Erection of boundary fence

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 23 March 2021 by William Cooper BA (Hons) MA CMLI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 29 March 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/H0520/D/21/3269413 22 Pig Lane, St Ives PE27 5NL • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr and Mrs Tony Moffat against the decision of Huntingdonshire District Council. • The application Ref 20/02125/HHFUL, dated 27 October 2020, was refused by notice dated 3 February 2021. • The development proposed is erection of boundary fence. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of boundary fence at 22 Pig Lane, St Ives PE27 5NL in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref: 20/02125/HHFUL, dated 28 October 2020, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings: Location Plan; Block Plan Rev 01. 3) An evergreen hedge shall be established on the outer face of the fence hereby permitted in the first planting season following installation of the fence, and shall be maintained and retained thereafter. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 3. The appeal property is a detached dwelling located on the corner of Pig Lane and the A1123 Saint Audrey Lane, within a mainly residential area. Saint Audrey Lane is apparently well used by vehicles, and cyclists and pedestrians on the cycle path and footway which passes close by the appeal property’s northern boundary. The property’s corner plot gives it a relatively individual character and orientation within the neighbourhood. 4. A combination of verges, hedges, trees, gardens and public routes give Saint Audrey Lane a suburban greenway feel. The prevailing pattern of garden enclosure in the locality is front hedges, with rear and side gardens typically enclosed by taller fences or walls. Other such close boarded timber fencing is noticeable in the vicinity of the site, on both sides of Saint Audrey Lane. Appeal Decision APP/H0520/D/21/3269413 2 5. The Council is concerned that the proposal would form an overly hard interface with the street. However, the proposed replacement of a garden side hedge with a 2m high timber panel fence to enclose the side and rear garden space of the appeal property - with a new evergreen hedge on the outer face for visual softening - would not appear out of context with the local character described above. 6. Furthermore, through improving the garden’s security, privacy and protection from the bustle of the apparently busy road, footway and cyclepath which pass close by, the proposal would encourage the enjoyment of the appeal property’s garden, in line with the pattern of use of private gardens in the area. The proposed retention of an existing garden tree would further serve verdancy. Consequently, the proposal would assimilate into the suburban streetscene without significantly altering the character and appearance of the greenway and the neighbourhood. 7. As such, the proposal would accord with Policies LP11 and LP12 of Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036 (2019). Moreover, it would not conflict with the principles of achieving development that is sympathetic to local context - including landscape treatment and public realm - as set out in paragraphs 3.6 and 3.8 of the Huntingdonshire Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2017) and parts C1, I1, I2 and P1 of the National Design Guide (2019). The policies and guidance, when taken together, seek to ensure that development is of appropriate design and appearance to complement local character. Conditions 8. The conditions suggested by the Council have been considered against the tests of the National Planning Policy Framework and advice provided by Planning Practice Guidance. They have been broadly found to be reasonable and necessary in the circumstances of this case. In addition to the standard commencement condition, a condition is necessary requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans, in order to provide certainty. The proposed new hedge is subject to a condition in order to safeguard the local character. Conclusion 9. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be allowed. William Cooper INSPECTOR