GitLab

A nursery that was at war with a 'ludicrous' council that had ordered to tear down a 6ft fence developed to safeguard children has won its fight.
condo.com
Imperial Day Nursery, in Westcliff-on-sea, had introduced an appeal versus Southend Council last year after it ruled that it should eliminate or lower the height of a big fence that towers at the front of the residential or commercial property.

An enforcement notification was issued by the local authority demanding it be ripped down or changed to an optimum height of 3.2 ft within three months.

Today, bringing an end to a years-long feud, the nursery has actually been informed it can keep its fencing as the Planning Inspectorate decided it was not 'popular' or 'out of keeping' with the character of the city and criticised the council for 'unreasonable' behaviour.

When MailOnline had actually visited last October, moms and dads had expressed their fury at the council, implicating them of prioritising the 'aesthetics of the street' over the security of their children.

But neighbours surviving on the domestic street in the seaside residential area branded the fencing as 'terrible and undesirable' and desired it took apart.

The nursery initially became swallowed up in the planning row in 2022 after a grievance was made concerning the structure which was erected without appropriate planning consents in place.

Fences towering 1.83 m high were erected at the Imperial Day Nursery, in Westcliff-on-sea, to permit children to play outside of public view

The nursery has won an appeal versus Southend Council after it ruled that it must remove or decrease the height of the big fence at the front of the residential or commercial property

Imperial Day Nursery then lodged a retrospective planning application, however the council rejected it, declaring it was 'visually prominent and stark' and 'out of keeping' with the surrounding location.

The nursery then stepped up its battle by appealing the council's enforcement action - which has actually led to a success.

Andrew Walker, a planning officer within the Planning Inspectorate, reversed the council's decision after a website visit in which he ruled the fence and other structures could remain undamaged, EssexLive reported.

He stated in his decision: 'I do not discover that either appeal scheme appears visually prominent, plain or materially out of keeping within the local context.

'No harm is caused to the character and look of the website, street scene or area.

'The degree of fencing upon the frontage under both plans is reasonably essential to separate the personal domestic area from the industrial nursery section.'

The nursery has also been granted a complete award of costs versus Southend City board in addition to having the enforcement notice quashed and planning application approved.

The costs choice checks out: 'The Planning Practice Guidance advises that costs may be granted versus a party who has behaved unreasonably and thus caused the party making an application for costs to sustain unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process.

'The Council refused the preparation application and released the subsequent enforcement notification on the basis of a single main issue.

'Its case, which continued to be pursued in defending the occurring appeals, was that the appeal advancements considerably damaged the character and look of the website, the streetscene and the location more commonly.

'I disagree with the Council on this matter of planning judgment. That would not by itself be a basis for a finding of unreasonable behaviour.

'However, the local presence of the really substantial and high close-boarded fencing serving the Essex County Bowling Club, with long areas straight abutting the highway - rather near to the appeal residential or commercial property and on the same side of Imperial Avenue - does not appear to have actually been considered at all by the Council in concerning its view.

'There is certainly nothing in the officer reports (on each appeal scheme) which refers to it.

'Indeed, they state that "The streetscene in this part of Imperial Avenue has a strong open character with low front limit treatments ..." To make that declaration without mentioning, thinking about or evaluating the extremely obvious and substantial close-by counterexample was both wrong and unreasonable.

'It seems to me that, had the single primary concern in disagreement been more effectively examined, there would have been no need for the attract have been made in the first location which the appellant has actually been put to unneeded expense.

'I for that reason discover that unreasonable behaviour resulting in unneeded or wasted expense, as explained in the Planning Practice Guidance, has been shown and that full awards of costs are justified in regard of both appeals.'

Talking to MailOnline outside the nursery, moms and dads had actually previously told of how they felt more secure with the structure being in place.

Parents told how they would feel more secure if they fences stayed in place as it blocks the general public from having the ability to see into the 'baby space' at the front of the building

They state that prior to its usage, complete strangers might easily peer into the 'child room' at the front of the structure, which the fence likewise enables kids to safely play in the outside location in front of the residential or commercial property.

One mother, Natalie Toby, stated: 'I'm a security consultant so from my perspective, it keeps children hidden away from the general public walking past.

'You can't truly see where the front door is unless you go all the method down there, so they're keeping access paths good and hid.

'The nursery has actually been here for thirty years so I do not see why the council are applying the exact same rules that they would to domestic homes.

'New-build schools are being developed with fence lines not different to this, so why are they not permitting this?

'Surely the safety of the kids is more crucial than the visual appeals.'

She informed of an incident, before the fencing which obstructs the window of the front room was set up, when a postman unintendedly dropped heavy parcels through the window of the child space.

She added: 'So it's not almost keeping it shut off from people with malicious intentions, it's unexpected things also.

'They have actually got vulnerable children because front room, and having the fence up keeps the infants safe.

'It's absurd, I don't understand why the council are being so stubborn about it.

'Surely securing kids and their security is vital to visual appeals.

'I don't desire my daughter in a space where people can simply stroll previous and browse.'

Another moms and dad had actually echoed the exact same issues, saying: 'As an instructor myself, I comprehend the value of safeguarding children, and I wouldn't desire the fence to be removed.

'My child goes to this nursery and my eldest simply started school but she went here the entire method through.

'It's a fantastic nursery and they have actually got the finest interest of the kids at heart.

'Prior to it being like this, you could see into the infant room.

'When my eldest was in the child space, you could see her, you would have the ability to wave. But certainly, that's different as a moms and dad than a stranger having the ability to search in.

'It feels a lot more secure now, knowing that no-one can see in or get in quickly. It's extremely safe and secure.

'Having the fence also indicates they can use the outside area for kids. I think they have Santa there at Christmas and things like that.'

She included: 'They do attempt and make it look as appealing as possible too, so they alter it seasonally, so it's all Halloween-themed at the minute.

'I don't believe it's an eyesore.'

Southend Council ordered for the fence to be taken down or lowered in height after finding that it was 'materially out of keeping' with the surrounding area. This has been reversed on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate

The council's enforcement notice for the elimination of the fence had mentioned that the height, design and 'strong look' of the fence deemed it unacceptable for the location.

The choice notification mentioned: 'The advancement at the website, by factor of its height, design and degree, and the solid look of the within the frontage, appears aesthetically prominent, plain, and materially out of keeping with the normally large setting of the surrounding location, and has resulted in considerable harm to the character and look of the site, the streetscene and the area more extensively.'

And now, the Planning Inspectorate's appeal decision mentions that the fence does not appear 'extreme' or 'incongruous' and can stay standing.

Talking to MailOnline, one neighbour had said of the advancement: 'It is a bit unattractive. I was astonished they were even allowed to put it up, however turns out they weren't.

'I understand why they did it, however preparing approval is preparing authorization and you have to comply with it.

'My personal opinion is that it is a bit undesirable. It would have troubled me more if I was best next door to it. But even from here, it is unsightly.'

Another neighbour echoed the same issues, saying: 'It's not nice, it looks dreadful.

'And the planning was retrospective also.'

While the majority of parents said the fencing made them feel safer, one parent said the outdoor space is very hardly ever used.

She stated: 'We're not too bothered in either case. I can comprehend that a few of the neighbours do not particularly like it.

'Before it was up, we were funnelled a various method. So truly you would only see into the child space if you were queuing to get your children.

'So, if you were a complete stranger not part of the nursery, you would need to actually come off the street, stare in a window and be rather obvious about it.

'I know the nursery are stating it's for safeguarding however when it's simply the parents having a fast appearance in to see their children, I do not believe that's much of a problem.

'And I have actually never seen anyone usage that outdoor area. To my understanding, it's not really used.'

Another parent, however, stated he had vowed assistance for the nursery who at the time had a petition going.

He stated: 'I've actually emailed the nursery revealing support for their petition.

'It appears like the council is taking a look at the view of the place and the aesthetics than the safety of our kids.

'The whole point was to secure the kids.

'I feel a lot much safer leaving my kid here knowing the fence is up.

'It stops people from seeing in and being able to take a look at the kids.'

A grandmother choosing up her grand son from the nursery included: 'I think it's terrible. The fence gives a little bit of safety for the children.

'It's extremely strange that the council are doing this.'

The nursery said: 'Imperial Day Nursery has effectively defended itself in its disagreement with Southend City Council over the frontage of the residential or commercial property, both Nursery and domestic.

'We are thrilled with the result of the appeals including our applications for expenses.

; This matter has hung over the nursery for more than two years now and with associated costs amounting to just over ₤ 35,000 it has actually been a very heavy monetary concern to bear with no assurance of success.

'Other similar children's nurseries dealt with and experiencing the very same might not have had the resources to make it through as we have actually managed to do.

'We feel that our method has actually been totally vindicated by the appeals inspector.

'As both a company rates and a council tax payer it is exceptionally concerning that the council's unreasonable behaviour has actually cost Southend on Sea City Council taxpayers so dearly. We truly hope that lessons will be gained from this judgement moving forward and applied appropriately.'

The council have given that acknowledged the Planning Inspectorate's decision.

Cllr Anne Jones, cabinet member for planning, housing, and the local strategy, stated: 'The Council took a well balanced decision, identifying the benefits of the fencing for the nursery, while likewise acknowledging the harm its prominence triggered to local character.

'We appreciate that the Planning Inspectorate reached a different view on where that balance ought to lie.'