Appeal 6004632
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
4 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 1.8m driveway gate and a 1.37m high boundary wall to the front.
Section 02
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Section 03
Main Issue
The main issue is the effect of the development on the appearance of the street scene and thereby on the character of the area.
Section 04
Reasons
[address] is comprised of detached dwellings of individual design set well back from the road. The absence of a roadside kerb and pavement contributes to an informal street scene whereby the front gardens and driveways are for the most part open and visible, such that the houses’ lawns and planting make a positive contribution to the pleasing character and appearance of the area.
In some cases, hedges provide a degree of enclosure but to the extent that this detracts from the open plan layout of the road it is partially offset by the verdant appearance of this planting. In contrast, the fence in the appeal proposal as submitted would obtrusively enclose the front garden of No. 1, which given its proximity to the junction with [address] is particularly prominent.
I refer to ‘as submitted’ because the appeal statement says that the proposal for the fence has been withdrawn and that the proposal is now for a driveway gate with the remainder of the boundary in the form of a laurel hedge. I saw on my visit that the hedge has now been planted but under the Householder Application Procedure the application plans cannot at this stage be amended. And in any event, a gate as shown on the plans on its own would still appear as a visually harmful feature that would detract from the openness of the street scene.
I have noted the appellant’s argument as to the need for security, but I am not persuaded that a fence of the height proposed would serve as a greater deterrent than a security system that detects movement within the front curtilage. Nor am I of the view that the frontage treatment of other properties in [address] is Appeal Decision Ref. 6004632 sufficiently persuasive for a new proposal that would harm the appearance of the street scene and the character of the area, contrary to the Council’s policies and guidance.
These are Policy DM9 of the [site address] [name] and Development Management Policies 2012; [name] WH1 & WH3 of the Western Urban Area Character SPD 2012, and Principle 9.1 of the [site address] [name] 2012.
For the reasons explained above the appeal fails.
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 204No official casework-database value to compare
- Extracted decision date · page 1
- 1 April 2026Matches the official casework database
- Extracted site visit dates
- 16 March 2026 (page 1)
Reference and authority
Official identifiers and the planning authority recorded against this case.
- Case reference
- 6004632
- Application reference
- 25/1228/FFU
- Lead case reference
- Not recorded
- Planning authority
- Surrey Heath Borough Council
- Planning authority code
- E07000214
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
- Householder
- 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
- 1,349 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
- Dismissed
- Decision category
- Dismissed
- Received date
- 4 February 2026
- Valid date
- 4 February 2026
- Start date
- 9 February 2026
- Planning authority decision date
- 28 January 2026
- Appeal decision date
- 1 April 2026
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
- 86928
- First seen
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Last seen
- 20 August 2026 at 16:29
- Removed from release
- Not recorded
- Record created
- 20 August 2026 at 14:25
- Record updated
- 24 August 2026 at 16:21