Issue - meetings

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

The application sought approval for retrospective planning permission for raised ground levels in rear garden and rear boundary fence in excess of permitted development parameters.

The Committee noted the amendment sheet.

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a local resident.

The representation covered the following issues:

     i.        Owner of 107 had misled the planning committee.

    ii.        Local resident had objections.

   iii.        High fencing to a narrow passageway was overbearing.

  iv.        Unfinished look was unsightly.

   v.        Elderly, less mobile neighbours were presented with an ugly fence outside their windows.

  vi.        Raised level of the internal garden had forced the fence to be raised for privacy.

Officers clarified the status of the garden canopy. This would be dealt with by a separate retrospective application.

The Committee discussed the application and stated that the fence was overbearing, of poor design and caused harm to the amenity of neighbours.

The Committee:

Resolved (Unanimously) to reject the officer recommendation to approve the application.

Resolved (Unanimously) to refuse the application contrary to the officer recommendation for the following reasons:

The fence, by virtue of its height and design would appear incongruous in the street scene and result in harm to the character and appearance of the area. As such the proposal is contrary to Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policy 3/7.

The fence by virtue of its height and design will result in an unacceptable degree of enclosure on and overbearing impact to neighbouring residents. The fence is necessary to prevent overlooking of neighbouring properties due to the raising of the ground level within the site and this aspect of the development is therefore also unacceptable. As such the proposal is contrary to Cambridge Local Plan policy 3/7.