Residents face prospect of new controls on home improvements

Following lobbying by a residents’ group, a series of “Article 4” directions were introduced in the Avenues and Pearson Park area this month, meaning residents now need planning permission for alterations to doors and porches, chimneys roofs, gutter blocks and gutters, fascia boards and barge boards.

The issue divided opinion in the conservation area, with opponents raising concerns about the potential cost of the materials that may be required, and others accusing the residents’ group of interfering.

But after acknowledging what has been an “unusually contentious year” in its December newsletter, the Avenues and Pearson Park Residents’ Association suggests more control of what householders can and cannot do may be on the cards.

An article by chairman Stephanie Wilson asks: “I wonder if you agree with us that ‘the charm and individuality’ of our front gardens is a vital local feature?”

Mrs Wilson notes that the directions have stopped the erosion of grass verges for off-street parking, but raises concern about the paving of gardens next to tenfoots to similarly cater for cars.

She writes: “The result – a parking lot in place of a growing breathing space – can be ugly and is definitely contrary to the original design of our houses.

“Although we have lost the uniformity of the iron railings, the variety of hedges and fences and the different plantings in our front gardens are a pleasure to watch and share communally; unlike back gardens, they are available to the public gaze – a gift to passers-by and a buffer between the pavement and our dwellings.

“Should we protect this threatened asset with a further Article 4 direction?”

Mrs Wilson said the backing of English Heritage for the earlier directions would support the group’s arguments.

It said: “In our experience the essence of a conservation area is its small architectural details as well as the big street scene.

“In the Avenues and Pearson Park conservation area, this applies particularly strongly as the architectural charm and individuality of the houses collectively combine to give the area such an important quality.”

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 became a conservation in 1974.

It was already subject to two similar regulations concerning the replacement of windows and driveways.

Of the 112 households which responded to a consultation on the latest directions, 97 supported all the changes and 12 were against them all. A survey in February saw a response rate of only 19 per cent of the 1,275 homes polled.

Mrs Wilson’s article also complains about the installation of new play equipment in Pearson Park.

She writes: “Our main criticism is lack of consultation. Young parents have expressed their interest in the playground and their concerns over its shabbiness over the last few years; but there was no consultation, with them, with us, with the Friends of Pearson Park.

“How can public money be spent on a community enterprise without the contribution of the public?

“Apparently there were questions asked actually in the playground, but an impromptu informal process is no substitute for a thoughtful debate over time. I’m afraid I see this as endemic in the city’s culture.”

Article 4 directions have been considered for another conservation area in the city, Boulevard and Coltman Street, which has seen £2m spent in the last five years restoring original features.