Appeal 6007458

The appeal is dismissed.

The application forms indicate that at the time of the application submission, the development had commenced but had not been completed. However, the Council determined the application as seeking retrospective permission for development already undertaken and this was also the approach set out by the Appellant at the appeal stage. I have therefore assessed the application as seeking permission for works already carried out under Section 73A of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990, namely the erection of new 1.[address] side of the appeal property.

It is noted that the ownership of the land on which the fence has been erected is not known and the Appellant advises that the land is unregistered. At the appeal stage a [name] has been provided. Ownership matters would need to be addressed under other legislation, and my consideration is therefore on the planning merits of the development undertaken as described above.

The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the local area.

The appeal property is a detached property on the corner of [address] with [address] and within a predominantly residential area.

The photographic evidence provided by the Appellant shows that there has been a boundary fence at the property along the northern elevation but set back behind the deep grass verge. A 1.8 m fence has been erected along most of the northern boundary to the site but now set forward and against the public footway. There is a narrower grass verge between the footway and the road.

There are a variety of frontages to the residential properties in the local area, including walls, fences and hedges, of varying heights. Generous grass verges are found along [address] and within some of the side roads including along parts of [address] and together with the street trees and planting in individual gardens, there is a distinctive spacious and verdant character and appearance to the local street scene.

Fences are found within the street scene, including on corner properties. As noted above, the photographic evidence indicates that the boundary of the appeal property along the [address] frontage to have been a close boarded fence and part of the older fence could also be seen at the site visit.

However, the current position of the fence against the back edge of the footway and enclosing the wide grass verge, which had been an integral part of the open and verdant street scene, has a very harsh and enclosing effect at the corner of [address] and [address]. The siting of the fence creates a jarring and visually intrusive feature to the street scene. It results in a very hard edge to this corner location which detracts from the distinctive open and verdant character and appearance of the local area.

I conclude that the fence as erected, with particular regard to its siting, does detract from and has a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the local area. This conflicts with Policy ENV3 of the Local Plan 2016-2036 [name]: Planning Strategy for the New Forest outside the New Forest National Park (Local Plan) and the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework), and in particular Section 12, all of which, amongst other matters, seek a high standard of design which respects the local context and contributes positively to local distinctiveness.

My attention has been drawn to a number of other fences of varying heights in the local vicinity which are close to the pavement edge including some on corner plots. The extent to which these fences benefit from planning permission is not known, nor the relationship between individual curtilages and the public highway and footways. However, even if some of these have incorporated open grass verges behind earlier fence lines, they do not persuade me that more should be permitted, given the harm I have concluded in the particular circumstances of this case.

The Appellant has offered to accept a condition regarding the treatment of the fence to ‘dull’ the colour, but this would not overcome the harm I have found to the street scene.

The Council’s decision notice refers only to Policy ENV3 of the Local Plan although the delegated Officer’s report also makes reference to the [site address] Neighbourhood Plan (NP) which was adopted in June 2021. The Council has provided me with Policy NM4 on [name] from the NP which has similar objectives to the Local Plan and the Framework in seeking a high quality of design and contributes to local distinctiveness. For the same reasons set out above, the development conflicts with this policy.

For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, including in representations, I conclude that this appeal should be dismissed.