Front boundary wall and gates at 39 High Road East, Felixstowe

What was proposed

The application proposed a front boundary wall with red brick piers, black railings and inward-opening vehicle gates.

“1.Summary 1.1.The application property, 39 High Road East is a detached dwelling with a semi-detached garage situated within the settlement boundary of Felixstowe. The proposal seeks to erect a front boundary wall with metal railings and vehicle gates. 1.2.The application accords with the policies and guidance referenced within this report, and the application is therefore recommended for approval.”

“The street consists of a varied range of dwellings, roofscapes, plot sizes and an assortment of front boundary treatments, which include brick walls, close-boarded fencing, hedging and railings of varying heights, materials and appearance. 3.Proposal 3.1.The proposal seeks the part removal of the boundary hedging and the erection of a front boundary wall consisting of red facing brickwork piers and black powder coated horizontal railings of approximately 10mm thick.”

Officer report

Earlier applications and changes

The proposal followed a withdrawn application, with the gate set further back and railings replacing a more solid enclosure.

“3.3.There would be 6 brick piers in total (including the vehicle gate brick piers), and the gate entrance would be set back from the edge of the dropped kerb by approximately 5.2m. 3.4.This application follows a previously withdrawn application DC/25/3156/FUL, which proposed a front boundary wall with a slatted fence above and a sliding gate. 4.Consultation responses / comments 34”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the design, parking, highway arrangements and neighbouring amenity acceptable, subject to conditions.

“8.12.The proposal complies with SCLP7.2 demonstrating its provision for secure and appropriately sized off-street parking and the conditioned incorporation of permeable bound surfacing, permeable shingle, drainage and soakaway. 8.13.Visibility has been secured (via conditions 4 and 5 below) in consultation with SCC Highways Authority.”

“Whilst the current proposal does not follow all the guidance provided by officers, it is an improvement upon the previously withdrawn scheme and is now acceptable. 8.16.The set back of the gate would enable vehicles to pull off the road whilst the gate is being opened/closed, which would be beneficial in terms of highway safety consideration.”

Officer report

What consultees said

The Town Council and Felixstowe Society objected to the proposal’s appearance and loss of hedging, while highways required safety conditions.

“4.1.The following summarises the consultee responses: ConsulteeDate consultedDate reply received Felixstowe Town Council Reconsulted Felixstowe Town Council Consulted 18 March 2026 29 January 2026 25 March 2026 11 February 2026 25th March 2026 Committee recommended REFUSAL We note the proposed changes from the two earlier applications. However, we feel that none of our fundamental concerns have been addressed.”

“Felixstowe SocietyN/A10 March 2026 10 th March 2026 The Felixstowe Society objects to this proposal. The development is out of keeping with its surroundings and would result in the loss of hedging. 5.Third Party Representations 5.1.There have been no third-party representations. Advertisement 6.1The application has been the subject of the following press advertisement: Publicity No press advertisement required for this application.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A Town Council representative and the [name withheld] spoke against the proposal, raising concerns about its appearance, setting and highway safety.

The vote and decision

A motion to accept the officer recommendation was not seconded, and members resolved to refuse the application as contrary to policies SCLP 11.1 and 11.2.

“Councillor Smithson proposed accepting the officer recommendation. There was no seconder so the motion failed.”

“That the application be refused on the grounds that it was contrary to policies SCLP 11.1 and 11.2.”

Minutes