Appeal 3342433

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of boundary fencing, pillars and sliding metal gate at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/23/01348/F, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out within 3 months from the date of this decision in accordance with the approved plans: [name] 1666BR.100, 1666BR.113c, 1666BR.114a and 1666BR.115.

All planting shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the date of this decision; any plants which within a period of 5 years from the date of this decision die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species.

The application was made retrospectively. At the time of my visit horizontal close boarded wooden fence panels measuring 1.8m in height had been erected across the front boundary of the appeal site above a boundary wall facing [address] West, along with slightly recessed sliding metal gates across the driveway access to the property. I saw that the fencing had been covered with trellis and space in front had been planted with star jasmine plants (Trachelospermum jasminoides).

In addition, part of the plot’s side return boundary along [address] was enclosed by a similar 1.8m high fence above an original low wall.

The planning application explicitly sought permission for the erection of boundary fencing and pillars to a height of 1.4m above the walls to both road frontages, together with planting in front of each. The development which has been carried out is not the same as that which was applied for. This is further made clear within the appellant’s submissions where modifications to the existing development are clearly proposed. I have therefore considered the appeal based on the ‘proposed’ development as shown on the plans which accompanied the application.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the street scene, including the settings of [address] Conservation Area and the [address] Conservation Area.

The appeal relates to a recently constructed dwelling of modern contemporary design occupying a corner plot on the south side of [address] West with a side return boundary to [address]. The area is residential in character comprising an eclectic mix of property types ranging from traditional detached homes to more contemporary new developments. Immediately north of the appeal site is Forest Road. Approximately [address]/[address] West junction is the southernmost boundary of the [address] Conservation Area, which extends further north from that point and away from the appeal site. The eastern boundary of the appeal site, which is shared in common with the locally listed No [address] West, marks the boundary of [address] Conservation Area, which extends largely away from No 4 to the south and east. The topography of [address] West is such that land levels start to drop markedly in front of the appeal site when travelling west. As a consequence, there is around a 1.5m height difference between the front boundary wall of the appeal site at its eastern end next to No 6 and at its western extremity near to the junction with [address], where it is tallest.

During my visit I observed that the planting in front of the fencing along [address] West appeared semi-mature and healthy. It has created a soft and natural façade above the wall which effectively shrouds a significant proportion of the fence panels. Its presence demonstrated to me how planting in front of the fence was feasible, contrary to the Council’s view. Based on the evidence available to me and my own observations, I have no reason to think that the planting would not continue to flourish.

Whilst the existing arrangement results in an increasingly dominant height of enclosure, terminating at almost 4m at its western extremity, the proposal would see this reduce by 400mm. I saw for myself a significant array of enclosure types locally, all set immediately at the back edges of the pavements. These range from simple tall hedgerows to exceptionally long stretches of tall close boarded fencing, including an example opposite No 4 and extending north along the east side of Forest Road, and lower walls of various heights and finishes with either fence panels or hedge planting above, or a combination of both. In almost every case there is an abundance of mature vegetation extending above and which tends to dominate any hard boundary. The result is an irregular mix which imparts a tight sense of roadside enclosure to the front boundaries of surrounding development whilst at the same time conveying a strong verdant quality overall to the surrounding street scenes. This established character in turn informs the immediate settings of both nearby conservation areas and the adjacent locally listed building.

Although the proposal at No 4 would not directly replicate the appearance of any other boundary, the lower walls to both road frontages are reflective of many others, and I am satisfied that the vegetation above to the [address] West frontage will mature further to provide a green and natural screen to the fence panels. The proposed planting to the [address] frontage would achieve a similar result. The metal sliding gates are recessed and not prominent. The result would be two frontages which I consider would be neither stark nor oppressive, but which would simply add to the area’s existing mix, and which would complement the contemporary looking architecture of the dwelling, which is openly visible within its surrounding context being set on higher ground relative to the levels along the adjoining highways.

Subject to the development being completed in accordance with the application proposal, I am satisfied that there would be no harm to the street scene. It follows that the settings of both adjoining conservation areas and that of [address] West would be unaffected. I therefore find no conflict with Policies PP27 and PP30 of the Poole Local Plan 2018 as far as they seek to ensure that development reflects or enhances the local pattern of development and preserves or enhances Poole’s heritage assets. For the same reasons I find no conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework’s objectives for achieving well-designed and beautiful places and conserving and enhancing the historic environment.

The Council has suggested conditions in the event I allow the appeal. I have considered these having regard to the advice contained within the Planning Practice Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework.

As the proposed works are part retrospective it would be inappropriate to impose the standard time limit condition. A condition requiring the external surfaces of the development to match the existing building fails to recognise the nature of the proposal as a means for enclosing the appeal site.

The Council has suggested a condition which would require details of a landscape plan to be submitted and approved within three months from the commencement of the works. The works have already commenced and part of the landscape planting has been undertaken and to good effect. The plans show similar planting to the [address] frontage. No further details are therefore necessary, although a strict timetable for the implementation of the remaining planting, and full implementation of the proposal in accordance with the submitted plans is necessary, in order to safeguard the character and appearance of the area. I agree with the Council that the residual planting should be carried out in the next available planting season, and that full compliance with the plans, which would necessitate the height of the fencing to be reduced, should be undertaken within three months, but from the date of this decision. For the same reason, the conditions that I have imposed require all the planting to be managed for a period long enough for it to become fully established.

For the reasons given, in the absence of any other conflict with the development plan, and having regard to all other matters raised, the appeal is allowed.