8

COMMITTEE: COUNCIL REF NO: E/14/14

DATE: 28 JANUARY 2015

SUBJECT: MARLBOROUGH ROAD CONSERVATION

AREA DESIGNATION

PORTFOLIO HOLDER: COUNCILLOR CAROLE JONES

HEAD OF SERVICE: MATTHEW LING

Short description of report content and the decision requested:

The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires

the Council to determine which parts of its district should be designated as a

Conservation Area.

The housing along Marlborough Road and part of Tolworth Road was

developed in the early 20th century by local builder Arthur Warnes to a single

design. The area has been well maintained by its residents and preserves

much of the detail and character of the original development. It is proposed to

designate the area as the Marlborough Road Conservation Area in

recognition of its architectural and historic interest, and to protect the area

against harmful development in the future.

Council is asked to adopt the designation of the Marlborough Road

Conservation Area. An additional proposal to make an Article 4 direction for

the same area is the subject of a separate report.

Ward(s) affected:

Alexandra Ward

List of Appendices included in this report:

a) Appendix A – Map and description of the proposed Marlborough Road

Conservation Area

b) Appendix B – Consultation Statement November 2014

This report has been prepared by Mike Taylor, Tel: 01473 432934,

Email: mike.taylor@ipswich.gov.uk

This report was prepared after consultation with:

Internal consultees

Portfolio Holder, Development Management, Legal, Finance.

External consultees

Residents of Marlborough Road

The following policies form a context to this report:

(all relevant policies must also be referred to in the body of the report)

National Planning Policy Framework, paragraphs 126 - 141

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, s.69

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW

(papers relied on to write the report but which are not published and do not contain exempt information)

1. None

OTHER HELPFUL PAPERS

(papers which the report author considers might be helpful – this might include published material)

1. National Planning Policy Framework

2. National Planning Practice Guidance

3. Adopted Ipswich Core Strategy and Policies DPD

______________________________________________________________ 1. Introduction

1.1 The Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires the Council to review its administrative area and determine which parts of its district should be designated as Conservation Areas.

1.2 Conservation Areas are areas of special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance. Since October 1974, a total of 14 Conservation Areas have been created by the Council.

1.3 This report proposes the designation of Marlborough Road and part of Tolworth Road as the Marlborough Road Conservation Area.

1.4 A proposal to make an Article 4 direction for this area under the General Permitted Development Order 1995 is the subject of a separate report.

2. Background

2.1 The Civic Amenities Act 1967 first introduced “Conservation Areas” recognizing that the character and historic value of a town depend as much on areas as individual buildings. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that local authorities should ensure designation of a conservation area is justified by an area’s special architectural or historic interest.

2.2 Marlborough Road and Tolworth Road are a unique example of a development undertaken between 1902 and 1926 by a local builder and land owner, Arthur Warnes. The houses have common design features which conservation area designation would aim to protect. These include gabled bays with individual name plaques, ornamental porch details and front garden walls. The survival of an intact and well preserved residential streetscape from this period is of particular value.

2.3 Marlborough Road and parts of Tolworth Road have previously been considered for conservation area designation. In 2008 residents were consulted about proposals for designation and the making of an Article 4 direction, and a generally positive response was received. The proposal was not prioritised at the time, however, because of limited section resources.

2.4 In 2013, the Council’s conservation staff re-appraised the area and prepared a fresh proposal for conservation area designation and the making of an article 4 direction.

2.5 The extent of the proposed conservation area is illustrated in the map at Appendix A. It comprises semi-detached housing blocks either side of Marlborough Road, all of which exhibit the builder’s characteristic design style. Most of the houses retain original features such as window glazing and gable finials. Also included are chalet bungalows at the west end of the road and a small group on Tolworth Road, all by

the same builder and featuring characteristic design elements. Buildings not by Warnes, or not as well preserved in their detailing, are not included in the proposed designation.

2.6 The conservation area designation will come into effect immediately if it is approved by the Council. As soon as possible after the designation, notification will be sent to all properties within the conservation area boundary together with a map showing the boundary and a description of the effects of designation. In addition, notice of the designation will be posted in the London Gazette and in a local newspaper.

2.7 It is also proposed to make an Article 4 direction covering the same area as that shown by the map in Appendix A. Although complimentary to the Conservation Area designation, the Article 4 Direction is a separate entity and is not included in this report. Approval for the proposed Article 4 Direction will be sought through a separate report to Council.

3. Effect of Designation

3.1 Designation is intended to ensure the special character of the area is

protected and enhanced. This is done through a number of additional planning controls. Planning permission will be required for the demolition of buildings or parts of buildings within a conservation area. Anyone wishing to carry out works to trees within a conservation area will be required to give six weeks notice, in writing, to the Council.

4. Relevant Policies

4.1 Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires that local authorities should review their areas periodically in order to determine if designation of new conservation areas would be appropriate.

4.2 Section 12 (para.127) of the National Planning Policy Framework refers to the statutory obligation of Councils to consider the designation of new Conservation Areas, and the importance of ensuring that the architectural and historic significance of the area is sufficiently clearly identified.

5. Options Considered / Under Consideration

5.1 In response to consultee comments, a number of additional areas have been considered for inclusion in the proposed area. These include nearby houses on Marlborough Road, Lansdown Road, Tokio Road, St Johns Road and Cauldwell Hall Road. The bowling green off Lansdown Road was also suggested.

5.2 The suggestions were considered in turn and excluded on the grounds that the individual properties, whilst of the right period and style, have been altered in the past, reducing their historic and architectural significance. The bowling green is an attractive green space but is at the rear of the main street frontage and is not a visually integral part of the streetscape.

5.3 No.14 Marlborough Road, a house designed by local architect JA Sherman, is of the right period and style and its detail is well preserved. After consultation with the owners in November 2014, and their positive response to inclusion within the proposed conservation area, the boundary was modified to include the property.

5.4 Council is not being asked to consider any options or alternatives to the proposed scheme.

6. Consultations

6.1 All residents within the area covered by the proposed conservation area

boundary were contacted by letter in November 2013. The letter explained the implications of both conservation area designation and the making of an Article 4 direction, and included a map showing the proposed boundary. Appendix B summarises the issues raised through the comments received, and the Council’s responses to them.

6.2 A letter and map explaining the proposal was sent to the Ipswich

Society secretary in December 2013. 6.3 Internal consultations have taken place with Councillor Jones (Portfolio

Holder for Economic Development and Planning) and with the Legal and Finance sections within the Council. A presentation of the proposal was made to the Urban Design and Conservation Panel in January 2014, and a summary of the response is given at Appendix B.

7. Risk Management

Risk Description

Consequence of risk

Risk Controls

Probability of risk occurring taking account of controls (scale 1-6) 1 – almost impossible 6 – very high

Impact of risk, if it occurred taking account of actions (scale 1 – negligible; 4 –catastrophic)

Actions to mitigate risk

1. Incomplete consultation

Need to repeat elements of process & resulting costs

Rigorous identification of consultee addresses

2 3 Checking process.

2. Proposed boundary does not include all relevant

Need to repeat elements of process & resulting costs

Carefully assess the significance of nearby features and

2 3 Checking / evaluation process.

significant features in the area.

the degree of threat that exists.

4. Special architectural / historic interest is insufficient to justify a CA designation

The value of all CA designations within the borough is potentially devalued

Thorough assessment of the area’s special interest

2 2 Checking / evaluation process.

8. Environmental Impact Assessment

8.1 The proposed conservation area is a response to the Council’s legal

obligation to identify and designate conservation areas where appropriate. It does not create new policy but provides additional development control measures which can, in appropriate circumstances, be used to restrict the extent of development. It is a conservation measure which will help protect the existing pattern of development and minimise environmental impacts. It will not, therefore, be necessary to carry out a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) or Sustainability Appraisal (SA).

9. Equalities and Diversity Implications

9.1 An equality impact screening assessment has been carried out and no adverse impact was identified.

10. Financial Considerations

10.1 The additional costs of the consultation on this proposal will be met by

the planning team budget.

11. Legal Considerations

11.1 Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)

Act 1990 places a statutory duty on the local authority to determine from time to time which parts of its area are of special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which is desirable to preserve or enhance. The local authority then has the statutory duty to designate those areas so determined, as conservation areas. There is also the statutory duty on the local authority to review areas designated as conservation areas and determine whether any further areas should be designated, and the duty to designate accordingly.

11.2 Once a designation is made, section 70 of the same Act places the

obligation on the local authority to notify the Secretary of State, the Commission, and to place notices in the London Gazette and at least one local newspaper for the authority’s area notifying that the

designation has been made. It will be registered as a Local Land charge in the Local Land Charges Register.

11.3 Section 12 (paragraph 127) of the National Planning Policy Framework refers to the designation of conservation areas by local authorities, and the need to ensure that the designation is based upon a sound identification of an area’s special architectural and historic interest.

12. Performance Monitoring

12.1 There are no performance targets for the designation of conservation

areas.

13. Conclusions

13.1 In accordance with the requirements in s.69 of the Planning (Listed

Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, an area of townscape on Marlborough Road and Tolworth Road has been identified which would benefit from the designation of a conservation area. The proposed designation is shown on the map in Appendix A.

14. Recommendations

14.1 That Council:

a) resolves to designate the parts of Marlborough and Tolworth Roads, as detailed in Appendix A to this report, as a conservation area; and

b) authorises the Head of Development and Public Protection to

take all necessary steps regarding notification of the designation and registration in the local land charges register as detailed in the report.

Appendix A Map and description of the proposed Marlborough Road Conservation Area

Addresses of the proposed Marlborough Road Conservation Area No’s 14 – 44 Marlborough Road No’s 5 – 55 Marlborough Road No’s 6 – 8 Tolworth Road No 1 Tolworth Road Description of the proposed Marlborough Road Conservation Area

Marlborough Road and Tolworth Road are a unique example of a large development undertaken by a single local builder and land owner, Arthur Warnes.

In 1898 Warnes purchased 5 acres of land between St John’s Road and Cauldwell Hall Road that was formerly part of the Cold Hall Estate. In 1901 he informed the Ipswich Urban Sanitary Authority of his intention to erect 42 houses on Marlborough and Tolworth Roads and by 1903 the first houses on the south side (No’s 5 - 19) were being sold. Houses were being built and sold from 1902 until 1926. No.14 is not part of Warnes’ development. It was built in 1911 to designs by local architect JA Sherman (1876-1966). The property is locally listed (see Local List SPD). The Warnes development comprises mostly semi detached houses either side of Marlborough Road and a small group on Tolworth Road. A number of chalet bungalows by the same builder has been included at the west end of Marlborough Road.

The semi detached type is the characteristic design, built in traditional red brick with slate roofs. The houses are more substantial than in neighbouring streets. Warnes provided his frontages with projecting double height bay windows, the openings framed with carved stone lintels and cills. The bays

rise to half timbered gables with deep eaves and a decorative finial. Red brick chimney stacks are set at either end of the roof ridge.

The entrances are paired under a single canopy which bridges between the window bays, supported on ornamental timber brackets. Originally tiled, most canopy roofs have been replaced with glazed units. All houses have front gardens enclosed by red brick walls and gatepiers, some with their original tiled garden path in situ.

One of the most distinctive features of the semi detached houses are the recessed name plaques fixed between ground and first floor bay windows. It is unclear how the names were chosen or by whom – it is possible that some element of purchaser choice was part of the sales package.

The chalet bungalows are equally distinctive, rendered with clay tile roofs. There are bay windows in the projecting gable and under the eaves, either side of the central doorway. A large dormer is set in the centre of the roof slope, between tall red brick chimney stacks.

No. 14 Marlborough Road is a detached red brick house, rendered on its upper floor. The canopied doorway is in a central gabled bay, but the composition is not as strongly modelled as the Warnes houses. The bay windows to either side are single height; upper floor windows have a decorative label under the cills.

Although altered since their construction – for instance the glazed entrance canopies – most house frontages in the area are in a good state of preservation. The distinctive design of sash windows (glazing bars in the upper sash only) is retained in almost all cases. Many decorative details also survive, for instance the carved entrance canopy brackets and the terracotta finials. The red brick garden frontages are well preserved. The ‘California’ section of the Ipswich Urban Character SPD (interim adopted version, p.9) highlights the significance of the Marlborough Road area,

drawing attention to its state of preservation and the high quality of the original scheme. This is an area characterised by 19th and early 20th century housing development. Marlborough Road is an example of an Edwardian scheme which reflects many of the features of domestic architecture in the period. The area has been well maintained by its owners - conservation area designation will help reinforce this protection into the future.

Appendix B

Consultation Statement November 2014

Prepared under regulation 12(a) of the Town and Country Planning

(Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

The Council wrote to all residents in November 2013 explaining the proposed

conservation area designation and the making of an Article 4 direction, and

enclosing a map showing the boundaries of the proposed area. The

implications for both the designation and the direction were explained in the

letter, and comments invited.

A number of responses were received and all of these are reproduced in the

table below, together with the Council’s reply.

The comments were generally supportive of the proposal and a small number

were very supportive. There were two responses which were opposed in

principle to the designation of either a CA or an Article 4 direction. Most

objections were to the detailed aspects of control covered by the Article 4

direction, in particular microgeneration equipment. Other questions sought

clarification of the difference between conservation areas and Article 4s, and

reassurance on issues such as retrospective action against owners for works

already carried out (there will not be any).

Two respondents thought that the conservation area / article 4 boundary

should be enlarged to include other similar properties, including a nearby

bowling green.

The comments were assessed by officers and several changes made:

i) The proposal to include microgeneration equipment on the Article 4 list

of items for which planning permission will be required, has been

removed. This type of equipment has sustainability benefits which can

be successfully balanced against the protection of the area’s special

character.

ii) The conservation area boundary has been extended to include no.14

Marlborough Road, in response to one of the comments. The owners of

no.14 were contacted by letter in November 2014, in which the

implications of designation were explained and they have responded

positively to the proposal for both the conservation area and the Article

4. No.14 is by local architect JA Sherman and was built in 1911, i.e.

within the same period as the Warnes houses, and in a sympathetic

style.

iii) The boundary has not been extended to include additional properties

on Tokio Road, St Johns Road or Cauldwell Hall Road, primarily

because of unsympathetic modern alterations (for instance upvc

windows) which reduce their historic and architectural significance. The

bowling green, although an attractive local open space, is not an

integral part of the streetscape which is the primary focus of the

proposed conservation area and for this reason has also not been

included.

Respondent Comment IBC Response

Private

individual 1

(resident within

boundary of

proposed area)

As the owners of .. Marlborough Road we have

received notice of the proposed conservation

area first mooted by yourselves a few years

previously. We think it would be a good thing to

preserve the architectural merits of the road with

a conservation area, even though much

preservation appears to have been done on a

voluntary basis up till now. Previous

communication from your department suggested

that the emphasis was more on preserving the

frontage of the street, which doesn't come

across to the same degree in your letter.

It also seems likely in the future that there will be

some conflict with even modest green

initiatives such as replacement windows. A way

round this might for the council to provide grants

to upgrade existing sash windows to make the

houses more energy efficient and still preserve

character of the road.

Thank you for your comments.

The emphasis remains the

preservation of the streets

character when viewed from

the street – frontages and side

elevations are the most

sensitive in this respect, rear

elevations much less so.

If approved, the Article 4

direction will provide controls

over window replacement.

Given their importance to the

streetscape, we would ask for

window replacements that

preserved the external

appearance of properties on

street frontages. Internal fittings

such as secondary glazing

could be considered as well as

double glazing replacements

within wooden frames which

reproduce existing frame /

glazing bar dimensions.

Unfortunately, the Council

doesn’t offer grants for works in

conservation areas, although

there may be central and local

government funding for energy

conservation measures.

Private

individual 2

(resident within

boundary of

I have some questions relating to the proposal to

make Marlborough Road a conservation area..

1. Your letters says that 'like for like'

1. There will be no attempt to

oblige owners to reinstate

features removed prior to the

designation of the Conservation

proposed

conservation

area)

replacements of original features will be

encouraged as will the removal of previous

unsympathetic changes to buildings. I would like

to know what 'encouraged' means in this context

- are you saying that if there have been

alterations or additions to a property in the past

the house owner will have to make changes to

bring these back to what is deemed acceptable

in a conservation area? Can you give examples

of what a house owner would be encouraged to

change and what would be deemed acceptable

to remain as it is?

2. What would be the conservation planning

attitude to an existing satellite dish in an

unobtrusive location as the side of a house?

3. What would be the conservation planning

attitude to existing uPVC window replacements

at the rear of a house?

4. What would be the conservation planning

attitude to existing render on part of the exterior

walls of a house?

Area. The designation and its

accompanying Article 4

Direction - if approved - will

create planning controls from

the date of designation. Once

the designation is in place, we

will be able to suggest methods

of renewing or replacing

features in a way which will not

harm the CA setting. There will

not, however, be any grant

assistance for alterations.

2. The planning controls

granted by the CA designation

and Article 4 direction will only

apply to facades facing the

street or public open space.

Side and rear elevations are

exempt, except for corner

properties which have

elevations onto separate public

spaces.

3. See answers (private

individual 1) above.

4. See answers (private

individual 1) above.

Private

individual 3

(resident within

boundary of

proposed

conservation

area)

I would like enthusiastically to support the

proposed conservation area for Marlborough

Road (although this process seems to have

started years ago, so must be glacial).

Having witnessed in my last residence a

beautiful example of a Victorian terrace in

Hackney turned into a mess with people

expanding upwards and ruining the character

and symmetry of the street, I feel it would be a

great shame if anything similar were to occur in

what friends, family, neighbours and others

regard as an elegant example of an Edwardian

road.

My only concern would be if such a preservation

order would stop potential future traffic calming

measures as this is a very narrow road which is

used as a ‘rat run’ and has no restrictions

despite having children travelling in both

directions every school day.

Thank you for your comments.

The Conservation Area

designation and Article 4

direction cannot be used to

block traffic calming measures

although some influence can

be exercised over the design of

features so that they are in

keeping with the streetscape –

for instance double yellow lines

in CAs can be thinner and

painted in a lighter yellow. We

would also want to avoid

unnecessary signage clutter.

Private

individual 4

(resident within

boundary of

proposed

conservation

area)

See ‘Letter A’, reproduced below.

Thank you for your email in

which you express opposition

to the proposed restriction on

the installation of

microgeneration equipment.

We are interpreting this as an

objection only to the proposed

Article 4 item on

microregeneration, rather than

to the Conservation Area

designation or the other

aspects of the Article 4.

We have included the proposed

microgeneration restriction

because of the potential impact

on the setting of the

conservation area. The

consistent design of the

housing is a characteristic

which we are seeking to

protect; there are concerns that

the sporadic appearance of

street-facing panels will both

harm the appearance of

individual properties and

undermine the visual integrity

of the street.

The example you mention in

Norwich is interesting - I

assume from The Greenhouse

website that it is the Bethel

Street property. This is a

distinctive building on a busy

thoroughfare and the affected

roof surfaces are a less

conspicuous part of the overall

architectural composition. I

suspect that this is a one-off

which does not necessarily set

a precedent for all historic

properties.

However, the Council supports

sustainable approaches to

energy generation and we

understand that the historic

environment cannot be exempt

from environmental

responsibilities. It could be

argued that the Marlborough

Road setting is capable of

absorbing street facing panels

because the roof slopes are set

back between projecting

gables; installations will be less

conspicuous particularly if, as

you suggest, dark coloured

panels are used. There is also

the option of solar tiles.

We will consider your objection

and ensure that it is included

(in its original wording) in any

report to members. In the

meantime, we would be

interested in any other

comments you might want to

make on this issue, including

suggestions about how to

mitigate the visual impact of

microgeneration equipment in

the Marlborough Road setting.

Private

individual 4

(resident within

boundary of

proposed

conservation

area)

As owner occupier of ... Tolworth Road (along with my husband), we have received a letter from you regarding a proposed Conservation Area and Article 4 Direction for Marlborough Road and Tolworth Road. To help me make an informed response to your letter I would be grateful if you could clarify for me the difference between a Conservation Area and an Article 4 Direction. It seems to me that they both restrict what residents can do to their properties without planning permission. Do they always come together or is it possible to have one without the other? Is your proposal to have both a Conservation Area and an Article 4 Direction in the area indicated on your plan or is there an option to just have say a conservation area for example? I do believe this proposal, should it be approved, will have considerable impact on the residents living in this area and therefore only one month to consider the changes, look deeper into the consequences and respond to your letter is not enough, especially considering the time of year in the run up to Christmas.

The proposed Conservation

Area and Article 4 Direction are

separate legal controls,

although they are often

designated together. It is

possible that a Conservation

Area could be approved without

the additional Article 4 controls,

or that both will be approved

but some individual items will

be removed from the Article 4

direction if there is local

opposition.

Conservation Area designation

on its own creates very limited

controls, basically over

demolition of structures. In the

case of Marlborough Road /

Tolworth Road, it is felt that the

historic and architectural

character of the area depends

upon the detail of the buildings

as much as their basic

structure, for instance the

retention of original windows.

Unsympathetic alteration of

these details, which may not be

preventable through a

Conservation Area designation

on its own, can be more

effectively controlled through

the additional powers provided

by an Article 4 Direction.

Although we have set a date for

return of comments, residents

are free to continue to make

additional comments beyond

this date which will be recorded

and taken into account. No

date has been set for the

preparation of the report to the

Council’s Executive; there have

been several local responses

which will require careful

consideration so it is unlikely

anything will be drafted before

the start of February 2014.

Private

individual 5

(resident within

boundary of

proposed

conservation

area)

Further to your letter of 19th November 2013

concerning the above we write to wholly support

the proposal. Having lived in Marlborough Road

for 15 years we appreciate the individuality of

the architecture and strongly believe that it

should be preserved. In fact, we have spent a

considerable effort to restore original features to

our property as we believe the house merits it.

Please let us know the timeline involved, turning

Marlborough Road into a conservation area was

proposed some time ago and we were surprised

it was not implemented then.

Thank you for your letter of

support. It will be included in

the report to members, along

with all correspondence from

residents (which so far has

been largely positive).

Additional, sent a couple of

days later: I apologise for not

answering your question about

the programme. The intention

is to assess the initial

responses from residents in the

new year. Separate reports will

then need to be drafted for

Executive Member approval,

one for the conservation area,

another for the Art 4 Direction.

The Art 4 Direction will require

a second report requesting

confirmation after a statutory

consultation period.

This process will be started in

early 2014 but has not yet been

tied to any Executive meeting

dates; it is hoped that the entire

process can be completed

before the end of 2014.

Private

individual 6

(resident within

boundary of

proposed

conservation

area)

You have written to us at F Marlborough Road

about the above. I am the house owner.

Before responding by your deadline of the 20th

December, we need to clarify if the 'Proposed

Conservation Area' and 'Article 4 Direction' are

two separate issues or go hand in hand with

each other? It would seem from your letter that

'Article 4 Direction' would only apply if first the

area was designated a Conservation Area. Is

that correct?

Also, on the map provided, we are a little

mystified why No.14 Marlborough Road has

been left out, as it is surely of the same vintage

as the bungalows Nos. 51-55. Why include one

and not the other?

Finally, what is the attitude of the Council to the

buildings that have already acquired different

features than the original ones, regarding the

removal of them? Will we be forced to remove,

for example, our tiled roof, which, in our case,

the Council approved when offering a partial

grant to re-roof our property many years ago?

I would be grateful for a swift reply, so that we

can respond before your deadline.

Additional comment in response to IBC

reply:

Thank you for your prompt response answering

our queries, which have satisfied us.

We agree with Marlborough Road and Tolworth

Road being designated a Conservation Area, as

we do not wish the area to be developed in an

unsympathetic manner.

1) The Conservation Area (CA)

and Article 4 Direction (art.4)

are separate legal entities

which will require separate

reports and approval by the

Executive. The CA can be

designated without the Art 4,

which is intended to enhance

the level of protection provided

by the CA. Individual elements

of the Art 4 can also be

amended or removed, if for

instance there is local

opposition.

2) No.14 Marlborough Road is

by the local architect JA

Sherman and is not of the

same style as the properties

within the proposed designation

boundary. The CA and its

associated Art 4 is intended to

protect the work of the builder

Arthur Warnes, and the

boundary has been drawn

accordingly. However, no.14 is

in a sympathetic style and of

the same period so its inclusion

could be considered,

particularly if the owners are

happy with this.

3) Features which have already

been altered will not be

affected by either the CA

designation or the Art 4.

Direction.

Private

individual 7

(resident within

boundary of

proposed

conservation

area)

Thank you for your letter dated 19 November

regarding the Marlborough Road Proposed

Conservation Area and Article 4 Direction.

Having lived at .. Marlborough Road since 1985,

I am interested in maintaining the essential

characteristics and charm of the street.

However, if the method used is that of an Article

4 Direction as described in your letter, then I

object on the following grounds:

1) The proposed restrictions

will only apply to street-facing

elevations – for most properties

the side and rear elevations will

not be included. The

exceptions will be properties on

street corners that have two

elevations to public spaces.

2) Roof coverings are an

important part of the historic

character of a property, and the

1. Elevations. The street’s value lies in the

elevations that face the street and not those that

cannot be seen from the street. I object to

works at the rear of the buildings requiring

planning permission.

2. Roofs. Many houses have already had slates

replaced with other material, and they remain in

character. I object to future changes to roof

material requiring planning permission.

3. Domestic microwave antenna. Three houses

on the opposite side of the road to me have

microwave equipment, and I do not find them

obtrusive. I object to permission being required

for similar sized equipment to be installed.

4. Roof windows. Several houses have roof

windows at the rear of the buildings and I see no

reason why they should not continue to be

allowed. I object to permission being required

for roof windows at the rear of properties.

5. Doors and windows. Several houses have

had their windows replaced in wood, and some

in plastic. I do not find them obtrusive,. None

have been replaced by a single pane of glass,

which would look greatly out of character. I

object to permission being required for the

installation of plastic windows.

retention of existing slate roofs

would be an important objective

of both the Conservation Area

designation and the Article 4

Direction. Alterations that have

already been made will not be

affected.

3) Satellite dishes often are

intrusive features when placed

on street facing frontages and it

will be an objective of the

Designation and Direction to

restrict their installation to side

and rear elevations.

4) Roof windows at the rear of

properties (ie not facing a

public road or space) will not be

affected by the proposals (see

(1) above).

5) Upvc (plastic) windows on

street facing frontages can

significantly undermine the

distinctive character of a

streetscape, especially where

there is consistency in the

appearance of properties, as in

Marlborough Road. It will be an

objective of the Designation

and Direction to restrict their

installation to side and rear

elevations.

Private

individual 8

(resident within

boundary of

proposed

conservation

area)

If the Marlborough Road Conservation Area is to

include the bungalows west of the Arthur

Warnes houses then a similar argument could

be used to include all of Landsdowne Road,

three properties are worthy of consideration - the

house across the far end of Landsdowne Road

(No 8), and the property on the west (No.2). and

as can be seen on the OS map (but not as

easily on the ground) No. 4 is in a similar style.

All were built just after the First World War.

The key green lung for the proposed

conservation area are of course the bowling

greens on Landsdowne Road and I recommend

inclusion (such that the remain green!)

Additional comment following IBC response:

The gables with triple ball finials on Cauldwell

Thank you for the note about

the possible additions to the

CA, including the bowling

green. We have also had a

suggestion to include no.14

Marlborough Rd, the JA

Sherman house which is on the

Local List.

We have a lack of background

information about the

bungalows – I think the ones

fronting Marlborough Road

were included because of their

distinctive detailing, rather than

any firm information about their

construction by Warnes. The

slightly less original design of

Hall Road are worthy of consideration but as you

say have been adulterated, not least by turning

the ground floors into retail - and all 12 ball

finials are still in place!

However if the proposed Conservation Area is to

be extended then there is argument to include

those at the top of St John's Road including the

strangely ordinary 166 which I understand was

Arthur Warnes first building in this area.

On second inspection the bungalows in

Landsdowne Road are fairly ordinary but the

bowling greens of Marlborough Bowling Club

provide an essential green lung (note that there

are no public open spaces, parks or recreation

grounds within half a mile).

I intend to revisit Suffolk Records Office over the

next few days - I know they have records and

plans of Arthur Warnes developments in this

area.

PS The Arthur Warnes houses at the top of St

John's Road are those which back onto No. 14

Marlborough Road

the Landsdowne Road

bungalows and some

alterations such as Upvc

windows were quoted as

reasons not to include them.

Are you able to confirm if the

bungalows were definitely not

by Warnes?

We are still a bit cautious about

extending the boundary away

from the compact group of

semis, because there are a

number of properties in

adjacent streets that could

potentially be included – the

group with gables and ball

finials fronting Cauldwell Hall

road, for instance. They share

many of the characteristics of

the Warnes houses, but have

also been altered.

IBC response to additional

comment:

I would be very interested in

any information you find at the

records office. When I get a

gap in the weather, I need to

have a look at some of the

additional properties that have

been highlighted (including the

St Johns Rd houses).

Private

individual 8

(resident within

boundary of

proposed

conservation

area)

IBC report of phone call:

The caller is opposed to the designation of a

conservation area. He is opposed 1) in principle,

on the grounds that property owner’s rights

should not be interfered with, and 2) in the case

of Marlborough Rd, where the residents can

generally be trusted to maintain their properties

to a high standard. He did express concern,

though, about the alteration of front gardens for

vehicle hardstanding.

I discussed briefly with the caller the scope of

both CA designation and the Art 4.

Caller’s follow-up e-mail:

Thank you for your telephone call of 3rd

I discussed briefly with the

caller the scope of both CA

designation and the Art 4. I

mentioned the fact that solar

panels may be excluded from

the Article 4 (see other

comments above).

January. We would like to confirm that we are, in

principle, opposed to the above proposals.

We do not think that anyone at present resident

in the street or anyone seeking to move here

would make changes to their property that would

be unsuitable, as the nature and appearance of

the buildings is what attracts people to move

here in the first place.

Solar panels and satellite receivers are part of

21st Century life and their addition to houses

should not, in our opinion, entail the additional

expense of obtaining planning consent.

One proposal that we would support would be

the restriction on the removal of front walls to

provide parking on frontages as this would

further restrict already limited on-street parking.

Conservation

and Design

Panel.

Comments on

the proposals

made at the

Panel meeting

on 23rd

Jan

2014

The Secretary asked for the Panel’s comments

on the information they had received regarding

the proposed Marlborough road Conservation

Area. The Panel was supportive of the

proposal. Mr Dyball asked why the terrace on

Tokio Road was not included. The Secretary

explained that whilst built by the same builder

they were too altered to merit inclusion.

Members had no further comments.

No action needed

Reproduction of Letter ‘A’ from ‘private individual 4’ (see below)