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 Free

Technical 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.

Get Free Review How it works →