Shropshire Star

Telford & Wrekin Council in planning row over Ironbridge bike shed

A planning row has broken out in Ironbridge after the borough council objected to a homeowner installing a shed to store their bicycle.

A planning row has broken out due to a bicycle storage shed outside a property in Kyrle Close, Ironbridge. Picture: Google Maps

The bike storage facility was installed last year outside of a Grade II listed property in Kyrle Close.

The home forms part of the former Beeches Hospital which has Grade II listed status.

The shed which is 1.45 metres high and 1.86m long was installed by the property’s owner Barney Tierney.

“I have always owned a bike and cycled for most of my life,” said Mr Tierney in his planning appeal statement.

“I was initially concerned by the lack of safe communal bike storage in the area. Then I noticed properties had their own sheds/garden storage in their gardens. Therefore I decided to buy one for myself to keep my bike safe.

“My property is a small one-bedroom building, there isn’t much space inside and keeping my bike indoors would also be problematic due to bringing dirt in, marking the walls et cetera. An outdoor wooden bike storage was a great alternative option.”

A month after installing the shed in October last year the property owner received a letter of complaint by the council.

After sending the Telford & Wrekin Council planning department images of the bike storage unit they informed Mr Tierney that he would require retrospective planning permission.

After submitting a planning application for the bike storage shed the council refused the application despite no formal objections being received.

In their refusal notice the council’s planning department said: “The local planning authority considers that the development would fail to preserve the setting of the listed building, due to its form, materials and prominent location which would not be outweighed by any public benefit.”

Mr Tierney has launched an appeal against the planning decision and now a government planning inspector will decide the row.

The applicant has argued that the storage unit is not touching the Grade II listed building and no alteration to the building has been made.

Mr Tierney added that the shed is at the front of his property due to not having a back garden and there is no communal bike shed available.

“The bike storage has no significant impact to any part of the original building,” concluded Mr Tierney.

“There is no demolition to any part of the building, there is no significant rebuilding and the bike storage does not attach in any way to the building.

“I purchased the property because I enjoy the aesthetic of the building and the estate, I therefore do not want to affect this and have carefully chosen storage with the least visible impact.”