Erection of brick piers and gates and fence around existing highway boundaries (retrospective)

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 9 July 2024 by T Morris BA (Hons) MSc Decision by John Morrison BA (Hons) MSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 24 July 2024 Appeal Ref: APP/G5180/D/24/3342608 150 Kingsway, Petts Wood, Bromley, Orpington BR5 1PU • 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 Mrs Yingyi Liu against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Bromley. • The application Ref is 23/03919/FULL6. • The development proposed is ‘Erection of brick piers and gates and fence around existing highway boundaries (retrospective)’. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for ‘Erection of brick piers and gates and fence around existing highway boundaries (retrospective)’ at 150 Kingsway, Bromley, Orpington BR5 1PU in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/03919/FULL6, subject to the following condition: 1) The development hereby permitted is as shown on drawing nos 311023- 31 (Existing Location Plan), 311023-20 (Existing Elevation and Section), 311023-30 (Existing and Prior Site Plan). Appeal Procedure 2. 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. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area with specific regard to the Petts Wood Area of Special Residential Character (ASRC). Reasons for the Recommendation 4. The appeal site is at the junction of Kingsway and Townscourt Crescent. The boundaries to the street are formed of a hedge and iron gates along the Kingsway elevation, alongside the brick piers, metal gate and wooden fence which have already been constructed. The boundary to the Townscourt Crescent elevation is formed of the wooden fence which is sited above a low brick wall and there are hedges and trees visible above the fence line. 5. The ASRC as a whole includes a number of typical garden suburb features such as an open feel in places, some low boundary treatments and visible front gardens. Houses are of a high standard and in many cases there is a pleasant degree of designed originality. The appeal site’s surroundings Appeal Decision APP/G5180/D/24/3342608 2 largely reflect these principles, and the host building is part of a clearly attractive suburban residential area featuring an abundance of trees, hedges and vegetation, contributing positively to a strong verdant character. Some boundaries to the front of properties are low and provide views into the front gardens. That said, many of the corner plots in the area have wooden fences of similar appearance to the one at the appeal site. Such as at the junction of Woodland Way and Townscourt Crescent and at the junction of Kingsway and Crossway. Furthermore, there is a similar fence directly opposite the site on Kingsway. 6. Hedges and trees are still visible above the fence line and greenery is beginning to appear above the low brick wall to the front of the fence. Over time, as vegetation intertwines with the fence and it weathers, its appearance will soften. The fence is very much a recessive feature in this respect which comes across as in amongst the greenery rather than being in front of it. The brick piers and metal gate are lower than the adjacent hedge and are set well in from the footpath. The new entrance is therefore well integrated within the boundary along Kingsway. Despite being a taller boundary than typical of the ASRC, the type and deployment of this fencing style is arguably more of a regular feature of the area than perhaps perceived. 7. The development has not therefore resulted in a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area or, by association, the ASRC. The proposal thus complies with Policies 37 and 44 of the Bromley Local Plan 2019, which together seek to ensure that development proposals are of a high standard of design and respect, enhance and strengthen the special and distinctive qualities of the area. Conditions 8. I have referred to the approved plans for enforcement purposes. A sample materials condition is not required as the fence is of a natural material and is likely to weather over time which will soften its appearance. A landscaping condition is not required as there is no information before me of an intention to remove any further vegetation from the site and any secured or proposed could not be so in perpetuity. A visibility condition is not necessary or justified since the hedge along Townscourt Crescent and Kingsway would have had a similar effect in terms of visibility and the development, given its location, extent and height is unlikely to have changed that situation. Conclusion and Recommendation 9. For the reasons given above, the appeal scheme complies with the development plan. I therefore recommend that the appeal should be allowed. T Morris APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER Inspector’s Decision 10. I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed. Subject to the condition set out. John Morrison INSPECTOR