Jail fears over conservation area home improvements allayed

Hull Council is consulting over plans to issue new planning regulations for the Avenues and Pearson Park conservation area, which would require residents to gain planning permission for alterations to features including doors and porches, chimneys roofs, gutter blocks and gutters, fascia boards and barge boards.

The area, which encompasses Pearson Park, Princes Avenue, the four main avenues running east to west from Princes Avenue and smaller streets in between, had established its “essential character” by 1910, a report said, and is already subject to two similar regulations concerning the replacement of windows and driveways.

The new “Article 4” directions have been requested by the Avenues and Pearson Park Residents’ Association (Appra), whose members are concerned about the impact of UPVC doors and other modernisations.

The proposals have divided opinion and raised concerns about the potential cost of the materials which may be required, while others fear breaching the conditions may be a criminal offence resulting in the loss of property and home owners even facing jail. This has prompted Appra to issue an “extraordinary newsletter” seeking to clarify these points and put minds at rest.

The letter says: “We live in an area of historical and architectural importance to Hull, a large urban village whose unique character and strong community spirit created the residents’ association in 1971.

“In 1974 the Avenues became a conservation area, defined as ‘an area of special architectural or historic interest, the character and appearance of which it is desirable to protect or enhance’.

“The then committee thought that conservation area status would protect the Avenues from alarming trends.”

The letter says that encouraging Article 4 directions for the area is in the Appra constitution, but then makes the following clarifications: “Article 4 directions are designed to maintain the character of a conservation area, which means that residents need planning permission for the alterations specified, but there is no cost for the application; they do not pre-empt the eventual planning decision; there is no need to consult a solicitor or produce expensive or architectural drawings; the council’s enforcement powers are civil, not criminal.

“It is wrong to claim that the directions could result in a prison sentence.”

The council made eight such directions for the area last month and is now inviting residents’ views on each.

Subject to them being confirmed they will come into force on December 1.

Appra chairman Stephanie Wilson said people should look after their properties but there was no cause for such alarm.

She said: “We do think the directions are necessary to preserve and enhance the conservation area.

“But there’s no question of any sort of threat to your property or a prison sentence.

“People will have to look after their houses but it’s an extra bureaucratic layer, it’s not set in stone and each application would be considered on a case by case basis.”

Mrs Wilson said she hoped as many people as possible would respond to the consultation.

An opinion survey in February saw a response rate of only 19 per cent of the 1,275 homes polled.

Mrs Wilson said: “I’m trying to get people to vote and let’s make it a democratic one. If they get voted down so be it. But if only two people vote on either side it’s unsatisfactory.

“We are hoping a large number will have their say. The consultation has been extended to give people a chance.”

The consultation closes on July 13.