Two listed building questions

[88v8]

And a pair or two of these
http://www.safetyhut.co.uk/product.aspx?productid=207

Ivor

 

[Penners]

And, with a nod to someone else's post in another thread, and to the great Douglas Adams, perhaps a pair of these?

 

[Fowler]

Hi Guys,
We are in south Wales, the firs we have planted are growing quite well, we brought them on in large buckets so we could easily control the nutrient addition. We have managed to grow them to around 4 foot in 18 months. We think we could better that if we use an 18 hour light hydroponics system.
All of the problems we have here are opportunist because its easy to get in, we are not stupid enough to think that people will forget we are here if we cannot be seen, however, stopping the kids from getting in the garden will stop the damage and stop them taking our bins and burning them!
This may be a stupid question but is there a law that governs the maximum size of a plant pot?
I believe dangerous animals are illegal but we really would not want to cause harm to anyone but we do believe we should be allowed to protect our property.
Regards
Steve n Sarah

 

[Flyfisher]

I'd be surprised if conifers would provide a solid enough barrier and also can't imagine that other plants would readily grow up them. Any plant that did require support would not find it on the flimsy outside of the conifer branches and the stronger internal branches would likely be too shaded.

Would a chain-link fence not be possible? This would provide an immediate 'message' and security and would provide a good framework for prickly climbing plants as suggested above, eventually hiding the chain link completely. I'd also suggest adding pyracantha to the shortlist of defensive plants - you'd have to be very well protected to push your way through its vicious thorns!

 

[Fowler]

We proposed the chainlink fence option to the council who basically told us that any application that was submitted with this proposal included would be turned down. Can we put this up within the boundary without their permission?
Regards
Steve n Sarah

 

[Flyfisher]

My understanding is that any fence/wall over 2m in height requires planning permission, as does any fence over 1m if it's adjacent to a highway. Last year I clarified with our council that 'adjacent' means closer than 2m. Otherwise, no planning consent is required.

There may also be 'suitability' considerations to ensure the fence/wall is 'in keeping' with the general area. This is a bit more subjective but not too difficult to understand or work around. We recently had problems with people accessing a field and sought permission to install a length of steel security fencing because a wooden one would likely have been vandalised (as the previous farm gates had been).

Knowing that a steel fence would not be in keeping with all the neighbouring residential wooden fences, we proposed to 'face' the steel fence with wood so that the steel fence was invisible to the neighbours. We were granted permission and erected the steel fence, leaving it for a month so that everyone could clearly see it before facing it with wood to match all the other fences. We've had no problems since. Good fences make good neighbours :wink:

 

[malcolm]

I can understand your frustrations. It is tricky to figure out the planning system and it's intentions sometimes. They want the nice building and the wall to stay upright. You are probably keen on that too.

The key thing for the boundary will be to protect the listed wall and make sure you are still able to rebuild the wall at a later stage at some point when you have the funds. My thought is get the building right first and then fix the wall. Without the building there would be no need for the wall, so securing the future of the building should be the best way to protect the wall.

I would suggest installing a temporary fence on your side of the wall which could be removed later without damaging the wall. That should reduce child traffic over the wall and help secure the property while you work to repair it. Heras fencing is one possibility that should bother nobody as it is very clearly temporary, but if the project could take some time it might work out cheaper to stick a close boarded wooden fence up. Planning deals with permanent structures. I very much doubt anyone will take you to court to argue with the logic of installing temporary fencing to protect a restoration project from fire starting children whatever form that fencing might take.

Nobody has ever complained at me for installing a temporary structure to facilitate much needed restoration work, and I've never applied for permission for those structures.

 

[Penners]

I believe dangerous animals are illegal but we really would not want to cause harm to anyone

Er... I wasn't being entirely serious about the leopards.

 

[livias]

How about putting up Heras fencing on your side of the wall. It is cheap when bought second hand, pretty secure and definitely temporary. OK so the kids can get to the wall but they can't get any further

 

[Fowler]

I believe dangerous animals are illegal but we really would not want to cause harm to anyone

Er... I wasn't being entirely serious about the leopards.

I guessed that but it would be pretty cool to have them as guard dogs. lol.

 

[Fowler]

How about putting up Heras fencing on your side of the wall. It is cheap when bought second hand, pretty secure and definitely temporary. OK so the kids can get to the wall but they can't get any further

We can do that but what happens long term? if we get the change of use sorted but still get problems with kids after that what can we do? If a fence between the boundary wall and the house is an option then thats what we will do but influence does the planning department have on an un-curtilaged listing?
Regards
Steve n Sarah

 

[Gareth Hughes]

You keep referring to an "un-curtilaged listing" but I doubt there is any such thing in this case - the building is listed, and has its curtilage, which would be determined in terms of the situation on the ground but probably includes everything up to the property boundary as it was at the time of listing. Ultimately it's a matter of fact and degree that only the courts can decide.
However, there's also a listed wall on the property - obviously that is unlikely to have its own curtilage for listing purposes but if I'm reading the situation right, it is within (possibly even defines) the curtilage of the main building anyway. Any other structure within the curtilage of the main building and dating from before 1948 is also covered by the listing. It may be that the curtilage for listing purposes extends beyond the wall, but it's unlikely to stop somewhere between the building and the wall.
With regard to Flyfisher's clarification from his local council regarding fencing, although in general terms, means of enclosure up to a certain height and in certain locations are Permitted Development (ie, don't require a planning application), those rules specifically do not apply in the curtilage of a listed building and any development that would normally be PD (including walls and fences) does require permission.
I'd certainly second the suggestion of Heras fencing (being temporary and only in place for "the duration of the works" - however long that may be :wink: ) which will hopefully help get the local kids out of the habit of using the land as a playground. Anything else, other than planting, is going to require permission.

 

[88v8]

Anything else, other than planting, is going to require permission.

You may know that Gareth is a Conservation Officer, although you would always need to speak to your own CO about listing matters, as I think it fair to say that the decisions of individual COs can to a degree be idiosyncratic.

I would be surprised if permission were given for a fence that visually isolated the listed wall from the property, or a fence that effectively abandons the wall to destruction by yobs.

However, if you were to plant as has been suggested, I would not hesitate to put up ahem, temporary, supports and protection for the plants while they become established.
One advantage of hawthorn as a hedge is that it can be layed, and once done this will make an impenetrable barrier. Takes a few years, but it will keep people out in a way that conifers never will, and it will look old-fashioned in a way that conifers never do. Hazel can also be layed, although of course it lacks the prickles.
http://www.hedgelaying.org.uk/

Ivor

 

[Flyfisher]

With regard to Flyfisher's clarification from his local council regarding fencing, although in general terms, means of enclosure up to a certain height and in certain locations are Permitted Development (ie, don't require a planning application), those rules specifically do not apply in the curtilage of a listed building and any development that would normally be PD (including walls and fences) does require permission.

Fair point - I should have mentioned that curtilage was not an issue in our case as the fence in question was two fields away from the listed house. However, one other thing to consider when there are vandalism problems is to report each and every incident to the police as criminal damage. They may be unable to apprehend the culprits but they will issue you crime numbers, which establish a formal record of events. A concentration of such crime numbers establishes a pattern and concentration of problems, which then pushes the matter higher up their priority list. The police will increase their general presence and they will conduct house to house enquiries, which also makes their presence more visible. Of course the culprits, or their parents, will likely deny all knowledge of anything but having to deny it to a pair of police officers on their doorstep can magically reduce the problems. Even if it doesn't, a formal and indisputable record of events In the form of crime numbers can be very helpful in future planning discussions and helps to 'share' the problem with the authorities and the wider community. Think of it as playing the 'long game'.

 

[Abi Cott]

The most effective tool I've found against young vandals is a mobile phone camera. Walk out to a moderate distance, take photos of those in the vicinity in such a way that they know your doing it, and then go back indoors WITHOUT saying anything.

 

[Fowler]

Thanks for the replies guys, It looks like we are destined to go down the planting option but I am going to get the CO and planning guys back for a chat first, It was the local planning officer that seemed to have the problem with the fence and not the CO. It does seem ridiculous that we are allowed to plant things that will harm people but are not allowed to put up a fence which wont. I guess that makes sense in some twisted way.
Regards
Steve n Sarah

 

[88v8]

It does seem ridiculous that we are allowed to plant things that will harm people but are not allowed to put up a fence which wont.

It's all about the visuals.

And the plants will harm no one if they keep out.

Ivor

 

[Penners]

I quite agree with Ivor. Thorny hedges will only harm people who try to penetrate them - and in your shoes I'd be completely relaxed about any harm that might come to intruding vandals.