Appeal 6000025
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
described on the planning application form as ‘Proposed replacement of front gates and fence’.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for proposed replacement of front gates and fence at [site address] , [site address] , Totteridge, Barnet, London [postcode] in accordance with the terms of application Ref 24/3413/HSE, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers: OTC-03 ([name]); OTC-01 (only insofar as it relates to [name]/[name] and Proposed Floor Plan); and Site Location Plan dated 30 August 2024.
Section 03
[name]
The Council adopted the Barnet Local Plan 2021-2036 (LP) on 4 March 2025. This replaces the previous Local Plan referred to in the Council’s reason for refusal. Both parties have been given an opportunity to comment on the implications of this for the appeal. The Council provided copies of Policies GSS01, CDH04 and HOU03 of the LP which relate to delivering sustainable growth, tall buildings and residential conversions which are not relevant to the appeal proposal.
Section 04
Background and Main Issue
The gates and fencing which I saw at my site visit do not have the benefit of planning permission and were the subject of a previous appeal1. This appeal relates to a proposal to replace a section of the fencing with a hedge planted above a low wall, reducing the height of a section of the fence and the installation of a pedestrian gate both with a height of 1.1m and replacing the existing vehicular gate with one which comprises of open metal slats of a varied height not exceeding 1.4 metres. 1 Appeal Ref: APP/N5090/C/22/3311752 & APP/N5090/C/22/3311753
Therefore, the main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the Totteridge Conservation Area (CA).
Section 05
Reasons
The CA is predominantly residential with a variety of building styles and ages in a countryside setting. Houses tend to be set back from the road with mature landscaping and trees. This results in the CA having a semi-rural and verdant character. The significance of the CA derives from it being a visually attractive, historic settlement in a rural landscape setting.
The appeal property is located at the junction of [site address] and [address], with vehicular access from the latter. [site address] is narrow, winding and semi-rural in character with overhanging trees, simple cottages and houses. Where gates are provided these tend to be open, providing views to the houses behind. [address] consists of relatively modern dwellings and has a more open character. There are fewer trees and planting and houses tend to be open to the road. [address], on the opposite side of the junction of [site address] and [address] is an exception, being enclosed by an established hedge and gates. The rear garden of the appeal property is also enclosed by a close boarded fence which abuts [address].
The CAS2 states that elaborately designed wall, railing and gate features is a significant issue throughout the CA and that gates which prevent views of houses and gardens have had a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the CA.
The removal of part of the existing fence and the provision of a laurel hedge in its place, would reduce the extent of the harsh boundary treatment to [address]. It would appropriately reflect the treatment of the boundary of [address] on the opposite side of the junction and the overall verdant character of the CA.
The proposed pedestrian gate and adjoining fence would be 1.1m high. The vehicular gate would be no greater than 1.4m high at its highest point. Both gates would be designed with small gaps. This would prevent the gates appearing as a solid mass. It would also allow views from the street, back towards the house, providing a degree of natural surveillance.
For these reasons, the appeal proposal would be appropriate in appearance and materials in relation to this particular context. The CA would not be experienced differently as a consequence, nor would the significance of the CA affected.
I therefore find that the proposed development would have a neutral effect on the character and appearance of the CA and preserve its significance. The proposal therefore accords with Policies CDH01 and CDH08 of the LP. Together these seek to ensure that, among other things, developments respond sensitively to distinctive local character and that conservation areas are conserved and enhanced in a manner appropriate to their significance. 2 Totteridge Conservation Area Character Appraisal Statement adopted May 2008
Section 06
Conditions
In addition to the standard time condition, it is necessary to specify the approved plans in the interests of certainty. A condition to ensure that the materials used are those set out on the planning application form is not necessary.
Section 07
Conclusion
The proposed development would adhere to the development plan and there are no material considerations that outweigh this finding. Accordingly, the appeal is 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 564No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 22 July 2025Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 7 July 2025 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 6000025
- Application reference
- 24/3413/HSE
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- London Borough of Barnet
- Planning authority code
- E09000003
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
- Not recorded
- Appeal reason
- refused
- Type detail
- No Application Type Assocaited
- Jurisdiction
- No Jurisdiction Associated
- Link status
- Not recorded
Site and development
Published appeal-site measurements and planning designations, without the withheld precise location fields.
- Site area
- 0 hectares
- Floor space
- 774 m²
- Number of residences
- Not recorded
- Site in Green Belt
- No
- Agricultural holding
- Not recorded
- Affects setting of a listed building
- Yes
- 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
- 27 November 2024
- Valid date
- 27 November 2024
- Start date
- 5 December 2024
- Planning authority decision date
- 28 October 2024
- Appeal decision date
- 22 July 2025
Case administration
Published recovery, call-in, costs and enforcement information for this case.
- Redetermined
- Not recorded
- Bespoke
- Not recorded
- 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
- Back Office
- Dataset status
- Current release
- Catalogue record ID
- 73432
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:28
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21