Appeal 3302225

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the brickwork wall and slatted fencing to the boundary at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/0791/HSE, dated 4 May 2022, as depicted on drawing no. [name] 01 and the site photographs by fairgroundfish.

The boundary features the subject of this appeal, and as depicted on the submitted drawing, are already in place. I have therefore dealt with the appeal on the basis of the retention of the existing development. In the interests of clarity, I have accordingly made minor amendments to the description of the development in my formal decision.

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

Amongst other things, [name] of the Hertsmere Planning and Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document Draft 2016 (‘PDG’) sets out that the design of front boundaries should complement the existing pattern of boundary treatment, and should help to create and enhance a local sense of place by maintaining consistency within the street, but should not be divisive or intimidating in appearance, or create a sense of segregation.

The dwellings on [address] either abut the pavement, or are set back a short distance from it, typically behind a low boundary wall, or a largely open frontage. However, around the junction with [address], there are taller features on [address], including a close boarded timber fence next to the appeal site at [address], and a high hedgerow beyond, as well as a timber fence opposite.

The wall that has been constructed here is of a fairly limited height, and the slatted construction of the timber fence above it and to the side allows some limited views through it to the house, thus limiting any sense of segregation. The structure’s overall height is lower than the adjacent timber fence which forms part of this streetscene. Moreover, its light coloured finish respects the brickwork on the host property and the other dwellings in this terrace, and helps to soften its visual impact.

Consequently, in this location at this end of [address], and given the presence of nearby tall boundary features, the scheme does not have a domineering or segregating impact, and it has not harmed the character and appearance of the area.

The scheme does not therefore conflict with those parts of Policies SP1 and CS22 of the [name] 2013, or Policy SADM30 of the Hertsmere Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan 2016, which require high quality design, with development which respects the area, and which is appropriate in scale, appearance and function to the local character and context.

Neither does it conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework requirement for good design, taking account of local design guidance; or with the stance in the PDG.

Whilst the Council has suggested a condition requiring that the development be carried out in accordance with the submitted plans, as it is already in place, that is unnecessary.

For the above reasons, and having regard to all other matters raised, including representations by interested parties both supporting and opposed to the development, the appeal is allowed.