Appeal 3313870
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
5 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
a wooden fence that runs along the boundary of the property. This includes separating the side of the property with neighbouring properties and also along the front of the property (already completed).
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a wooden fence that runs along the boundary of the property. This includes separating the side of the property with neighbouring properties and also along the front of the property (already completed) at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 2022/0583/HHA, dated 1 September 2022 and in accordance with the following condition:
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: Fence Location Plan (as amended).
Section 03
Procedural Matter
The development the subject of this appeal has taken place. It is referred to below as “the development.”
Section 04
Main Issue
The main issue in this case is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area.
Section 05
Reasons
The appeal property is a two storey detached dwelling with a double garage to the side. It is located on a plot towards the corner of [address] and [address], an unpaved private road.
The appeal property is located in a residential area, characterised by the presence of largely detached one and two storey dwellings with gardens.
During my site visit, I observed that the appeal property is set well back from [address], behind a grass verge, a row of conifers, a footpath and a front garden area. I also noted that the dwelling sits at a considerably lower level than [address].
As a result of the above, the development, which comprises a simple wooden fence around much of the boundary of the property, is not visible when travelling along [address] from the west and does not appear prominently in views from the east.
As noted above, [address] is an unpaved private road. During my site visit, I observed it to be unmade and to appear somewhat unkempt. By way of contrast, the development appears as a well-kept modern fence little different to other examples of fencing visible along [address] in the wider area. Consequently, the development provides for a sense of neatness and a degree of uniformity.
Further to the above, the wooden panels used for the development do not appear incongruous in their setting but rather, as a natural material, appear to some degree to blend in with the nearby trees and with the planting within and around the appeal property’s garden. 10.Taking all of the above into account, I find that the development does not harm the character and appearance of the area and is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework or to Local Plan1 Policies P1, P2 and P6, which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.
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 601No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 17 April 2023Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 14 March 2023 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 3313870
- Application reference
- 2022/0583/HHA
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Mansfield District Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000174
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
- Unknown
- 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
- 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
- 28 December 2022
- Valid date
- 28 December 2022
- Start date
- 9 February 2023
- Planning authority decision date
- 24 October 2022
- Appeal decision date
- 17 April 2023
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
- 31213
- 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