Appeal 6008095

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for development described as “a timber fence on the inside of the boundary wall” at [site address] , Bradford [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/04730/HOU, subject to the following condition:

The development hereby permitted is as shown on the approved plans reference: Proposed retrospective boundary wall, Sheet 1.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal, which seeks retrospective planning permission.

There is a discrepancy in the appeal documents with regard to the appellant’s surname. The planning application form identifies the applicant as ‘[name], whereas the appeal form refers to ‘[name]. Clarification has been sought from the appellant, who has confirmed that their correct and preferred surname for the purposes of this appeal is ‘Rashad’.

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

The appeal property is a semi-detached dwelling occupying a prominent corner plot at the junction of [address] and [address]. Surrounding dwellings are typically set back from the highway behind grassed verges and pavements, with modest front gardens and off-road parking. The treatment of front boundaries is varied, comprising a mix of low brick walls, hedging and sections of taller solid timber fencing. Overall, the area has a verdant and green character.

The appeal property is positioned on rising land, with the front garden descending towards the street. Consequently, the host dwelling remains readily perceptible within the public realm, despite the presence of the fence. The fence is positioned above an existing low brick wall and, when seen in context, does not appear excessively dominant or unduly enclosing. Its effect is further moderated by the presence of comparable boundary treatments within the street scene, including a similar timber fence on the opposite side of the junction. Moreover, the verdant character of the area is retained, with garden planting behind the fence clearly visible and continuing to contribute to the green street scene.

Consequently, the development does not harm the character and appearance of the area. As such, it complies with Policies DS1 and DS3 of the Local Plan for the Bradford District, [name], 2017. As well as guidance contained in the Householder Supplementary Planning Document 2012 which, amongst other things, require development to achieve good design and be appropriate to their context in terms of layout, scale and materials.

The development is already complete and given my findings, planning permission is granted in accordance with the plans submitted and no further conditions are necessary in this instance.

The appeal scheme complies with the development plan for the reasons I have set out and there is nothing to suggest a decision other than in accordance therewith. I therefore recommend the appeal is allowed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed. Planning permission is therefore granted, subject to the condition stated.