Installation of container with surrounding area to have a gate and fence installed, the fence will continue from the existing gate and will be installed within the property boundaries. Fence will be 6' in height
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Character & Appearance
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 7 January 2019
by M Russell BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 29 January 2019
Appeal Ref: APP/Y3425/D/18/3213409
92 St Georges Parkway, Stafford ST16 3WF
The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
against a refusal to grant planning permission.
The appeal is made by Mrs Holly Gibson against the decision of Stafford Borough
Council.
The application Ref 17/26885/HOU, dated 2 August 2017, was refused by notice dated
18 September 2018.
The development proposed is installation of container with surrounding area to have a
gate and fence installed, the fence will continue from the existing gate and will be
installed within the property boundaries. Fence will be 6' in height.
Decision
1. The appeal is dismissed.
Procedural Matters
2. From my site visit, I noted the metal storage container and fence to the south
west frontage are already in situ. A plastic shed has also been erected
adjacent to the container but this does not form part of the appeal proposal
and does not therefore form part of my assessment.
Main Issue
3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of
the area.
Reasons
4. 92 St Georges Parkway is a two-storey end terrace dwelling. The property is
located within an estate characterised by a mixture of dwellings and
apartments. The host dwelling is situated on a corner plot and is set down from
an attached three storey row of terraced dwellings. Boundary treatments to
property frontages on the estate largely comprise of low height fencing and
hedges with more substantial wall and fence boundary treatments to rear
gardens. A roughly triangular shaped piece of land forms part of the curtilage
of No 92 and this sits between the side gable of the dwelling and a shared
access drive. This piece of land is currently open other than a dwarf wall and a
close boarded fence, the latter of which forms part of the appeal proposals.
This current boundary treatment is set back from the highway on St Georges
Parkway continuing from and aligned with the front elevation of the dwelling.
Appeal Decision APP/Y3425/D/18/3213409
2
5. The appeal proposal seeks the retention of the metal storage container and
proposes screening with timber fencing to the boundary with the shared access
drive to supplement the already installed fencing to the front boundary. Given
its height, bulk and materials the container is not domestic in appearance. The
appellant suggests the container could be cladded in timber. Whilst this would
assist in softening its appearance, the container sits immediately adjacent to
the brick side gable of the dwelling. The proposed fencing would screen a
significant proportion of the container. However, the container would still
protrude above the fence level by approximately 0.8m. Due to the height, bulk
and materials proposed, the remaining visible element of the container would
appear incongruous and this impact would be exacerbated by the prominent
position of the structure visible both when facing the front elevation of the
property and when entering the estate from Crooked Bridge Road.
6. Whilst no specific examples have been provided, the appellant makes a
comparison to sheds, seating areas and extensions at other properties.
However, in assessing the proposal before me on its own merits, I find the
specific size and design of the proposed storage container, materials utilised
and position within the streetscene would not compliment the host dwelling or
its wider setting.
7. I therefore find the proposal would have a harmful impact on the character and
appearance of the area. This would conflict with the aims of Policy N1 (g) and
(h) of the Plan for Stafford Borough 2011-2031 (adopted in 2014) which
require development proposals to include high design standards which take into
account the local character and context seeking to preserve and enhance the
character of the area including the use of locally distinctive materials.
Conclusion
8. For the reasons given above and taking into account all other matters raised, I
conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.
M Russell
Inspector
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.