2.77m timber boundary fence at Tower Farm, Middleton, King's Lynn

“Retrospective planning permission is sought for a timber boundary fence, erected above an existing brick and carstone boundary wall. 0.90m over the height of the existing wall, bringing the total height to 2.77m at the highest point (some variation exists due to sloping land levels). Timber mountings are present on the rear of the wall and are affixed to the wall itself. The site is located along Station Road, Middleton, at Tower Farm. Tower farm itself is approx.”

“Retrospective permission is sought for the construction of a timber boundary fence affixed to an existing carstone and brick wall. The fence itself protrudes over the height of the existing wall by 0.90m, bringing the total height to 2.77m, and is comprised of unpainted horizontal timber boarding. The fence measures 40m in width.”

“25/01596/LB: Consent Not Required: 30/09/25 - Retrospective Listed Building consent for installation of 2.770m timber fencing.”

“The development, located within a sensitive countryside location and in close proximity to Listed Buildings, is of an unacceptable scale and design. This causes harm to the setting of Listed Buildings and the character of the streetscene, principally by virtue of its height and use of closed board timber, contrasting with the traditional materials of the wall and the boundary treatment of other sites in the vicinity.”

“The fence, by reason of its height, siting and appearance, has a harmful impact upon the setting of a Listed Building and represents an incongruous and intrusive form of development. The proposal is therefore contrary to Local Plan Policies LP18, LP20 and LP21 of the Local Plan and Paragraphs 187, 213 and 215 of the NPPF.”

“The wall which is the subject of this application does not meet the tests for curtilage listing as it was constructed after 1948. There is no wall present in 2009 google imagery, but is a wall present in 2021. Therefore, there is little historic interest in the wall.”

“Understands the applicant’s need for privacy and suggests raising the existing wall in Carstone and brick and removing the fence;”

“Whilst not formally consulted, the Highway Officer has confirmed that due to the height wall as approved, and the distance of the wall from the highway, the additional height of the fencing does not pose a highway safety concern.”

“In the absence of an acceptable scheme for returning the wall to its previous height or an application for an acceptable alternative, enforcement action may be instigated to secure the fencing’s removal within an appropriate timescale.”

“The Committee noted the key issues for consideration when determining the application, as set out in the report.”

“The Democratic Services Officer then carried out a roll call on the recommendation to refuse the application and, after having been put to the vote, was carried (10 votes for, 3 against and 2 abstentions).”

“RESOLVED: That the application be refused as recommended.”