Appeal 3289692
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
erection of fence in the rear garden.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Procedural Matter
At the time of my site visit, the proposed fence was in place. The application made clear that the scheme had been submitted retrospectively and I have dealt with the appeal on that basis.
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area and the living conditions of the occupiers of No. [address].
Section 05
Reasons
The development comprises a timber fence with structural supports along the shared boundary with No. [address]. The land levels of the appeal site garden and adjacent properties fall towards the watercourse at the rear of the properties.
The fence is at a consistent height along the majority of the shared boundary. Due to the fall in levels the height of the fence is visually dominant and at odds with the open waterside views. The fence between the appeal site and No. 27 decreases in height and follows the fall in land levels, I observed other boundary treatments in the area also decreased in height closer to the watercourse.
The robust aluminium structural supports are clearly visible when the development is viewed from the neighbouring garden, No. 25, and give a non-domestic appearance to the fence. This combined with the overall height of the fence is incongruous to the area, oppressive and stark to the occupiers of the neighbouring property.
[name] recognise that a decking area and garden building are located within the rear garden of No. [address] to the shared boundary, I am not persuaded that the development before me is the only solution to provide privacy for the residents of the appeal property.
I find that the fence is dominant and detracts from the open nature of the area. I conclude that the proposed development harms the character and appearance of the area along with the living conditions of the occupiers of No. [address].
There is conflict with A Local Plan for Sefton (2017), Policies EQ2 and HC4 which seek amongst other things to ensure development responds positively to the character and form of an area whilst protecting living conditions of occupiers of neighbouring properties. There is conflict with the [name], Supplementary Planning Document (2018) which seeks to ensure such structures respect the character and design of an area and neighbouring properties.
There is also conflict with the Framework which seeks to ensure developments are of good design appropriate and sympathetic to their surroundings.
Section 06
Conclusion
For the above reasons I conclude that this appeal should be 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 126No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 11 March 2022Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 8 March 2022 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3289692
- Application reference
- DC/2021/01858
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E08000014
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
- 0 m²
- Number of residences
- 1
- 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
- 22 December 2021
- Valid date
- 22 December 2021
- Start date
- 21 January 2022
- Planning authority decision date
- 15 October 2021
- Appeal decision date
- 11 March 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
- 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
- 12193
- 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