None
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Character & Appearance
Policy Weight
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 20 May 2025
by Juliet Rogers BA (Hons) MA MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 02 June 2025
Appeal Ref: 6000141
Proposal: boundary fencing and security bollards at 50 Hazelmere Road, Petts Wood, Orpington
BR5 1PD
Application Ref: 24/04382/FULL6
Decision – planning permission is granted.
Preliminary Matters – I have determined this appeal retrospectively.
Reasons
Issue – the effect on the character and appearance of the area, including the Petts
Wood Area of Special Residential Character (ASRC)
1. Whilst the predominant front boundary treatment in this part of the ASRC
comprises low brick walls, there is little consistency in their design with a variety of
pier types, capping details, brick patterns and the incorporation of railings evident
in the street scene. Other front gardens nearby are bounded with rendered and
painted walls or landscape features.
2. Aside from the tall close board fencing between 23 and 25 Hazelmere Road, the
presence of wooden fencing in the street scene is principally limited to side
boundaries. Nonetheless, the height, colour and horizontal slatted design of the
boundary fence preserves the spacious character of the street scene and the
wider ASRC. Furthermore, the visual connection between the properties and their
surroundings, a key feature of the ASRC’s character, is maintained.
3. The development does not harm the character and appearance of the area and
accords with the policies cited in the decision notice.
Conditions
1) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with
drawing nos: 6233-24-PL001: Alterations to Front Driveway - Retrospective; and
6233-24-PL002: Alterations to Front Driveway - Pre-Existing Drawings.
Reason: to provide certainty.
Conclusion
4. The development complies with the development plan as a whole and nothing
indicates a decision should be made otherwise.
Juliet Rogers
INSPECTOR
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.