DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - Date: 6 February 2008

Report of the Executive Head of Planning, Transportation and Highways. Ref: A2007/58859/3FR WARD: A02 / NONSUCH Time Taken:

8 weeks, 2 days Site: Fairlands Park LONDON ROAD North Cheam Surrey

Proposal: Provision of a two metre high boundary fence and gates on Esher Avenue /

Wrayfield Road perimeter. Applicant: Mr D Aslangul Agent: Mr D Aslangul Recommendation:

GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION Reason for Report to Committee: Council’s own application.

The proposed fencing is considered acceptable, as the increase in height will help provide further security measures to combat anti social behaviour by restricting access to the park when the gates are shut.

1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Site: 1.2 The site, Fairlands Park, is located in within North Cheam on the eastern side

of London Road and is approximately 2ha. The park is designated as public open space and contains a playground towards the southeast corner of the site and a hard court area towards the north west of the site. The site contains a path that joins both Esher Avenue and London Road together, running along side the boundary with Sainsbury’s supermarket. The boundary of the park contains a number of trees providing screening to the adjoining residential properties.

1.3 Surroundings: 1.4 The site adjoins residential properties at Camberley Close to the west, Esher

Avenue to the South East, residential properties at Hilbert Road to the south and Sainsbury’s to the west. To the North West is the Goals football centre and the North Cheam Sports Club to the north.

1.5 Site specific UDP designation:

1.6 The site is designated as public open space and is therefore subject to Policy BE18 of the Sutton Unitary Development Plan.

1.7 Relevant Planning History: 1.8 91/35533/OUT – Planning permission was granted in 1991 for the provision of

the park and facilities as part of the development of Sainsbury’s. 1.9 95/39531/FUL - Planning permission was granted for the erection of a 3-metre

high steel mesh fence to enclose three sides of the multi-sports ballpark. 2.0 APPLICATION PROPOSALS 2.1 Details of Proposal: 2.2 The applicant is seeking to install a new 2m high fence around the southern

perimeter of the park adjacent to Esher Avenue. It is proposed that a double gate will be installed at the Wrayfield Road entrance to the park and a further single gate is to be installed to provide separate access to the play area. The gates will be locked by the Sutton Safer Partnership to secure the park when trouble is expected or to discourage the use of the park as a meeting place for anti social behaviour between young people. At present it is possible to climb over the current fence and gain access to the park at any time.

2.3 The proposal for the new fencing arose due to antisocial behaviour reported to

the Cheam and Worcester Park Area Committee. It was agreed at this meeting that the park needed to be totally enclosed by a fence/gates so it can be locked when necessary to deter such behaviour. The height of the fence is such that it would deter unauthorised entry, yet is not high enough to cause a visual problem within the area. The fence will contain a blunt topped palisade style, with the access gates being 3200mm for the double gate and 1200mm for the single gate.

2.4 The northern end of the park adjoining London Road will undergo a similar

development to that proposed within this application. The fence and gate situated at this part of the park will be situated at least 5metres from the highway, and therefore the work will be carried out under permitted development rights

2.5 Significant amendments to application since submitted: 2.6 There have been no significant amendments to the scheme since it was

submitted. 3.0 PUBLICITY 3.1 Adjoining Occupiers Notified 3.2 Method of Notification: 3.3 A total of 28 letters (dated 17 December 2007) were sent out to the adjoining

and surrounding residents on the 18 December.

3.4 Number of Letters Received: 1 3.5 Addresses of letters: 3.6 3 Camberley Close, North Cheam 3.7 Non-Material Responses:

• The proposed fence would result in the loss of access to the park, as shown on the objector’s deeds.

3.8 Official Consultation 3.9 Internal: 3.10 Senior Highways Engineer 3.11 Having assessed the application it was considered that there were no

objections with regards to highway matters. However it is noted that the gates must open inwards only and can only be used by maintenance and emergency vehicles when the gates are locked.

3.12 External: 3.13 Due to the nature of the application it was considered unnecessary to consult

with any external groups. 3.14 Councillor Representation: 3.15 There have been no Councillor representations regarding this application. 4.0 MATERIAL PLANNING POLICIES 4.1 Sutton Unitary Development Plan

• BE1 – Good Urban Design • BE8 – Design for Safety and Security • BE9 – Access for Disabled People • G/CL2 – Sports, Recreation and Leisure Facilities • TR18 – New Development and Transport

4.2 Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents

• SPD1 – Designing out Crime 5.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 The principle considerations (including whether any material planning

objections have been reasonably addressed) in relation to this application are: • Use • Design Quality • Impact on Neighbours

• Access 5.2 Use: 5.3 The proposed gates have been assessed against Policy BE8 of the Sutton

Unitary Development Plan and the Designing out Crime SPD. The policy states that the Council will seek to ensure that the design and layout proposal incorporates design principles that deter crime and reduce the fear of crime. In considering there principles consideration will be given to the use of appropriate materials and fittings in order to deter crime.

5.4 The SPD states under guideline 21 (observation of public space) that the space

should be visible from streets and nearby dwellings, whilst under guideline 19 (boundary treatments) the guidance states that developments should incorporate high standards of materials and design to provide an attractive environment whilst providing adequate security. Further to this, by maintaining unobscured views into secured space, this will make potential intruders feel vulnerable and railings are often the best option of achieving this objective.

5.5 The proposed development meets the guidelines as set out in the SPD whilst

respecting the policy. It is therefore considered that the use of a fence and gates to secure the site is acceptable in this instance.

5.6 Design Quality: 5.7 The proposed design of the fence is considered in regard to policy BE1. Policy

BE1 states that proposals for new development should incorporate the basic elements of good urban design. It states 8 principles of good urban design, including (i) respect for or reinforcement of the character and identity of the area, including the buildings and their context; (ii) avoiding isolated developments which do not integrate well into the surrounding area and (iii) creation of attractive well functioning spaces within the site.

5.8 The proposed development would allow for the continued use of the park whilst

providing improved levels of security. It is considered that the height of the fence (standing at 2m high) is taller than the existing 1.2m high fence, it will not result in the open space being unacceptably enclosed sufficiently as it already contains fencing along the boundary of Esher Avenue/Wrayfield Road.

5.9 The design of the fence and gates incorporate simple details and appear

understanding in the street scene. The fence and gate will be painted black and will be an appropriate form of development in the streetscape.

5.10 Impact on Neighbours: 5.11 The development would have no impact on the surrounding neighbours as a

result of the increase in the height of the fence. Having spoken to the objector regarding their concern, it transpires that they had misread the plans online, and as a result thought that the fencing would enclose the entire boundary of the park, thus fencing in the objectors property at the rear.

5.12 Access:

5.13 Access to the park for disabled persons, as outlined within Policy BE9 has

been considered within the application. As a result the applicant has put in a double gate at 3200mm to allow for wheelchair access.

6.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 6.1 Having considered the application for the proposed fence/gates with regard to

the use, design and siting it is considered that the application is acceptable. It is therefore considered that permission should be granted subject to conditions.

Background Papers: A2007/58859/3FR 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: A2007/58859 3) Click on Search and View Current Applications 4) Click on View Plans & Documents

G Mr D Aslangul Assistant Parks Manager 24 Denmark Road Carshalton SM5 2JG

A2007/58859/3FR

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 Fairlands Park LONDON ROAD North Cheam Surrey Provision of a two metre high boundary fence and gates on Esher Avenue / Wrayfield Road perimeter.

SECOND SCHEDULE (1) The development must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date hereof. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended. (2) Both gates within the fencing must open inwards only towards the park. Reason: To prevent obstruction and inconvenience to other highway users (especially pedestrians, cyclists and those with disabilities), and also in the interest of highway safety. INFORMATIVES. (1) This application has been assessed against the relevant policies of the Sutton Unitary Development Plan. The proposal is generally in accordance with Section 54A of

the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and for this reason planning permission is granted. (2) This approval only grants permission under section 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Further approval or consent may be required by other legislation, in particular the Building Regulations and you should contact Building Control on 020 8770 6268 before proceeding with the work. (3) The permission hereby granted confers no rights on the applicant to encroach upon, extend over or otherwise enter upon property not in his ownership for any purposes connected with the implementation of this planning permission. (4) The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the London Borough of Sutton monitors the implementation of permissions and in particular that conditions imposed are fully complied with. Should you have any queries with regard to the discharge of the conditions please telephone 020 8770 6200 for further information. (5) The drawing numbers relating to this decision are LBS1, LBS2, LBS3 and LBS4.