A nursery that was at war with a ‘ludicrous’ council that had actually ordered to tear down a 6ft fence built to protect children has won its fight.

Imperial Day Nursery, in Westcliff-on-sea, had released an appeal versus Southend Council last year after it ruled that it should remove or lower the height of a big fence that towers at the front of the residential or commercial property.

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

Now, bringing an end to a years-long feud, the nursery has actually been informed it can keep its fencing as the Planning Inspectorate chose it was not ‘prominent’ or ‘out of keeping’ with the character of the local location and criticised the council for ‘unreasonable’ behaviour.

When MailOnline had visited last October, parents had actually expressed their fury at the council, implicating them of prioritising the ‘looks of the street’ over the safety of their kids.

But neighbours living on the domestic street in the seaside residential area branded the fencing as ‘awful and unattractive’ and wanted it took apart.

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

Fences towering 1.83 m high were put up at the Imperial Day Nursery, in Westcliff-on-sea, to enable children to play beyond public view

The nursery has won an appeal against Southend Council after it ruled that it should get rid of or decrease the height of the big fence at the front of the residential or commercial property

Imperial Day Nursery then lodged a retrospective preparation application, however the council rejected it, claiming it was ‘aesthetically popular and plain’ and ‘out of keeping’ with the surrounding area.

The nursery then stepped up its fight by appealing the council’s enforcement action - which has resulted in a success.

Andrew Walker, a preparing officer within the Planning Inspectorate, reversed the council’s decision after a site check out in which he ruled the fence and other structures might stay undamaged, EssexLive reported.

He stated in his choice: ‘I do not discover that either appeal plan appears aesthetically popular, stark or materially out of keeping within the local context.

‘No damage is caused to the character and look of the site, street scene or location.

‘The degree of fencing upon the frontage under both schemes is fairly essential to separate the personal residential section from the industrial nursery section.’

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

The expenses decision reads: ‘The Planning Practice Guidance recommends that expenses might be awarded versus a celebration who has acted unreasonably and consequently triggered the party using for expenses to sustain unneeded or squandered cost in the appeal process.

‘The Council declined the planning application and provided the subsequent enforcement notice on the basis of a single primary concern.

‘Its case, which continued to be pursued in defending the ensuing appeals, was that the appeal developments substantially hurt the character and look of the site, the streetscene and the area more widely.

‘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 extensive and high close-boarded fencing serving the Essex County Bowling Club, with very long areas straight abutting the highway - quite near to the appeal residential or commercial property and on the same side of Imperial Avenue - does not appear to have been considered at all by the Council in pertaining to its view.

‘There is definitely absolutely nothing in the officer reports (on each appeal scheme) which describes it.

‘Indeed, they state that “The streetscene in this part of Imperial Avenue has a strong open character with low front boundary treatments …” To make that declaration without mentioning, considering or assessing the very obvious and considerable nearby counterexample was both awry and unreasonable.

‘It seems to me that, had the single main concern in dispute been more appropriately 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 unnecessary expenditure.

‘I for that reason discover that unreasonable behaviour leading to unneeded or lost cost, as described in the Planning Practice Guidance, has actually been shown which complete awards of expenses are justified in respect of both appeals.’

Speaking to MailOnline outside the nursery, moms and dads had formerly told of how they felt more secure with the structure remaining in place.

Parents told how they would feel safer if they fences remained in location as it obstructs the general public from being able to see into the ‘infant space’ at the front of the building
blogspot.com
They say that previous to its usage, complete strangers might quickly peer into the ‘infant space’ at the front of the structure, and that the fence also permits kids to securely play in the outdoor location in front of the residential or commercial property.

One mom, Natalie Toby, said: ‘I’m a security advisor so from my point of view, it keeps children concealed away from the public walking past.

‘You can’t really see where the front door is unless you go all the way down there, so they’re keeping access paths good and tucked away.

‘The nursery has been here for 30 years so I do not see why the council are using the same rules that they would to domestic houses.

‘New-build schools are being constructed with fence lines not different to this, so why are they not enabling this?

‘Surely the security of the kids is more vital than the aesthetic appeals.’

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

She added: ‘So it’s not practically keeping it closed off from individuals with harmful intentions, it’s unexpected things as well.

‘They have actually got susceptible kids because front room, and having the fence up keeps the infants safe.

‘It’s absurd, I do not understand why the council are being so persistent about it.

‘Surely protecting kids and their safety is paramount to aesthetic appeals.

‘I do not want my child in a room where people can simply stroll past and browse.’

Another moms and dad had echoed the exact same issues, stating: ‘As a teacher myself, I comprehend the value of protecting kids, and I wouldn’t want the fence to be taken down.

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

‘It’s a brilliant nursery and they have actually got the finest interest of the kids at heart.

‘Prior to it being like this, you might see into the baby room.

‘When my eldest was in the infant room, you could see her, you would be able to wave. But obviously, that’s various as a parent than a complete stranger having the ability to search in.

‘It feels a lot more secure now, understanding that no-one can see in or get in quickly. It’s very safe.

‘Having the fence likewise means they can use the outside area for kids. I believe they have Santa there at Christmas and stuff like that.’

She added: ‘They do attempt and make it look as appealing as possible too, so they change it seasonally, so it’s all Halloween-themed at the minute.

‘I do not believe it’s an eyesore.’

Southend Council bought for the fence to be taken down or minimized in height after discovering that it was ‘materially out of keeping’ with the surrounding area. This has been overturned on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate

The council’s enforcement notice for the removal of the fence had specified that the height, design and ‘solid look’ of the fence deemed it unacceptable for the area.

The decision notice mentioned: ‘The advancement at the site, by factor of its height, design and extent, and the solid look of the fencing within the frontage, appears visually prominent, plain, and materially out of keeping with the typically large setting of the surrounding location, and has resulted in substantial damage to the character and appearance of the site, the streetscene and the area more extensively.’

And now, the Planning Inspectorate’s appeal decision states that the fence does not appear ‘excessive’ or ‘incongruous’ and can stay standing.

Talking to MailOnline, one neighbour had stated of the advancement: ‘It is a bit undesirable. I was astonished they were even permitted to put it up, but ends up they weren’t.

‘I comprehend why they did it, however preparing approval is planning permission and you have to comply with it.

‘My personal opinion is that it is a bit unsightly. It would have bothered me more if I was right next door to it. But even from here, it is unpleasant.’

Another neighbour echoed the exact same issues, stating: ‘It’s not great, it looks awful.

‘And the planning was retrospective also.’

While a lot of parents said the fencing made them feel much safer, one moms and dad said the outside area is extremely hardly ever utilized.

She said: ‘We’re not too troubled in any case. I can understand that a few of the neighbours don’t especially like it.

‘Before it was up, we were funnelled a different method. So really you would just see into the infant room if you were queuing to get your children.

‘So, if you were a complete stranger not part of the nursery, you would have to really come off the street, gaze in a window and be rather obvious about it.

‘I know the nursery are saying it’s for protecting however when it’s just the moms and dads having a fast appearance in to see their kids, I don’t think that’s much of an issue.

‘And I have actually never seen anyone use that outside space. To my understanding, it’s not really utilized.’

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

He stated: ‘I’ve really emailed the nursery revealing assistance for their petition.

‘It appears like the council is looking at the view of the place and the visual appeals than the security of our kids.

‘The entire point was to protect the kids.

‘I feel a lot more secure leaving my kid here understanding the fence is up.

‘It stops people from seeing in and having the ability to look at the kids.’

A granny getting her grand son from the nursery included: ‘I believe it’s dreadful. The fence gives a little safety for the kids.

‘It’s very odd that the council are doing this.’

The nursery stated: ‘Imperial Day Nursery has actually successfully defended itself in its disagreement with Southend City Council over the frontage of the residential or commercial property, both Nursery and property.

‘We are delighted with the result of the appeals including our applications for costs.