DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - Date:6 December 2007

Report of the Executive Head of Planning, Transportation and Highways. Ref: D2007/58641/FUL WARD: D15 /

WALLINGTON NTH Time Taken: 6 weeks, 4 days

Site: Grosvenor House 2 Grosvenor Road Wallington Surrey SM6 0DW

Proposal: Retrospective application for a vehicular barrier and palisade fence up to 2.9

metres in height and proposed removal of spikes from top of fence. Applicant: Metropolitan Police Authority Agent: Jacob Willson Recommendation:

GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION Reason for Report to Committee: De-delegation by Councillor Bruce Glithero.

Summary of why application proposals are acceptable: • As the applicant proposes to remove the Spiked tops from the

existing fencing, which was the sole refusal for the previous application, it is considered that the proposal has overcame the reason for refusal and therefore should be granted planning permission.

• The palisade fence establishes a clear distinction between public and private domain

• Fencing allows for unobscured views into and out of the site. • The design and materials are appropriate and sympathetic to the

streetscene. 1,0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Site & Surroundings: 1.2 The application site comprises a three-storey office and rear car park located

at the junction of Manor Road and Grosvenor Road. The building is currently occupied by the Metropolitan Police Child Protection Unit. Victims of crime and vulnerable witnesses re brought daily to this site. The fencing, which is the subject of this application, is located on the boundaries of the rear car park fronting Grosvenor Road.

1.3 Located immediately to the west of the application site is a vehicular access

that leads to a parking area. The car park which is the subject of the current application is accessed off that access drive. To the west of the access drive are located two storey terraced houses.

1.4 Grosvenor Road comprises primarily of two storey in height residential types of properties. To the west of the application site, although not immediately adjoining it, Grosvenor Road is located within the Springfield Road/ Grosvenor Road Area of Special Character.

1.5 Site specific UDP designation: 1.6 The site is located within Wallington District Centre. The site is also identified

as being located within a Secondary Shopping Frontage, (Policy TCS5). 1.7 Relevant Planning History:

• Application for a Certificate of Lawful Development for the “erection of a palisade fence and vehicle barrier to car parking boundary” refused on 23.05.2007 with ref. 07/57392/CPU as “The proposal constitutes development under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and the local planning authority is not satisfied that, based on the drawings submitted as part of the application, this proposal falls within any class of 'permitted development' specified within Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995”.

• Planning permission was refused on 11 September 2007 for the

retrospective application ref. 07/58066/FUL ‘for a vehicle barrier and palisade fence up to three metres in height’ as it was considered that ‘The palisade fencing, by reason of its unduly aggressive appearance trough the use of spiked tops, adversely affects the visual amenity of the streetscene and the outlook of nearby residential occupiers. The application is therefore contrary to policies BE4 and BE8 of the Sutton Unitary Development Plan and Supplementary Planning Document 1 “Designing Out Crime”.’

2 APPLICATION PROPOSALS 2.1 Details of Proposal: 2.2 The application seeks retrospective planning permission for a 3 metres height

black palisade fence and traffic barrier with associated equipment along the boundaries of the car parking area at the rear of Grosvenor House. The fencing fronts Grosvenor Road and the access drive on the west side of the car park.

2.3 Planning permission had previously been sought in a retrospective planning

application for the erection of these means of enclosure. This planning application, listed above with ref. 07/58066/FUL, was refused as it was considered that the spiked tops on the top of the palisade fence adversely affected the visual amenity of the streetscene and outlook of nearby residential occupiers.

2.4 This application is for the retention of this same means of enclosure, however

with the spiked tops removed from the top of the palisade fencing so as to overcome the previous reasons for refusal.

2.5 This palisade fencing is set upon an existing lower boundary brick wall which runs along (Grosvenor Road) the southern boundary line with an average height of 0.9. The overall height combining both the height of this brick wall and palisade fence built upon it would be in average 3.0 metres in height.

2.6 A traffic barrier has also been installed to the western boundary and is 4,70

metres in length and approximately 1.6 metres in height. This traffic barrier has a 1.2 metres security camera and car reader to control and operate access into and out the car park.

2.7 The applicant has submitted the following statement in support of the

application: “The building is occupied by the Child Protection Unit of the Metropolitan Police, and victims of crime and vulnerable witnesses are brought to the property on a daily basis. However, the acts of burglary and vandalism that were being facilitated by the openness of the car park at the rear and the lack of a secure boundary around it led to the Metropolitan Police becoming increasingly concerned for the safety of both the children, and their families when accessing the building, as a result. The installation of the fencing therefore became a matter of extreme urgency, and unfortunately was required to be carried out prior to the determination of the Certificate of Lawfulness Application The fencing and vehicle barrier will together provide the Metropolitan Police with the level of security that they require at such a sensitive location, whilst the fencing being painted black will help to minimise its visual impact on the surrounding area.”

2.8 Significant amendments to application since submitted:

• None. 3 PUBLICITY 3.1 Adjoining Occupiers Notified 3.2 Method of Notification:

• This application was advertised by way of 46 letters sent to the owners/ occupiers in Railway Approach, Manor Road, Belmont Road and Grosvenor Road.

3.3 Number of Letters Received:

• Three letters received objecting to the proposal. 3.3 Addresses of letters:

• Wallington, 20 Grosvenor Road, • Wallington, 22 Grosvenor Road, • Springboard Residents Association.

3.4 Summary of material responses:

• The fence seems to be too large and out of keeping with the area, • The fence is too high and has no bearing in relation to the height of the

gate • The fence is too close to a garage and would limit its use

• This application is little different from the previous submission; • The fencing is threatening, affects the amenity of the streetscene and

outlook of nearby residents • Reduce the visual impact by painting the fence green.

3.5 Official Consultation 3.6 Internal:

• Traffic Senior Engineer comments: There are no highway requirements or safety issues. The ‘as built’ fence abuts the service road to the rear of the site and its junction with Grosvenor Road. Because the lightly used access is wide, and there is a hatched pedestrian route on the site side at its junction with Grosvenor Road, and the location of the gates is such that cars do not have to wait on public highway for the gates to open, there are unlikely to be any significant safety issues

3.7 External:

• Not required 3.8 Councillor Representation:

• De-delegation Reasons The application was de-delegated by Cllr. Bruce Glithero as “even though the spikes are to be removed from the palisade fencing, by reason of its unduly aggressive appearance through it being nearly 3metres in height, it will still adversely affect the visual amenity of the streetscene and the outlook of nearby residential occupiers. I feel that the application is therefore contrary to policies BE4 and BE8 of the Sutton Unitary Development Plan and supplementary Planning Document 1, ‘Designing Out Crime’.”

4 MATERIAL PLANNING POLICIES 4.1 National Planning Guidance

• Not applicable

4.2 The London Plan • Not applicable

4.3 Sutton Unitary Development Plan

• BE1, ‘Good Urban Design’ • BE 4, ‘Building Relationships’ • BE8, ‘Designing for Safety and Security’ • TR18, ‘New Development and Transport’

4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents

• SPD1 – “Designing Out Crime”

5.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 The principal considerations (including whether any material planning objections

have been reasonably addressed) in relation to this application are:

• Design Quality • Impact on Neighbours • Access • Designing Out Crime

5.2 Design Quality: 5.3 A palisade fence as the one erected at this site establishes a clear distinction

between the public and private domain whilst allowing for unobscured views into and out of the site. The materials utilised for the fence and traffic barrier are considered to be appropriate and of high standard and the black painting sympathetic to the streetscene as this colour lessens its visual prominence and further helps integrate the development into the townscape.

5.4 Notwithstanding this, the spikes at the top of this fencing are considered to be

an overtly negative feature of this development, as its visually aggressive design is not considered to be appropriate whilst adjacent to a residential area or in a prominent commercial location.

5.5 As the applicant proposes to remove this feature from the existing fencing,

which was the sole refusal for the previous application, it is considered that the proposal has overcame the reason for refusal and therefore should be granted planning permission.

5.6 Impact on Neighbours: 5.7 Its is considered that with the spiked tops removed, as proposed by the

applicants the fencing would no longer have an excessively aggressive impact on the outlook of adjoining occupiers and would be of acceptable appearance in terms of amenity.

5.8 It is considered therefore that the applicant has overcome the amenity aspect

of the refusal reason as it no longer has a substantial and unacceptable detrimental impact on the amenities of neighbours and should therefore be permitted.

5.9 Layout: 5.10 The fence is for the enclosure of the car parking area to the rear of the

Grosvenor House and runs along its boundaries. 5.11 It is considered that the layout of this fence is appropriate for its functions. 5.12 Access: 5.13 The Senior Engineer does not object to the erection of this fence along the

boundaries of the rear car parking of the Grosvenor House. 5.14 Some residents objected to the erection of this fence as it restricts the access

to a garage at the northeastern corner of the boundary.

5.15 However it is considered that the fencing, which runs along the boundary and not outside it does not unreasonably restrict access to the garage.

6.0 Designing Out Crime 6.1 It is considered that the palisade fencing, with the spiked tops removed,

complies with the guideline set out in SPD1: Designing Out Crime as (1) it creates a clear distinction between the public and private domain whilst avoiding negative features, such as razor wire; although the fencing is quite high, because it is in the form of railings it allows views through them and does not create an unacceptable visual barrier; (2) the palisade fencing is of a good standard of design and materials providing an acceptable environment and ensuring reasonable security; (3) the palisade fencing allows unobscured views into and out of site to make potential intruders feel more vulnerable

7.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 7.1 The palisade fencing, with the spiked tops removed, does not adversely affect

the visual amenity of the streetscene and the outlook of nearby residential occupiers. The application is therefore in accordance with Policies BE1, BE4, BE8 of the Sutton Unitary Development Plan and Supplementary Planning Document 1: Designing Out Crime. It is recommended that planning permission is granted, subject to the condition set out in the recommendation page.

Report Author: Tiago Jorge Background Papers: D2007/58066/FUL Background Papers: D2007/58641/FUL Drawings and other documents can be viewed on line – 1) Go to page: http://82.43.4.135/FASTWEB/welcome.asp 2) Enter Planning Application Number: D2007/58641 3) Click on Search and View Current Applications 4) Click on View Plans & Documents

G Jacob Willson Arup 13 Fitzroy Street London W1T 4BQ

D2007/58641/FUL

DRAFT WARNING: It is in your interests to ensure you obtain the approval of the Local Planning Authority, where the conditions require that to occur. Failure to comply with the following conditions may lead to enforcement action to secure compliance.

FIRST SCHEDULE Grosvenor House 2 Grosvenor Road Wallington Surrey SM6 0DW Retrospective application for a vehicular barrier and palisade fence up to 2.9 metres in height and proposed removal of spikes from top of fence.

SECOND SCHEDULE (1) The spikes from the top of the palisade fence shall be removed as indicated in the permitted drawings not later than 3 months beginning with the date of the planning permission. Reason: To protect the visual amenity of the area. INFORMATIVES. (1) The drawing no(s). relating to this decision are LBS1, AS/01 P1 Issue 1.3 and S/02 P2 Issue 1.0.