home - committee - volume - faq's - help -search - meeting - previous - next

V28-269 : W8609/5 - 24 QUAVES LANE, BUNGAY

Application for retention of boundary fence and verge planting.

The report of the Head of Planning advised that the present fence and embankment were erected without planning permission in January 2000 and enforcement action against the unauthorised works were authorised by the Panel in February. An appeal was lodged against the requirement to remove the fence only, and the Secretary of State's decision was awaited.

The curtilage of 24 Quaves Lane abutted the Bungay Conservation Area where Article 4.2 Directions controlled alterations to the front elevations and boundaries of residential properties. The former mature hedge and grass verge beside the plot marked the conservation area boundary. Although not heavily used by vehicular traffic, this route was well frequented by pedestrians and cyclists. The present unauthorised boundary treatment gave concern regarding highway safety for vehicles negotiating the Quaves Lane/Castle Lane junction and for pedestrians using Castle Lane, access on the Castle Hills footpath especially for wheelchairs and pushchairs, and the visual quality of the boundary treatment adjacent to the Conservation Area.

The Parish Council recommended refusal, and the Highway Authority said that the replacement of the verge by a sloping revetment increased risks for pedestrians by removing the means of escape from vehicles. The slab revetment was also constructed over the former verge and bank, part of which was believed to be highway land, thereby increasing the County Council's liability for maintenance and third party claims. They advised removal of all or part of the revetment and reinstatement of the grass verge. A number of neighbours were concerned that the current boundary treatment was obtrusive and out of keeping in the conservation area. The Footpath Officer recommended removal of the fence and reinstatement of the original verge.

Whilst the submitted scheme appeared to meet the minimum standard demanded by the Highways Officer, it fell far short of satisfying the design criteria normally expected for such a prominent site adjacent to the conservation area. It would, furthermore, be premature to consider approving a proposal which included retention of the fence before the Planning Inspector's appeal decision was known, and the Head of Planning recommended refusal.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be refused to application W8609/5.


Volume 28 Minute 269

powered by Oultwood Web Technology

© Waveney District Council