If you have a story call our newsdesk on 01722 426511 or email us. To advertise call 01722 426500.
The highs and lows of living in Pennys Lane
A BUNGALOW owner from Fordingbridge has launched an appeal after planning permission was refused for a two-metre-high fence at the front of his property.
James Glucksam, of Pennys Lane, says his brick and timber fence does not look out of place in the road, as claimed by New Forest District Council’s planners, and that most of the fences and hedging fronting on to the road exceed the one-metre rule.
The town council has said it would recommend approving retrospective planning permission for the fence, saying there are already a number of different boundaries along the road, and the road is wide enough to accommodate them without changing the character of the area.
But district planners turned down Mr Glucksam’s application to keep the 20-metre-long fence, and say they have now identified two further fences in the road they are considering taking action over – number three Pennys Lane, opposite, and 86 Whitsbury Road, on the corner of Pennys Lane.
The district’s planner says in her report: “The proposed fencing is considered to be inappropriate in terms of its height, design and materials, creating an incongruous feature that would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the street scene.
“If permitted the proposal would also set an unwelcome precedent.”
It is not the first time that height has been a planning issue in that area.
Only last year a couple in the property opposite 86 Whitsbury Road, where the council says it suspects the fence is too high, had to fight planners who said an enormous tree in their garden had to be replaced with something equally large if they wanted to chop it down, saying its loss would affect the street scene.
Tracey and John Scrivener, who had the support of several neighbours, fought back, and won an appeal to allow them to chop the tree, which was overshadowing their bungalow.
A planning inspector will decide the matter in due course.
Comments are closed on this article.