Appeal 3371053

The appeal is allowed. Planning permission is granted for the removal of a small picket fence and the erection of a new fence at [site address] , [site address] , Lincolnshire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, S25/0669, and the plans submitted with it subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Block Plan UK Planning Maps and Location Plan.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed as shown on the plan drawing Block Plan UK Planning Maps

Whilst not included in the description of the development the block plan submitted shows a brick wall to be demolished to allow for the extension of the existing garden. The Council assessed the application on this basis and I shall do likewise.

The main issue in the appeal is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal property, No [site address] , (No 2) stands at the junction of [address] and [address] within a relatively modern residential estate. The appeal property’s frontage on [address] is enclosed by an iron railing fence (referred to as a picket fence) which runs along the boundary of No 2 to leave an open frontage onto [address]. The fence is in front of a brick screen wall set in from the boundary and which encloses the rear garden. The small area between the wall and the fence is infilled with gravel and is not of any particular merit. The proposal would see the removal of part of the iron railing fencing and the erection of a timber panel fence which would return towards the host property at the end of the existing brick wall.

I noted on my site visit that the estate as a whole has a variety of boundary treatments. Whilst there are open frontages, some of which are enclosed by iron railing fencing of a similar height to that currently found at No 2, I also saw residential curtilages or parts thereof which have been enclosed by timber fences of similar height and appearance to that the subject of the appeal. In particular there are examples of such fencing on other corner plots on [address] in a similar siting to that of the appeal property. In these circumstances the fencing the subject of the appeal would not be said to be wholly uncharacteristic of the area. Further, given the siting of the timber fence around part of the curtilage, an element of openness would still be retained at the junction of [address] and [address]. Consequently, even though the fencing would be visible in views along [address] it would not be a visually dominant feature.

[name] note that objections were made commenting on the obstruction of visibility when manoeuvring vehicles, I note that the highway authority did not raise any objection to the proposal. Further, an open verge at the front of the fence would still be maintained enabling adequate visibility for drivers of vehicles.

I find that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the area. The proposal would therefore not be contrary to Policy DE1 of the South Kesteven Local Plan (2011-2036) which requires, amongst other matters, development not to have an adverse impact on the streetscene. Nor would it conflict with the aims of the Deepings Neighbourhood Plan Policy DNP9 which seeks boundary treatment to respect the surrounding context. It would also not be contrary to guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework which requires development to be sympathetic to the surrounding built environment.

I have imposed conditions in respect of timescales and the approved plan as this provides certainty. I have imposed a condition relating to materials to also ensure certainty and in the interests of visual amenity.

Accordingly for the reasons given, I hereby allow the appeal.