Described on the planning application form as ‘Proposed replacement of front gates and fence

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 7 July 2025 by Alison Fish BA (Hons) Dip TP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 22 July 2025 Appeal Ref: 6000025 Oak Tree Cottage, Barnet Lane, Totteridge, Barnet, London N20 8AP • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr David Lambert against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Barnet. • The application Ref is 24/3413/HSE. • The development proposed is described on the planning application form as ‘Proposed replacement of front gates and fence’. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for proposed replacement of front gates and fence at Oak Tree Cottage, Barnet Lane, Totteridge, Barnet, London N20 8AP in accordance with the terms of application Ref 24/3413/HSE, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers: OTC-03 (Proposed Elevation); OTC-01 (only insofar as it relates to Proposed Fence/Gate Elevation and Proposed Floor Plan); and Site Location Plan dated 30 August 2024. Preliminary Matter 2. 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. Background and Main Issue 3. 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 Appeal Decision 6000025 2 4. 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). Reasons 5. 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. 6. The appeal property is located at the junction of Barnet Lane and Oaklands Road, with vehicular access from the latter. Barnet Lane 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. Oaklands Road 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. Apple Lodge, on the opposite side of the junction of Barnet Lane and Oaklands Road 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 Oaklands Road. 7. 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. 8. 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 Oaklands Road. It would appropriately reflect the treatment of the boundary of Apple Lodge on the opposite side of the junction and the overall verdant character of the CA. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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 Appeal Decision 6000025 3 Conditions 12. 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. Conclusion 13. The proposed development would adhere to the development plan and there are no material considerations that outweigh this finding. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Alison Fish INSPECTOR