A couple have been ordered to tear down a 6ft garden fence outside their £1.15million home after their council ruled that it was 'ugly' and 'out of character' in the upmarket neighbourhood.
Paul and Lisa Toomer, who live in an affluent suburb of Poole, Dorset, erected the large looming wooden fence due to concerns about their security and privacy.
The couple, who bought the house five years ago, witnessed a spate of attempted burglaries and after a new home was built on the road behind - which could see directly into their property - decided to take action.
In response, they put up a 6.5ft wooden fence at the bottom of their garden, thinking they were within their rights under permitted development.
But since then the couple have been locked in a £3,000 battle with Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (BCP) who have demanded that the fence be torn down.
The legal battle started following a visit from BCP Council where they were informed that because their property borders a highway, only a 3.2ft fence was allowed and they would need to apply for retrospective planning permission.
Mrs Toomer, 51, said: 'The first we knew about the problem was we were on holiday and spoke to some guy from the council over our doorbell.
'It's a normal, wooden fence, just under two metres.
'But they said because it borders a highway it's not covered by permitted development and said we must have retrospective planning permission.'
Mr and Mrs Tommer did as they were told but despite receiving no objections the council refused the application - claiming it was 'out of character' for the area as other houses rely on 'dense tree cover' to form the rear boundary of their properties.
The BCP Council planning officer said: 'The fencing is clearly visible along this stretch of street and appears prominent due to the height, use of materials and colour and is highly dominant against the background of the trees.
'There are no other similar examples of fencing within this stretch of the streetscene and the proposal is therefore visually dominant and not reflective of the character in an area where hard landscaping is limited.'
The Toomers have refused to back down and have continued to fight the decision despite losing an appeal and having been issued multiple enforcement notices.
If those notices are upheld they will have to remove the fence completely or reduce it to one metre, which they say would be pointless and provide no privacy or security.
They say they have already spent nearly £3,000 fighting the council's 'witch hunt.'
Mrs Toomer continued: 'It's just a normal garden fence, but they said it's not in keeping, it's ugly, it's completely out of character.
'Our application was refused but before we even had a chance to submit the appeal, the guy from the council came to visit us and handed us both an enforcement notice each, it's utterly ridiculous.
'It's not on a busy well-used highway, it's a dead-end road. The only people that would even be affected is a handful of people who live there.
Mr Toomer said: 'Their argument is because it borders a highway it must not be higher than one metre tall, but if you look in the surrounding area there are many fences that are higher than one metre and border a highway.
'It's funny because the council put these up all over the place and all the council fences look exactly the same as ours.'
The 60-year-old Scuba diving instructor claims that he was going to paint the fence and put plants in order to make it 'more hidden and camouflaged' but he will not spend any more money if he has to tear it down.
He added: 'Everything we have done has made the house better... But before it was ugly, gnarly bushes. It was unkempt wilderness and the remainders of a wire fence that looked ghastly.
'We had tree surgeons in and they removed everything that was dead - with the correct planning permissions from the council.
'The house that has been built behind us, they could now gaze directly into our property.
'All I want is privacy and security. There have been a few attempted burglaries in the area. I want to protect my wife and son.'
A date has not been set yet for the appeal decision.
Read more
No comments:
Post a Comment