Furious residents have blasted their neighbour after he erected a ‘Berlin Wall’ fence around his garden.
Gary Partlett put up the 6ft wooden boundary around his home to protect his garden and ornamental fish pond from vandalism.
But neighbours in Skelton-in-Cleveland, North Yorkshire, have called it a “carbuncle” that puts their safety at risk.
They claim the fence makes it impossible to see oncoming traffic at a busy junction of three connecting roads.
Mr Partlett’s handiwork caused a blizzard of complaints to the local authority who also claimed it was the result of ‘shoddy’ and ‘slapdash’ workmanship.
However, Mr Partlett insists it was done with care, using sympathetic materials which cost him £1,600.
He told MailOnline: ‘If anything it has made drivers slow down because they always drove too fast around the estate before. The roads are actually safer because people are taking more care.’
Residents of the Wiltshere Road estate have described Gary Partlett’s 6ft fence, pictured, as a ‘Berlin Wall carbuncle’
After pondering the matter for three years and asking for some modifications, Redcar and Cleveland Council have infuriated the majority of residents by granting retrospective planning permission for the fence.
One resident told Mailonline: ‘What sort of precedent does it set when a bloke can decide to build his own version of the Berlin Wall without apparently needing permission from anyone and the council just rolls over and accepts it?’
Stuart Dick, 52, an oil terminal process technician, said: ‘It is a carbuncle which is not in keeping with anything else on the estate, it’s astonishing it has been allowed to remain.
‘But more than that it is right on a tight corner where three roads meet and it has created a really dangerous hazard for drivers and pedestrians.
‘Motorists cannot see over it to check whether vehicles are coming down the hill past his bungalow as they are turning into the adjoining cul-de-sac, there have been several very close calls.
‘The householder erected the fence without asking permission and then when there was a flurry of complaints the council eventually decided to look into it – the words ‘gate, horse and bolted’ spring to mind.
‘Even then after so many letters of objection to the fence and two of us attending a meeting with planners, we felt they were bound to intervene and insist it is taken down.
‘But we’ve just discovered they have granted retrospective planning permission and the thing will be allowed to remain.
‘It is a completely lily-livered approach by the council who clearly feel it is too much trouble to enforce a rule.
‘I’ve seen more aesthetically-pleasing fences on ramshackle allotments and by the council not enforcing removal or reduction in height they are basically giving carte blanche to any resident to erect any fence as they have set a precedent.’
His neighbour Stan Binns, 73, agreed, saying: ‘Apparently someone from the Highways department came to have a look but I don’t know what they were looking at.
‘It is clear to anyone that the fence is too high and blocks the view of traffic approaching a junction of three roads in a residential area.
Mr Partlett, 49, built the fence because he wanted to protect his garden and ornamental fish pond from vandalism
‘It’s remarkable there hasn’t been a serious accident yet, there have been a lot of very near misses and I we’re all hoping to goodness no one is badly hurt at that spot.
‘I’ve lived here myself for 40 years and there has never been anything like that built on the estate, it is completely out of keeping with everything else.
‘The home owner said in his application that he wanted it for security but crime on this estate must be close to zero. It’s unnecessary.’
Jen Tilley, 70, who lives directly opposite Mr Partlett’s property, said: ‘I’m retired now and spend a lot of time at home. I used to like looking out of the window and seeing the gardens of the houses stretching down the street.
‘Now there’s this ugly grey fence and no one can really understand what it’s there for. It looks as though he’s got away with it now and there’s not a thing we can do about it.’
Linda Borrow, 63, also lives opposite. She said: ‘Many people have lived on the estate for almost as long as it has stood and previously it was the friendliest place, everyone knows each other and people rarely move.
‘When the houses were built there was known to be a covenant which said that the estate was open plan and gardens would be left as they were without being enclosed.
‘But that went out of the window when he erected his huge fence. Initially it had trellises on top of the fence which made it loom even taller, but thankfully they have now gone.
‘The look of the thing is bad enough but it’s the safety issue that really bothered people.
‘When we back off our drive we can’t see whether people are coming towards us down the bank and because it is a slope it means that sometimes they’re travelling at speed, it really isn’t safe.
‘It came as unwelcome news to hear the council had given permission, it’s difficult to understand that decision.’
Other neighbours made their feelings known in letters to Redcar and Cleveland.
Joe Harrison wrote: ‘I have had a very near accident on this corner. This will only get worse with the approach of winter.’
Matthew Wilde said in his letter of objection: ‘The fence is an eyesore due to poor methods of construction.’
And Gerald Dunning wrote: ‘It is a disgrace to the estate. My wife and I have been living here for over 50 years.
One resident likened the fence as being ‘his own version of the Berlin Wall’, which is pictured here in 1962
‘When we came to live here we were made to understand it was open plan so we have kept ours this way for all the years we have lived here. The fence is directly opposite our house and not only is it an eyesore but also a traffic hazard.’
At home in his bungalow, Gary Partlett says he has been ‘shocked’ by the reaction.
Mr Partlett said he moved to the estate from neighbouring Loftus four years ago after becoming the subject of bullying.
He said: ‘I suffer from bipolar disorder and as a result of that I was bullied in Loftus and I came to what I thought was a nice quiet estate to get away from all that.
‘But instead I’ve had horrible accusations made because I built a fence to protect my property. I have a garden and a fish pond I built myself which I want to remain safe.
‘People have said the fence is slapdash but I took time and care to build it. I could have put in concrete posts but instead I chose wooden half moon ones because they would be more in keeping.
‘I built it myself and it cost £1,600 so it wasn’t a cheap thing to do and I can’t understand how much anger it has caused.’
He also rejected the allegation that it caused a safety hazard for road users.
Mr Partlett said: ‘I just want to live quietly by myself and not be bothered by anyone. These days I am anxious about going out because I know people are talking about me, I just go to work and come back and stay in my home.
‘They say that what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger and I think I have been made stronger by all this.’
While granting planning permission, regulatory committee chairman Councillor Stuart Smith highlighted that there were other fences on the estate just as high and a partial trellis attached to it had now been removed.
A report adopted by planners said: ‘The provision of a fence in this location continues to remain acceptable in principle.
‘The fence raises no issues in terms of neighbour amenity or highways safety. The removal of the trellis has improved the appearance of the fence and the development does not have an adverse impact on the street scene.
‘It is recommended that conditions be included to ensure that the fence is stained a dark oak colour within six months of the permission and that the posts be cut down to the height of the fence within the same six month period.’
A condition attached to the planning permission said the fence should not be altered in height or new materials incorporated into it.
