Opposition to new fence not the work of NIMBYs on St Giles Hill in Winchester

You correctly state that there was an objection from the City of Winchester Trust, but omitted to add that there were also full objections from the local ward councillor, Charles Radcliffe and the St Giles Hill Residents’ Association, which in its constitution has the power to represent residents’ views in planning matters.
Objections submitted by the City of Winchester Trust, the local councillor and the Residents’ Association made reference to the St Giles Hill Neighbourhood Design Statement, prepared by local residents and adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance by Winchester City Council in 2005 and more recently revised and adopted by WCC in 2020. St Giles Hill Residents’ Association only objects to a planning application if it contravenes the policies in the Design Statement agreed by WCC.
The proposal for a horizontal batten timber fence atop the existing brick and flint wall was basically the same proposal rejected in the planning officer’s report earlier this year, as it was deemed harmful to the character and appearance of the conservation area.
The fence clearly needs replacing and nobody objects to the applicant wishing to create more privacy for her family. However, this property is in a prominent position in a conservation area, facing a public space – St Giles Hill Park. The proposed horizontal batten fence conflicts with policy 4 of the Neighbourhood Design Statement, which recommends open ‘picket style’ fencing with vegetation, as seen in the surrounding properties. 
It is disappointing that on this occasion the planning committee and the planning officer chose to disregard the agreed supplementary planning guidance in the St Giles Hill Neighbourhood Design Statement and that there was no mention of this in the article.
 
John Cooper,
Chair, St Giles Hill Residents’ Association,
Northbrook Close,
St Giles Hill