Appeal 6001683

The appeal is dismissed.

The development applied for is already in place. I have altered the description of development to reflect this and determined the appeal on that basis.

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

The appeal site comprises a large contemporary detached dwelling with an undercroft garage, driveway parking spaces and gardens. The dwelling is located along a stretch of [address] which is characterised by an eclectic mix of styles of dwellings varying greatly in size, form, spacing and appearance. To the rear of the appeal site, the land slopes steeply towards the rear boundary of the property, which lies adjacent to [address].

Along the rear boundary of the site, a close‐boarded timber fence of approximately 2m in height and 20m in length has been erected, which is the subject of this appeal.

My attention has been drawn to examples of fences and walls in the immediate area. From my observations, some appear to integrate more successfully than others, but these are not common features of the rear boundary treatment in the immediate vicinity of the appeal site.

The properties along [address] are a mix of contemporary detached dwellings of varying design, size, spacing and appearance. Front boundary treatments in this location are a mix of low brick walls, metal rail fencing and natural hedging. The outlook for these properties is predominantly that of verdant growth and trees.

The newly installed close‐boarded fencing forms a stark and visually abrupt feature when set against the verdant growth and mature trees. Whereas the surrounding vegetation provides depth and texture, contributing positively to the character of the area, the fencing introduces an unrelieved, solid expanse of timber that lacks visual permeability or natural integration.

The contrast between the uniform, man‐made enclosure and the organic form of the adjacent natural growth serves to emphasise the fencing’s scale, length and solidity, resulting in an overly prominent and somewhat austere appearance that interrupts the otherwise green and visually cohesive setting.

I acknowledge that the appellant would be willing to stain the fence green. However, whether the fence is stained or allowed to weather naturally over time, it would not alter its built form nor significantly reduce the stark prominence of the development within an otherwise principally verdant and natural setting.

The evidence before me indicates that the verge is in the ownership of the Council. As such, there is no mechanism available to me through which any re‐growth can be required to be retained in order to mitigate the visual impact of the development.

Whilst the Council received no objections to the planning application, I find the development to be visually discordant and at odds with the prevailing character and appearance of the area.

I therefore conclude that the [address]-boarded fence, by reason of its design, scale and materials, results in an incongruous and overly dominant feature. It causes harm and fails to preserve the open and spacious character and appearance of the area, contrary to Policy PP27 of the Poole Local Plan 2018, which, amongst other things, seeks to prevent development that would result in a harmful impact on the amenity of local residents.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be dismissed.