Appeal 3274719

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area.

[address] is a suburban residential street. The appeal site comprises a detached bungalow on a prominent corner plot on the junction of [address] with [address]. The properties in the immediate area are set back from the street with front gardens and driveways. Most of the front boundaries in this part of [address] and [address] have low walls or fences, or hedges of varying heights. Overall, the streets have an open, green and pleasant appearance and character.

Fences are not uncommon in the street scene, and a few properties further along [address] and [address] have tall fences adjacent to the highway. However, these tall fences have reduced the open character of the street and furthermore it is unclear whether or when any of these fences received planning permission.

In this case, the 1.8 metre height of the proposed fence, when combined with the substantial length and solid appearance, would form an obtrusive feature, further eroding the open appearance and character of the street. These effects would be exacerbated by the prominent location of the fence on a corner plot at the junction with [address].

For these reasons, the proposed fence would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area and as such would conflict with policies DS1 and DS5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan (May 2003) and policy CS5 of the [name] (June 2011). These policies all seek, amongst other things, for developments to be of a high standard of design that reflect the character and appearance of the immediate area.

I accept that the existing wall is in a poor condition and that the fence would provide privacy to the property. I have sympathy with these concerns and have taken them into account. However, there is no reason why these issues could not be resolved by other forms of boundary treatment which may not have such a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the area. Consequently, these matters do not outweigh the harm that has been identified.

I acknowledge that no objections to the proposal were raised by Messingham Parish Council; however this carries neutral weight in this case.

I note the concerns regarding the Council’s handling of the case, and in particular the lack of response to emails sent by the appellant. However, this is a matter that would need to be taken up with the Council in the first instance, and in determining the appeal I have only had regard to the planning merits of the case.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and, on that basis, agree with the recommendation and shall dismiss the appeal.