Appeal readacted version for Agenda Pack
Argyll and Bute Council · 26 February 2025
Back to Argyll and Bute Local Review Body — 26 February 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Some pages contain no extractable text. They may be blank, graphics or scanned pages. OCR has not been applied.
Page 1
Appeal Against Fence Refusal Based on Height and Design To: Argyll and Bute Council Planning Department Subject: Appeal Against Fence Refusal Based on Height and Design (Application Reference: 24/00925/PP) Date: 23/12/2024 Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to formally appeal the decision to refuse my fence application at Flat 2, 3 Shore Road, Port Bannatyne, Isle of Bute, PA20 0LQ, citing its height, design, and location within a conservation area. I respectfully request that the council reconsider my application for the following reasons: 1. Compliance with Regulations: The fence is six feet tall, which is within the standard height regulations for fences in Scotland, even in some conservation zones. Its construction adheres to safety and structural standards, and I believe it aligns with broader regulatory expectations for residential properties. 2. Neighborhood Character and Design: The fence has been thoughtfully designed to preserve and complement the historic surroundings of the conservation area. Using high-quality timber and cast iron hinges and fittings, the fence was crafted to mimic traditional styles, blending seamlessly with the character of the 1800s-era buildings nearby. This approach was deliberately chosen to avoid the use of off-the-shelf, modern materials that could detract from the heritage look of the area. The effort and care I put into the fence’s design reflects my commitment to maintaining the aesthetic integrity of the neighborhood. 3. Privacy and Security: Privacy and security are vital for my family and me, especially given the proximity of public spaces and overlooking properties. The fence’s height and design are necessary to mitigate the intrusion caused by a neighboring property at 4 Shore Road, which includes an unapproved surveillance camera overlooking my garden. This neighbor’s behavior has caused significant discomfort and distress, as they have repeatedly made me feel uncomfortable whenever I enter my garden, to the point of feeling watched and unsafe. Their actions have created an environment where I no longer feel at ease in my own outdoor space. It is also worth noting that this same individual is believed to have made the report against my fence and submitted a final complaint comment online on the very last day of the public consultation period. This raises concerns about the fairness of the decision, as the objection appears to stem from personal grievances rather than legitimate planning concerns. I come from a Muslim religious background, where privacy is deeply valued and integral to our way of life. A private and secure garden space is not just a matter of personal preference but a cultural and religious necessity for me and my family. The lack of privacy caused by the surveillance and unwanted attention from this neighbor has made it impossible for me to use my garden freely, affecting my quality of life and ability to practice modesty as required by my faith. I would also like to highlight that, out of the four other owners in the building (excluding myself), all have expressed praise for the fence and are happy with both its construction and design. Their support underscores that the fence does not detract from the property’s shared aesthetic or communal harmony, further emphasizing the lack of valid objections. The fence is crucial for creating a private and secure environment, a basic expectation for any homeowner, and a necessity for my mental, emotional, and cultural well-being given these circumstances. 4. Support from Neighbors and the Community: My neighbors and the broader community have overwhelmingly supported the fence. My downstairs neighbor, Sheena Ferguson, has submitted a letter directly to the council expressing her support and describing the decision to reject the fence as unfair. Another supporting letter has been attached to this appeal. Passersby and other local residents have also commented positively on the fence’s design and its contribution to the neighborhood’s character and privacy. I am happy to provide letters or testimonies to substantiate this community support. 5. Inconsistencies in Application of Policy: While my fence has been criticized for its height and design, there are numerous examples within the conservation area of features that deviate far more significantly from its intended character. These include buildings covered in grey cement over
Page 2
original stone facades, PVC doors and windows, and poorly repaired structures and fences. I have documented multiple examples of fence lines throughout the conservation area that demonstrate much poorer care for both height and design than my own fence. These fences, many of which I have photographed, show a significant lack of alignment with conservation standards compared to the thoughtful and sympathetic design of my fence. Some examples of others fences throughout the conservation are below: Note: Above image is neighbour in the same block of flats. Below are a variation of photos which are fences on the conservation zone.
Page 3
No embedded text on this page.
Page 4
No embedded text on this page.
Page 5
Additionally, my friend Jane Simpson at 47 Ardbeg Road received approval for a six-foot fence, suggesting that height is not inherently an issue. This raises concerns about the consistency and fairness in the application of policy, leaving me feeling unfairly targeted despite the care I have taken to align my fence with the area’s character. 6. Impact on Mental Health and Well-being: On a deeply personal note, I am currently battling severe mental health challenges, which have been significantly exacerbated by the stress and anxiety caused by this situation. I am now receiving daily therapy sessions to help cope with the emotional toll that the lack of privacy and the ongoing issues with my neighbor have had on me. My therapist has recognized the severe impact this situation is having on my mental health and will be contacting the council directly via a formal letter to provide professional documentation of this. Privacy is a fundamental right, and the inability to enjoy it in my own garden has led to considerable distress. This issue is no longer just about the physical presence of the fence but the emotional and psychological well-being of an individual who is struggling to navigate the constant stress and surveillance from a neighbor. The refusal of my fence application has had a profound impact on my quality of life, mental health, and ability to feel secure in my own home. A simple six-foot fence, designed with care to blend with the historic surroundings, would resolve these issues and allow me to live with dignity and peace of mind I understand and respect the importance of preserving the character of the conservation area, and I am willing to work with the council to address any specific concerns or make reasonable adjustments if necessary. However, I believe the fence as it stands enhances the area’s character, provides necessary privacy and security, and has broad support from the community. Thank you for taking the time to review my appeal. I hope the points raised here demonstrate the appropriateness and necessity of my application. Please feel free to contact me at zarinashah66@yahoo.co.uk or 07763921686 if further details or documentation are required. Yours faithfully, Zarina Shah