme is constructed in accordance with the submitted drawings. Accordingly and for the reasons given, it is concluded that this 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 1351No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 25 February 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 18 January 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3283878
- Application reference
- NE/21/00539/FUL
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- North Northamptonshire
- Planning authority code
- Not recorded
Casework details
The casework, procedure, development and linking details supplied by the official record.
- Casework type
- Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development type
- Other minor 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
- Not recorded
- 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
- 29 September 2021
- Valid date
- 29 September 2021
- Start date
- 14 December 2021
- Planning authority decision date
- 3 September 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 25 February 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
- 11270
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:26
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:24
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21