LONDON BOROUGH OF SUTTON

THE EXECUTIVE

TUESDAY, 3 MAY 2011

11.30 am at the

Sutton Life Centre, Alcorn Close, Sutton, SM3 9PZ

SECOND DISPATCH

To all members of The Executive:-

The following papers, which were not available for dispatch with the agenda, are attached. Please bring them with you to the meeting:-

7. STANLEY PARK HIGH SCHOOL - PROPOSED PLANNING BRIEF (Pages 1 - 2)

To agree the Planning Brief for the Site.

11. ANY URGENT ITEMS, BROUGHT FORWARD AT THE DIRECTION OF THE CHAIR, WHO HAS AGREED THE REASON FOR URGENCY (Pages 3 - 144)

There are two urgent items brought forward, at the direction of the Chair, as urgent items to allow them to be discussed before going onto the Council Meeting of 9 May 2011.

a) Consultation Response and Approval of Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area Designation (Pages 3-78)

b) Consultation Response and Approval of the Proposed Additions to the Local List (Pages 79-144)

28 April 2011

Enquiries to: Richard Shortman. Democratic Services Manager Tel: 020 8770 5120 Fax: 020 8770 5404 E-mail: [email protected]

Copies of reports are available in large print on request This page is intentionally left blank Page 1 Agenda Item 7

London Borough of Sutton

THE EXECUTIVE – 3 MAY 2011

REFERENCE FROM PLANNING ADVISORY GROUP

Ward Location: Sutton South Executive Councillor: Jayne McCoy Sutton Central

Extract from the Minutes of the meeting held on 26/04/11

--/11 STANLEY PARK HIGH SCHOOL – PROPOSED PLANNING BRIEF

Further to Minute 39/10 Members had before them a summary of consultation responses to the draft Planning Brief for the Stanley Park High School. Following consideration of representations, approval was sought for the brief, as revised, as well as Members’ agreement to the preparation of a Development Brief for the site.

Consultation responses had shown a strong preference for the option of retaining part of the school site to accommodate a Special Educational Needs school and redeveloping the remainder for housing. Therefore officers had redrafted the document to show how the site should be developed in this way. The need for other changes to the document was also explained.

However, there had been some criticism of the lack of detail in relation to the location of proposed houses etc and officers intended, subject to Members’ approval, to prepare a Development Brief which would assist with the disposal of the site and both provide further detail and an opportunity for further involvement from residents. Consultation would take place in June or July 2011. Members discussed whether this additional consultation would be confusing and the need to be very clear when the consultation is circulated about why this is being done. It was agreed that the consultation document did not need to come back to Planning Advisory Group but be distributed to members outside of the meeting. It was also requested that officers include ward councillors.

Resolved: (i) To request that officers prepare a Development Brief for the site.

(ii) That officers will undertake consultation on the draft Development Brief to enable residents to have greater input; that officers include ward councillors, and that the draft consultation document is distributed to Planning Advisory Group members outside of the meeting.

(iii) To RECOMMEND that the Executive approve the revised Planning Brief as a Supplementary Planning Document and as a material consideration for development control purposes.

Page 2

This page is intentionally left blank Page 3 Agenda Item 11

London Borough of Sutton

THE EXECUTIVE – 3 MAY 2011

REFERENCE FROM PLANNING ADVISORY GROUP

Ward Location: Sutton South Executive Councillor: Jayne McCoy Sutton Central

Extract from the Minutes of the meeting held on 26/04/11

--/11 URGENT ITEM BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE CHAIR - CONSULTATION RESPONSE AND APPROVAL OF SUTTON CROSSROADS CONSERVATION AREA DESIGNATION

Further to Minutes 35/10 and 40/10 officers had conducted a character appraisal in accordance with English Heritage best practice guidance for the purposes of consultation. English Heritage responded positively to the draft Character Appraisal commenting that it would provide an excellent basis for the designation of a Conservation Area. Public consultation ran for a six week period from 5 January to 16 February 2011.

Members considered consultation responses attached as an appendix to the report. Whilst responses were low they were in overall support for that work that had been undertaken and were positive about preserving Sutton’s past. The Chair requested that the report include responses received from Local Committees, the Sutton Town Centre Partnership, the Economic Development Advisory Group and the Conservation Area Advisory Consultative Group as it was generally felt that they had all supported these proposals.

There had been representations to expand the boundary of the proposed conservation area to include properties in Grove Road and St Nicholas Church and the officers response to not including these was upheld by Members.

Resolved: (i) That the proposed Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area be forwarded to The Executive for approval.

(ii) To RECOMMEND that The Executive agrees the proposed Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area.

(iii) To RECOMMEND that subject to the views of The Executive recommend that Full Council approves the Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area for the purposes of: designation; inclusion in the Site Development Policies DPD: Submission draft for purposes of the Examination in Public in June 2011; and for Development Control purposes.

Page 4

This page is intentionally left blank Page 5 Agenda Item 11

London Borough of Sutton CMT – 30 March 2011 Planning Advisory Group – 26 April 2011 The Executive – 3 May 2011 Council – 9 May 2011 Report of the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation CONSULTATION RESPONSE AND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONSERVATION AREA DESIGNATION Ward Location: Sutton Central, Author: Claire Gray (x6453) Sutton South Area Served: Sutton Town Lead Councillor: Jayne McCoy/Graham Tope Centre

Key Decision Report

Summary This Report sets out the response to the public consultation on the proposed Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area and outlines the key issues raised. Recommendations a. I recommend that the Planning Advisory Group considers the consultation responses received and officer views and recommendations, and, subject to its views, agrees that the responses and the proposed Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area be forwarded to the Executive for approval. b. Subject to the views of the Executive, I recommend that the Council approve the Sutton Town Centre High Street Crossroads Conservation Area for the purposes of: (i) designation; (ii) inclusion in the Site Development Policies DPD: Submission draft for purposes of the Examination in Public in June 2011; and (iii) Development Control purposes. 1. Background 1.1 Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5) sets out Government policy on heritage assets1. This proposed Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area provides an evidence base in relation to the historic environment and heritage assets in this part of Sutton town centre, in accordance with the requirements of PPS5 (Policy HE2)2.

1.2 At the Planning Advisory Group (PAG) meeting in October 2010 it was resolved (Minute Ref: 35/10) to complete a Heritage Study of Sutton town centre. An informed appraisal of the heritage assets of the town centre identified the need to undertake a Character Appraisal in the southern part of the town centre with the view to designation as a Conservation Area (CA).

1 Heritage assets are defined as any building, monument, site, place, area or landscape having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions. 2 Policy HE2.1 “Local Planning Authorities should ensure that they have evidence about the historic environment and heritage assets in their area and that this is publicly documented.” Agenda Item 11 Page 6

1.3 The Draft Character Appraisal of Sutton High Street Crossroads was prepared in accordance with best practice guidance from English Heritage (EH) and in accordance with EH guidance ‘Conservation Principles’ (2008). Officers have undertaken a comparison of the proposed CA with existing designations elsewhere in suburban London and are confident that it is comparable in terms of heritage value.3

1.4 On 7 December 2010 the PAG endorsed (Minute 40/10) the findings of the analysis of the heritage assets of Sutton Crossroads area and approved the Conservation Area Character Appraisal for the purposes of consultation and for purposes of informing the preparation of planning briefs for opportunity sites within the town centre, and for development control purposes. PAG recommended approval of the draft Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area for consultation purposes by way of DDN. If approval is given, the intention is to designate the CA and include the Character Appraisal as part of the evidence base to the Site Development Policies DPD for purposes of submission to the Secretary of State. 1.5 PAG also agreed the consultation programme, however, requested that it be extended to six weeks from the recommended four week period and that a presentation be taken on the item to all the Local Committees. 2. English Heritage Involvement 2.1 The Character Appraisal was prepared in consultation with EH. Following a site visit to the town centre, officers from EH agreed with the initial conclusions about the potential for designation of a CA. They considered it appropriate to consult the public and were positive about encouraging shop front improvements. The draft Character Appraisal was subsequently forwarded to EH officers who responded positively saying it would provide an ‘excellent basis for the designation of a Conservation Area’. 3. Consultation Arrangements 3.1 Consultation ran for a six week period, commencing on the 5 January 2011 and concluding on 16 February 2011. Consultation arrangements included: x A presentation to all Local Committees, to the Sutton Town Centre Partnership Meeting, to the Economic Development Advisory Group, and to the Conservation Area Advisory Consultative Group; x Letters to the owners of all properties within the proposed Conservation Area; x A press release; x An article in the Sutton Guardian and the Council’s free magazine ‘Sutton Scene’; x An exhibition at Sutton Central Library throughout the consultation period which was staffed on Wednesday 19 January and Monday 7 February 2011; x Posters in prominent locations in the High Street, including in the foyer of Sutton Station x Leaflets and reference copies of the consultation documents lodged at all the Libraries in the Borough and at the Civic Offices and Denmark Road Offices; x Information provided on the Council’s internet and consultation web pages; x Publication of a hotline number to help people with any queries they may have. 4. Key Issues Raised Through the Consultation 4.1 Feedback following presentations to all Local Committees, the Sutton Town Centre Partnership, the Economic Development Advisory Group, and the Conservation

3 Comparisons have been made with the Conservation Areas designated in Bromley, Croydon, Forest Gate, Surbiton, town centres. It is obviously not comparable with historic market towns or destinations such as Oxford/Regents Street. Page 7 Agenda Item 11

Area Advisory Consultative Group was positive with overall support for the proposed Conservation Area designation as well as Character Appraisal document. 4.2 There were a total of 10 formal respondents, comprised of nine individuals and one local group. The full list of respondents is set out in Appendix 1. One representation was received one day late and it is recommended that this response is considered by members. 4.3 The schedule in Appendix 2 summarises all of the representations received along with Officers’ views and recommendations. 4.4 There was overall support for the work that has been undertaken in respect of the Proposed Conservation Area of Sutton Crossroads. Many responses were positive about preserving Sutton’s past and welcomed the proposal to designate this CA. The full Character Appraisal document for the Sutton Town Centre High Street Crossroads Proposed Conservation Area is attached in Appendix 3. Improvements to Building Facades Representations 4.5 Four representations were received in relation to encouraging better appearance of shop fronts within the proposed CA and one representation was received in relation to improving the appearance of upper storeys. Officer Response 4.6 It is recognised that poor shop fronts and fascias have a negative impact on the quality of the proposed CA however it is considered that the Character Appraisal document adequately discusses the importance of good quality shop fronts and improvements to upper storeys, therefore no changes are proposed. The council will continue to pursue possibilities to secure grant funding for shop front improvements. The council will also explore the use of Local Development Orders and the need for specific shop front design guidance in Heritage areas given that Cheam Village, Carshalton Village, Wallington Green and, subject to approval, Sutton Town Centre Crossroads are now all CAs. Changes to the proposed Conservation Area Boundary Representations 4.7 One resident suggested the inclusion of St Nicholas Church in the proposed Conservation Area. Two representations were made in respect of including the converted dwelling at 36 Grove Road and one of those representations suggested inclusion of the adjacent building, now obscured behind the shopfronts at 44-54 Grove Road. One representation questioned the inclusion of the Morrisons site in the proposed CA. Officer Response 4.8 The St Nicholas Church site is a set apart from the remainder of the proposed CA and is physically separated by the Civic Centre site. Inclusion of the site in the CA would create boundaries which are illogical and not defensible. In addition, St Nicholas Church benefits from protection as a Grade II listed building and Listed Building Consent is required for nearly all alterations. It is recommended that the CA boundary is not extended to include St Nicholas Church and it is considered that the statutory listed provides sufficient protection in terms of the building’s historic value. 4.9 The property at 36 Grove Road and adjacent properties are set apart and separated from the High Street which is the main focus of the proposed CA. The Grove Road frontage of Morrisons further isolates these properties. It is considered that the Agenda Item 11 Page 8

properties would be more suitably included in a schedule of Potential Additions to the Local List, as identified in the Site Development Policies Document (see a separate item on the Local List elsewhere on the agenda). 4.10 As a large site, with three frontages, the Morrisons supermarket currently has a negative impact on the historic value of the area. Any future redevelopment of the site has the potential to significantly impact further on the adjacent and surrounding historic environment. The impact of any new development on the existing historic environment should carefully be considered and it is therefore recommended that the Morrisons site is retained within the CA boundary. 7-9 Carshalton Road Representation 4.11 One representation was received in relation to the semi-detached properties at this address. The respondent suggested that the properties should be retained and reference to the redevelopment potential of the sites should be removed from the CA document. Officer Response 4.12 These two properties are isolated from the remainder of the terrace on the High Street and are both in poor repair with detailing obscured and a variety of replacement windows installed. In addition, shop fronts at ground floor level detract from the original building and overall it is considered that the buildings do not contribute positively to the area. It is therefore considered that no changes are made to the document. Promotion of Heritage Assets Representations 4.13 The Sutton and Cheam Society suggested that signage and information boards would be helpful in emphasising Sutton’s heritage assets to the public. Officer Response 4.14 The opportunity for street signs to be updated to bring attention to the special character and history of the area is discussed in the Crossroads Conservation Area document. This reference will be broadened to include other methods of emphasising Sutton’s heritage, such as information boards. Potential Costs and Restrictions Associated with a Conservation Area Designation Representations 4.15 One landowner expressed concern regarding any additional costs and development restrictions for properties within a CA. Officer Response 4.16 There are some additional planning controls in Conservation Areas: including the need to apply for planning permission for some minor developments where the council needs to ensure development is in keeping with the local character, and certain trees are given added protection. The purpose of the CA and these additional controls is to provide the appropriate development guidance to landowners and developers, emphasising the need to preserve and enhance the area’s local history and the historic value of the buildings. Page 9 Agenda Item 11

Potential re-routing of traffic Representations 4.17 One resident expressed concern regarding an indicative road link, from outside Sutton Station, through to Grove Road. The Economic Development Advisory Group raised the issue of potentially conflicting interests where a road link proposal would require the removal of a building (for example, the Masonic Hall) within the CA. Officer Response 4.18 The road link, as shown in Appendix 1 to the document, illustrates proposals that may affect buildings and structures within the CA. The road link is not a proposal arising from the proposed CA and information has been publicly available through extensive consultation on the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan. 4.19 The CA designation does not preclude development but does require an assessment of the significance of Heritage Assets. In undertaking the Character Appraisal, officers were aware of other town centre objectives (in particular the Sutton Station SPD and the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan) and the need to reflect this in the Character Appraisal. 5. Next Steps 5.1 Subject to approval, the Sutton Town Centre High Street Crossroads Conservation Area will be designated. All respondents to the consultation, residents within the Conservation Area, Members and the Town Centre Partnership will be advised of the outcome. In addition, a designation statement will be posted on the council’s website and a general press release will be issued. 5.2 The designated CA and supporting Character Appraisal will go on to be included in, and form part of the evidence base for the Site Development Policies DPD for the purposes of Examination in Public in June 2011. 6. Financial Implications 6.1 The costs associated with the designation of the CA relate to informing respondents and residents of the designation by post, which would be at a cost of approximately £35. Legislation requires that a notice be published in the London Gazette for the designation of any Conservation Area. The cost of this notice is £50 (ex VAT). The costs of postage and the notice will be contained within the 2011/12 revenue budget for Strategic Planning and Projects. 6.2 The Council will not be liable for costs or financial aid should the owner wish to repair or develop a building or structure with the CA. 6.3 Officers will continue to pursue every opportunity to secure additional finance and grant funding to put towards a shop front / advert improvement scheme. 7. Influence of the Council’s Core Values 7.1 Consulting with the local community and all stakeholders during preparation of the CA contributed towards working in partnership and making the Council’s services open and accessible. Taking a strategic approach to the future of the town centre facilitates investing wisely in the future, ensuring all stakeholders see the big picture. 8. Contribution to the Achievement of the Council’s Policy Aims 8.1 The Council’s goals include achieving environmental sustainability and encouraging enterprise and employment. The protection of this heritage area will help to achieve these goals. 9. Equalities Impact Assessment 9.1 None. Agenda Item 11 Page 10

APPENDIX 1 List of Individuals / Organisations that made representations on the Proposed Crossroads Conservation Area Local Groups The Sutton and Cheam Society Individuals RichardWilson Charles Martin Karen Gillett Neil Galahad Rajka Kuhar* Michael Coleman Pamela Wright Tony Monblat Roland Sparkes * This representation was received on 17 February 2011, one day late. Page 11 Agenda Item 11

APPENDIX 2 Schedule of Responses and Officer’s Views and Recommendations Representations on Sutton Town Centre High Street Crossroads: Proposed Conservation Area - Draft

Heritage Character Appraisal Agenda Item 11 Comment ID Nature of Representation Text Response/ Officer Respondent No / Name and Officer Response Organisation Recommendation HSCCA1 Object I'm concerned that this change to the road layout affects some people who live in and around Mulgrave Road. I live very near 498786 Mrs Pamela Wright to the area where the traffic will be re routed and I have not actually received anything from the LBoS to communicate this might happen. Its is pure good fortune I have drilled down on the LBoS web site to find this important consultation and related documents. I think the site needs to flag these consultations more obviously on the site and write to those whom this particular project will affect and th LBoS should take into account not everyone uses the internet - e.g. the eldely for one or people with learning disibilities. From reading the documentation it looks like the traffic from the Brighton Road will be re directed down over either a new road or over the existing Bridge Road. I cannot see which as the plans on the LBoS site cannot be enlarged so I can't see for sure. Will this affect me/my home or the value of my home? Important questions that I would like you to write to me about. If this project ensures that the shops outside the station are painted and their external shop frontage are more sober than what they are are already then this is good. I would agree that the initial site of some of these cheaply painted shops with their horrid colours is not what we want in promoting Sutton. Noted - No The road link, as shown in Appendix 1 to the document, illustrates proposals that may affect buildings and structures within the action CA. The road link is not a proposal arising from the proposed CA and information regarding the road link has previously been

widely publicised through extensive consultation on the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan. Page 12 HSCCA2 Support with I wholeheartedly and unreservedly support this proposal. The buildings have great character and lend a real touch of style to 499461 Mr Tony Monblat Conditions the town. A suggestion would be to encourage shop owners to have reasonably sympathetically designed fascia boards to fit in with the overall architecture. A competition with a small award/prize could be be given for the best one (I believe Pizza Express won an architectural prize about twenty years ago). Agree - No It is recognised that poor shop fronts and fascias have a negative impact on the quality of the proposed Conservation Area. Changes Planning applications would be subject to Proposed Policy DM4 - Historic Environment of the Site Development Policies DPD by which the Council will only grant planning permission for development that preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The council will continue to pursue possibilities to secure grant funding for shop front improvements. The council will also explore the use of Local Development Orders and the need for specific shop front design guidance in Heritage areas given that Cheam Village, Carshalton Village, Wallington Green and, subject to approval, Sutton Town Centre Crossroads are now all CAs. HSCCA4 Observations I think the listing and preserving everything possible of old Sutton and our heritage here is a fantastic and extremely important 501678 Mr Coleman Michael and adds so much character to the area especially as builidings that are built now are so mumdane and lifeless but the old Coleman ones are often grand , well thought out and many full of history and if only their walls could speak. We have sadly lost a lot of treasures but hopefully this will preserve the many others for us to enjoy and be proud of in our borough, many thank's Michael Noted - No Noted. action

15 April 2011 Page 1 of 5 Comment ID Nature of Representation Text Response/ Officer Respondent No / Name and Officer Response Organisation Recommendation HSCCA5 Support I think it is good that the council are recognising that Sutton might have some merit as far as Heritage goes. I appreciate that 501850 Karen Gillett parts of Carshalton and Cheam might be better preserved but it is good to know that some of Sutton's past might be preserved. I like the idea of a conservation area but I feel it is a shame that it could not somehow have stretched to include St Nicholas Church. Noted - No The St Nicholas Church site is a set apart from the remainder of the proposed CA and is physically separated by the Civic action Centre site. Inclusion of the site in the CA would create boundaries which are illogical and not defensible. In addition, St Nicholas Church benefits from protection as a Grade II listed building and Listed Building Consent is required for nearly all alterations. It is recommended that the CA boundary is not extended to include St Nicholas Church and it is considered that the statutory listed provides sufficient protection in terms of the building's historic value. HSCCA6 Support with I am former Sutton resident, it is many home town. I am also interested in local heritage and history. Great idea. I SUPPORT, 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Conditions broadly. I really enjoyed reading the report/paper. Thank you. Nice to see LB Sutton council giving some decent attention to the heritage Sutton area itself for a change, as it often gets overlooked due to focus on Carshalton/Beddington/Cheam. I have some CONDITIONS or issues though: 1.I would strongly suggest the boundary of the proposed area iis extended marginally on the west side, in Grove Road.Specificlly, I think the area should INCLUDE the detached Victorian building, formerly a house, but now a solicitors office (Copley, Clark & Bennet). It seems obvious to add it, because: it is in excellent original condition; it is a rare survivog example of a Victorian residence proximate to the crossroads and high street;and it is literally just by the proposed border. Moreover, as the premise of the Conservation Area scheme is to conserve the original Victorian architecture

of that part of Sutton town centre, then it should be included in theboundary of thearea to protect that also!I ndeed, it's one of Page 13 the best survivals! 2. A Victorian property at the western end of Carshalton Road (a former house with shops added and protruding at ground level), although included in the C/Area boundary, has been designated for redevelopment in the proposed scheme. However, if the premise of the Conservation Area scheme is to conserve the original Victorian architecture of that part of Sutton town centre, then it should not be allowed or encouraged to be demolished for re-development - as that is contrary to conservation! 3. I don't quite see why the Morrisons/Safeways site is included in the proposed area. I just seems a way to include the two churches but they're both Grde listed already anyway. Noted - No Noted. The property at 36 Grove Road and adjacent properties are set apart and separated from the High Street which is the action main focus of the proposed CA. The Grove Road frontage of Morrisons further isolates these properties. It is considered that the properties would be more suitably included in a schedule of Potential Additions to the Local List, as identified in the Site Development Policies Document. The semi-detached Victorian buildings at the western end of Carshalton Road (nos 7-9) are in poor repair with large cracks in the brickwork, a variety of unsympathetic replacement windows and obscured detailing. The addition of shops in front of these former houses detracts from the original building and while there are similarities between this building and the High Street terrace, they are separated by a large 5-storey modern building. As a large site, with three frontages, the Morrisons supermarket currently has a negative impact on the historic value of the area. Any future redevelopment of the site has the potential to significantly impact further on the adjacent and surrounding historic environment. The impact of any new development on the existing historic environment should carefully be considered and it is therefore recommended that the Morrisons site is retained within the CA boundary. Agenda Item 11 HSCCA7 Support with I was pleased to hear about the proposal to create a conservation area in Sutton town centre and I welcome the opportunity to 507177 Richard Wilson Conditions comment on it. I have lived in Sutton for over 30 years and as someone who has a long-held interest - albeit as a layman - in buildings and streetscapes, it has been good to discover that there are other people who value several of the buildings and structures that I have come to admire. In general I agree with the observations and proposals set out in the Draft Heritage Character Appraisal. However, I do have one particular concern: it is that the proposed boundary of the conservation area excludes a group of buildings at least two of which in my opinion deserve to be included on the grounds of their quality,

15 April 2011 Page 2 of 5 Comment ID Nature of Representation Text Response/ Officer Respondent No / Name and Officer Response Agenda Item 11 Organisation Recommendation condition, rarity in the town centre and, most important perhaps, as examples of the many houses on the outer edges of the town in London and many other places that extended forwards, covering forecourts or gardens in response to the needs of a growing population. The site in question is on the north side of Grove Road between Morrisons supermarket and what appears to include all but the building on the corner of Sutton Park Road. Please refer to paras.4.72 and 4.73 of the Draft H.C.A which point out that only one of the four remaining Victorian dwellings - number 36 - has retained its original 'set-back' from the pavement. This in an example of a process that, over time, reflected the need for more business premises like shops and offices. As far as I am aware, the only examples still standing of this phenomenon inside the proposed conservation area are the two terraced or semi-detached Victorian properties in Carshalton road, opposite the police station. But I hope the committee will agree that those do not compare favourably with the above-mentioned properties in Grove Road. Leaving aside the three of the four Victorian houses in Grove Road whose 'set-backs' were built on, number 36 appears to be the only example of such fine Victorian mansions still standing in the town centre. It is very impressive and appears to remain unchanged since it was built except that concrete roof tiles have replaced slate, and an unsympathetic dormer has been added in the roof. The superb 'Gothic' porch looks original and in any case adds greatly to the appeal of the building. In my opinion, the fact that the Victorian house next door to number 36, much of which, with its superb brickwork, can still be seen from across the road, makes a strong case for at least these two houses to be brought into the conservation area because they appear to be the only example of neighbouring properties in the town centre that illustrate the 'before and after' history of the growth of the town as population grew. I hope that serious consideration will be given by the committee to this proposal. I can't

imagine what valid reasons there could possibly be for excluding those two buildings. Could I please ask to inform me of the Page 14 committee's decision in due course, and the reasons for it. Disagree - No The property at 36 Grove Road and the adjacent properties are set apart and separated from the High Street which is the main Changes focus of the proposed CA. The Grove Road frontage of Morrisons further isolates these properties. It is considered that the properties would be more suitably included in a schedule of Potential Additions to the Local List, as identified in the Site Development Policies Document (see a separate item on the Local List elsewhere on the agenda). HSCCA8 Support The Sutton & Cheam Society welcomes and fully supports the proposal to identify part of Sutton High Street as a Conservation 33508 Mr Tony Golledge Area, as outlined in the consultation document. The Society feels that since the mertis of several buildings in this part of the Town Centre, particularly those which are listed, are best seen at first floor level and above, it may be helpful to install signage, Sutton and Cheam Society information boards, etc. to emphasise Sutton's heritage assets to local residents, workers and visitors alike. It is hoped that the designation of Conservation Area status to part of the High Street will encourage all occupiers to pay more attention to the appearance of their frontages and to facilitate the Council to control the design of shopfronts to ensure their suitability to the area. Agree - Propose The opportunity for street signs to be updated to bring attention to the special character and history of the area is discussed in Changes the Crossroads Conservation Area document. This reference will be broadened to include other methods of emphasising Sutton's heritage, such as information boards. HSCCA9 Support Sutton Living Streets welcomes the proposal by Sutton Council to develop a new Conservation Area at the southern end of the 507146 Charles Martin High Street, as outlined in the Draft Heritage Character Appraisal Sutton Town Centre High Street Crossroads: Proposed Conservation Area. We support the recommendation to designate the High Street Crossroads area as a Conservation Area, and wish all involved every success in taking the proposal forward. Key endorsements In this concise response we would like to take the opportunity to highlight just one or two of the paragraphs in the draft character appraisal document which we feel are particularly worthy of endorsement. In Section Four, Character Analysis, for example, these include: 4.98 The High Street area outside Sutton Station and the east/west roads would benefit from an extension of the scheme using a range of compatible materials. As a key town centre gateway, the area around the Station should be upgraded to improve the arrival experience to

15 April 2011 Page 3 of 5 Comment ID Nature of Representation Text Response/ Officer Respondent No / Name and Officer Response Organisation Recommendation the town centre and the proposed conservation area. The High Street outside the station is a busy vehicle road and the pedestrian footways along this stretch are narrow and can become congested which does not allow easy views of the surrounding historic buildings or allow space to dwell. The junction of the High Street with Grove Road/Sutton Court Road is busy and the pedestrian crossing points would benefit from upgrading and removal of barriers. 4.99 Where possible, a reduction in street clutter is desirable. This includes posts, signs, railings, columns, apparatus, structures, advertisements and should be kept to a minimum in order to enhance views in the proposed conservation area and not detract from the detailing and features of the historic buildings and environment. If designated as a conservation area, the existing street signs could be updated to indicate the extent of the conservation area and to bring attention to the special character and history of the area. Lessons from the past.... In Section Two, Archaeological and Historical Context, the recognition that "in the last 50 years new development has given little consideration to the context and human scale of the historic High Street.." (paragraph 2.13), is particularly welcome. Sutton Living Streets would suggest that walking to the High Street has become less attractive because many development decisions have resulted in a reduction in permeability and ease of access to the town centre and High Street by any mode other than the car. Thankfully the High Street in Sutton does have a few remaining access points that provide some escape from the surrounding traffic-dominated roads. Two of these are Hill Road and Throwley Road situated on the northern edge of the proposed Conservation Area. Leading south from Hill Road (in Characteristic Appraisal Sub-area 4) is an example of one of the many service roads that provide access to the rear of shops and properties- see photos below. Sutton Living Streets would be interested to know whether there is potential for spaces like this cobbled, unnamed and presumably forgotten cul-desac to contribute more to the vitality of the town centre. Perhaps, through the creation of additional access

points, they could be expanded and joined-up to provide filtered permeability and improved connectivity for pedestrians and, atPage 15 the same time, further enhance the conservational aspect of the High Street. ...and looking to the future Designation of the High Street Crossroads area as a Conservation Area will certainly help protect and enhance heritage buildings and structures in Sutton. But forthcoming redevelopment should help to create, sustain and build on a strong local identity too. Sutton Living Streets would like to see more evidence that the planning decisions that are being made today reflect the importance of ensuring that walking becomes a more viable option for people to make in the future. In conclusion, Sutton Living Streets would like congratulate the authors and contributors of the appraisal document for the producing a very interesting and thorough assessment. The Draft Heritage Appraisal Proposal certainly contains aspects that suggest a step is about to be taken in the right direction, with new thinking which will help Sutton ultimately become an even more people-friendly town. We believe these are very appealing aspirations and would like to thank you for the consultation, and for giving us the opportunity to contribute. Noted - No The Core Planning Strategy seeks to increase the proportion of trips made on foot through coordinated improvements to the action pedestrian environment (BP10 - Transport: Strategic and Borough-wide Proposals). Improvements to the public realm will also support increased pedestrian activity. Core Policy BP12 - Good Urban Design and Heritage, seeks to ensure that new development: creates vibrant, attractive and accessible public spaces; creates easier movement; and creates a sense of welcome by promoting legible places through the development of landmark buildings, public realm features, landscape and public art. Agenda Item 11 HSCCA10 Support I am a resident just across the borough boundary in Morden who goes to Sutton regularly for shopping and leisure. With all the 507133 Neil Galahad demolition of the heritage buildings in the past,I think during the 1970s in particular,especially the Municipal Offices, it is obviously critical to ensue the town looks after the those buildings, which survive. I understand planning regulations are being relaxed by Central Government, which may or may not have an impact on conserving architecturally and historically important buildings. A few thoughts which come to mind: the upper storeys of many of the shops look rather neglected and decorative details are obscured. I suspect many arebeing usedfar short of their full potential either as possible residential accommodation or as offices. It would be nice if owners could be persuaded to improve matters in both respects both inside the conservation

15 April 2011 Page 4 of 5 Comment ID Nature of Representation Text Response/ Officer Respondent No / Name and Officer Response Agenda Item 11 Organisation Recommendation area and of course that area surrounding it. Noted - No It is recognised that poor shop fronts and fascias have a negative impact on the quality of the proposed Conservation Area and action it is considered that the character appraisal document adequately discusses the importance of good quality shop fronts and improvements to upper storeys, therefore no changes are proposed. The council will continue to pursue possibilities to secure grant funding for shop front improvements. The council will also explore the use of Local Development Orders and the need for specific shop front design guidance in Heritage areas. HSCCA11 Observations It is difficult for me to support the proposal of Conservation Area around the Southern end of Sutton High Street as I am not 505408 Rajka Kuhar quite sure of what that entails. Although I appreciate the importance and value of the period features of the architecture I am worried that all we, residents will be left with are higher repair bills and difficulties in obtaining planning permissions for possible developing of our properties. So far, in my opinion, the area around Waterstones book shop (this is just at the entrance into Throwley Road from which my property is accessed) has been destroyed by the horrible paving that was recently put down. More than £4 million was spent on regeneration of pavement but aesthetically it is far from being in keeping with the period of buildings in that area. With random €˜cuts' and utilities' manholes the grey pavement looks more like Frankenstein and that is all it has in common with 19th century. Who is responsible for choosing the style of pavement? Not to mention that the paving blocks which were removed were also quite new (maybe several years old). Moreover, the alleyway from which my property is accessed looks more like a slum than a street belonging to a possible Conservation Area. The council is not able to impose

measures needed to regulate the disposal of rubbish from the restaurants and pubs and although there is a documented Page 16 history of rat infestation there is no one we residents can turn to for help. I will not go into the whole problem of how disgusting the alley looks (the rubbish is now completely stuck to the pavement in some places and looks like it has grown into it) but I believe this issue must be regulated before any talk of Conservation Areas. I would kindly ask you to let me know what benefits we as residents will have if the area becomes a conservation area and what will be possible increases in rates e.g. higher council tax, inability to install PVC double glazing and other possible charges. Agree - No There are some additional planning controls in Conservation Areas including the need to apply for planning permission for Changes some minor developments where the council needs to ensure development is in keeping with the local character, and certain trees are given added protection. The purpose of the CA and these additional controls is to provide the appropriate development guidance to landowners and developers, emphasising the need to preserve and enhance the area's local history and the historic value of the buildings. Benefits include: creating a stronger local identity; supporting the regeneration of Sutton town centre; encouraging visitors and shoppers; and supporting retailers and a vibrant town centre. As an example, English Heritage recently reported that every £1 invested in the historic environment directly contributes to an additional £1.60 to the local economy over a ten year period (see English Heritage report entitled 'Heritage Counts', 2010).

15 April 2011 Page 5 of 5 Page 17 Agenda Item 11

APPENDIX 3 Sutton Town Centre High Street Crossroads Proposed Conservation Area Character Appraisal Agenda Item 11 Page 18

London Borough of Sutton Sutton Town Centre High Street Crossroads Proposed Conservation Area Draft Heritage Character Appraisal

April 2011 Page 19 Agenda Item 11

London Borough of Sutton

Sutton Town Centre High Street Crossroads Conservation Area

Character Appraisal

Planning and Transportation Service

Environment and Leisure

April 2011 Agenda Item 11 Page 20

CONTENTS PAGE NUMBER ONE Background 1 Introduction 1 Planning Policy Context 2 Methodology 3 Purpose of this appraisal 3 Structure of this Document 4 Consultation Arrangements/Next Steps 4 Figure 1: Character Appraisal Area 5

TWO Archaeological & Historic Context 6 Archaeological Interest 6 Early Settlement Patterns 6 Victorian History 7 Edwardian History 7 Interwar History 8 Mid Twentieth Century to Date 8 Figure 2: Changes in Extent of Built Development 10

THREE Spatial Analysis 11 Historic Road Pattern 11 Urban Form 11 Spaces within the area 12 Views and Vistas 13 Figure 3: Age of Buildings / Structures 14 Figure 4: Townscape Analysis 15

FOUR Character Analysis 16 Introduction 16 Land Uses 16 Figure 5: Ground Floor Land Uses 17 Architectural Character 18

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 i Page 21 Agenda Item 11

Figure 6: Building Character Analysis 20 Appraisal of Sub-Areas 21 Public Realm 48 Problems, Pressures and Capacity for Change 48

FIVE Summary of Special Interest 51

SIX Conclusions and Recommendations 53

APPENDICIES Appendix 1 Site Allocations 54 Appendix 2 Features of Merit 55 Appendix 3 Glossary 56

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 ii Agenda Item 11 Page 22 ONE Background

Introduction 1.1 The historic environment plays an important role in helping to shape the identity of a place. Whilst central London has many of the world renowned heritage assets it is widely recognised that there is also benefit in understanding and promoting the local historic environment. Every place, like every person, has a distinct character, and an understanding of this is important when designing and making decisions about the type and location of future development.

1.2 The historic environment can make a significant contribution towards achieving a range of objectives: x Economic development. In particular heritage can be pivotal to the success of regeneration schemes; x Tourism and cultural promotion; x Resource efficiency; x The creation of a sense of place and sense of pride linked to enhanced health and well-being; and x Improved access and social cohesion.1

1.3 Sutton has a considerable historic lineage having been recorded as Sudtone in a seventh century charter of the Benedictine Chertsey Abbey when the Manor was granted to the Abbot by the Governor of Surrey. Some sources state the early name as Suthtone or Sudtana. The name is either considered to have been derived from south “tun” or south farm or south enclosure from the Anglo-Saxon “ton” for enclosure.

1.4 During the early nineteenth century Sutton was still largely a small settlement although the landscape to the east of what is now the High Street was characterised by the large house and grounds of Sutton Court Estate, and the High Street was a busy thoroughfare with a public house and hotel acting as an important point to refresh horses and travellers alike.

1.5 Development in Sutton accelerated in the latter half of the nineteenth century, with the opening of the railway line in 1847 and the development of infrastructure enabling the development of a community, including water and sewage treatment works and the development of schools and other social infrastructure.

1.6 Significant ‘modernisation’ took place during the 1960s and there has been much change to the commercial area through a programme of pedestrianisation and the development of two shopping centres.

1 “Capital Values: The Contribution of the Historic Environment to London” English Heritage, 2006

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 1 Page 23 Agenda Item 11

1.7 Whilst much of “historic Sutton” still exists and can clearly be appreciated when looking at first and second floors (particularly in the area focused on in this character appraisal), it is often obscured at ground floor by the plethora of shop front designs and inappropriate fascia boards. It is intended that this character appraisal will help reveal the history of the development of the southern end of the High Street and help determine policy choices regarding future change, preservation and enhancement.

Planning Policy Context 1.8 The legal basis for the designation and maintenance of conservation areas is the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. This legislation requires that local authorities consider whether there are any parts of their area that are worthy of designation as a conservation area. In order for an area to be designated, the local authority must determine if it is ‘an area of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which it is desirable to perverse or enhance’2.

1.9 Further government guidance is contained in Planning Policy Statement 5 (PPS5): Planning for the Historic Environment. PPS5 states that local planning authorities should maintain and publicly document evidence about the historical environment and heritage assets in their area3. In addition, this evidence should be used to assess the heritage assets and the contribution that they make to their environment.

1.10 The importance of built heritage in the boroughs and for the whole of London is stressed in The London Plan, and it is recognised that the contribution of built heritage to environmental quality, the economy and the well-being of London’s people should be maintained and enhanced4. In terms of heritage conservation, the London Plan stipulates that boroughs should identify areas, spaces and buildings of ‘special quality or character’ and adopt policies for their protection and enhancement. The special character, design, urban improvement goals and relationship to adjoining areas should also be considered by boroughs in the protection and enhancement of historic assets.

1.11 The Sutton Core Planning Strategy (adopted 2009) sets out the vision and spatial strategy for shaping the future development of the Borough and managing change over the next 15 years. The Core Planning Strategy recognises the central importance of the role of Sutton town centre as one of only four metropolitan centres in south London, offering a high level of shopping, employment and leisure activities with good public transport links. Accordingly, the policy approach for Sutton town centre is to support development which contributes to its regeneration and growth (Policy PMP6 – Sutton Town Centre). This vision requires significant development/redevelopment which must be set in the context of an

2 As defined in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 3 Policy HE2: Evidence Base for Plan-Making 4 The London Plan (Feb 2008) Policies 4B.11 – 4B.13.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 2 Agenda Item 11 Page 24

understanding of the historic development of the centre and the significance of the centre’s heritage assets.

1.12 The Core Planning Strategy also identifies six principles in order to secure good urban design, the first of which specifies that all development should respect the local context and distinctive local character (Policy BP12 – Good Urban Design and Heritage). The amplification to this Policy also recognises the importance of having regard to the local character of Sutton town centre and the other identified centres of growth or intensification in order to successfully integrate new higher intensity of development.

1.13 The Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan: Preferred Options Document indentifies suitable sites for development and redevelopment. The (re)development of these sites have implications for the town centre, and the southern part in particular. These sites are now being incorporated into and taken forward in the Site Development Policies Document. Individual sites, and the potential development issues, are discussed in further detail in Chapter 4 of this document.

Methodology 1.14 In the preparation of this document, the Council has followed English Heritage’s Guidance of Conservation Area Appraisals (August 2005) in order to understand the characteristics specific to this part of the town centre.

1.15 The appraisal identifies the archaeological, architectural, aesthetic and historic features of the area and those buildings and key elements that make an important contribution to the historic quality of the area. In addition, it identifies the opportunities and threats to the preservation and enhancement of the character and appearance of the area.

1.16 The character appraisal helps to identify the level of significance of the heritage assets. In judging significance it is helpful to also assess rarity; representativeness; aesthetic appeal (existing and potential where this has currently been diminished through inappropriate alterations); integrity; and associations with historic events or people. The assessment of significance is also dependent upon public interest/communal value of an area.

1.17 This document has been prepared in discussion with English Heritage and with the input and support of the council’s heritage officers. It sets out the current historic character appraisal of the Southern end of Sutton town centre, focussed around the High Street Crossroads (see Figure 1).

Purpose of the Appraisal 1.18 In the context of growth and development pressure in the town centre, there are a number of purposes of this character appraisal: x to define the distinctive character of the area and understand whether this is an area of ‘special architectural or historical interest’ worthy of designation as a conservation area;

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 3 Page 25 Agenda Item 11

x to identify development pressures and capacity for development in order to help achieve the delivery of the objectives of this metropolitan centre; x to identify negative and neutral features, structures and buildings in the area in order to help identify further areas suitable for redevelopment and to help develop initiatives for improvement/a public realm management strategy; and finally x to help secure funding (either grant, S106, public realm or through the Town Centre BID) for targeted improvements.

1.19 The draft Conservation Area character appraisal was the subject of community involvement for a six-week period, from 5 January 2011 to 16 February 2011. Letters were sent to residents, local groups/residents’ associations and business in the area. Copies of the draft character appraisal document were made available on the Council’s website and placed in Sutton Central Library, together with a staffed exhibition.

1.20 This Conservation Area character appraisal was approved by the Council on 23 May 2011 for the purposes of designation, inclusion of the Site Development Policies Development Plan Document: Submission draft for the purposes of Examination in Public in June 2011 and for Development Control purposes to guide and assess proposed development in and around the Conservation Area.

Structure of the Document 1.21 Chapter 2 describes the archaeological and historic context of Sutton town centre and the southern end of the High Street, from very early references through to today; Chapter 3 sets out a spatial analysis of the area which looks at aspects of the urban environment including historic road layouts, spaces and views within the area.

1.22 Chapter 4 consists of a character analysis of the area, focusing in detail on land uses and the architectural character of each of the sub-areas.

1.23 Chapter 5 sets out a summary of the special architectural and historic interest within the character appraisal area, and, Chapter 6 outlines the conclusions and recommendations arising from the assessment contained within this character appraisal.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 4

Agenda Item 11 Page 26 8

9 4

IHSTREETHIGH

3

2 1 0

9 2 1

St Nicholas ST NICHOLAS ROAD HOL YWAYTHROWLEY Church PCs

THROWLEY WAY

8 4 Surrey

House 71 to 81 to 71 Surrey House

Chancery THROWLEY TNCOA WAY NICHOLAS ST House ROAD THROWLEYROAD College of THROWLEY ROAD Liberal Arts TRINITY TOWN SQUARE

7 6

The Upper Walk HILLROADHILL ROAD 7 2

PH 6 8

6 to 9 7 0 67 Georgian

6 6 Epworth Mansions

Lodge The Lower Square

ULC Shelter 63

The Upper Walk HIGH STREET

Trinity 6 0

59 3 Methodist Civic Centre 5 8 Church

5 6 57 55

4 15 Shelter 51 5 2 CARSHALTON ROAD

4 6to50 9 Hall

Bank 49 Cheam Road 1 1 4 Bank CHEAMCHEAM ROAD ROAD 8 2 CARSHALTON ROAD Police Station

ON Patrick Dunne Hse Sunday 2

Sutton School

RK ROAD 2

a 1 3

Baptist 21 9 Bank 43

Church Hall

1 9

41 Police Station Sutton Sunday Hall School

Baptist 37 PH 4 2 City House Church IHSTREETHIGH Watermead Patrick Dunne Hs

HIGH STREET House

35 33 2 Hall BANK MEWS

3 6

3 2 3 4 Bank House 9 to 15 3 0 1 to 5 7 SUTTON PARK ROAD ROAD 2 6 SUTTON COURT

ORME ROAD

19to21 Raffety

Administration Place 17 House

4

2 South Point a 2

1 6 1 8 30

1 4

36 15

1 1 13 7

44

9 11 9 50 48 9 Masonic Hall

54 HIGH STREET 3 1

5 1 7 GROVE ROAD 1 1 6 68 to 74

Telephone Exchange PO Bank

2

Copthall House 1 PH

Works 1e

ROAD Sutton

1d Station

2 1c

4

Greensleeves Manor 1

3 1b

THE QUADRANT 0 1

Sorting Office 1a 2 1 9 5 2 1 1

2

2a

2 BRIDGE ROAD Sutton Station 4 4

6

8a Shelters

8 Quadrant House

ROAD MULGRAVE

14 ROADBRIGHTON 1 1

16

Tudor Court

2 4 6

1 3 5 22 Station Parade Mulgrave 1to 6(over shops)

7 Mulgrave Court

Cyrillian House Chambers 8 to 1 2 1 2 4 6 6

St George's 1

Court MULGRAVEROAD 4

1 3 5 8 a

Figure 1 High Street Crossroads z Character Appraisal Area

Character Appraisal Area 4 Character Appraisal Sub-areas N

Copyright Ordnance Survey 2010 100008655X Page 27 Agenda Item 11 TWO

Archaeological & Historic Context

Archaeological Interest 2.1 The majority of the character appraisal area is defined as an Archaeological Priority Area (APA) and, in accordance with PPS5, the effects on the significance or setting of heritage assets is a material consideration when determining planning applications.

2.2 Within the character appraisal area, a Neolithic stone implement was discovered near the junction of Carshalton Road and High Street. This is the only entry on the Historic Environment Record for Greater London in the study area, however this object reflects the wider significance of the east-west spring line from Cheam to Beddington where over the years much prehistoric material has been discovered.

Early Settlement Patterns 2.3 There are early scattered references to Sutton since 675 AD when it was known as Sudtone and the Manor was granted to the Abbot of Chertsea by Frithwold; in 1086AD Sutton is mentioned in William the Conqueror’s ‘Domesday Book’; and, in 1145 the Prior of Merton had vineyards in Sutton. In 1537 the estate passed from Chertsea Abbey to Nicholas Carew of Beddington, but subsequently changed hands frequently.

2.4 Sutton was a small rural community until the Victorian era. A Map of Sutton dated 1815 clearly shows that Sutton was linear settlement even then, with properties concentrated along what is now the northern end of the High Street. Indeed the nomenclature of the roads makes this clear with the ‘High Street’ running down from the north to Lodge Place (formerly part of Manor Lane) and then becoming ‘Cock Hill’ up to the junction of Cheam Road and Carshalton Road where the Cock Public House and Hotel were located to cater for passing coaches. The road alignment of the High Street which we are familiar with today is likely to have been a feature of the area since the middle ages and certainly dates from before 1755 when it became a turnpike road.

2.5 There were two main estates in Sutton: The Manor House, located further north along the High Street, and Sutton Court at the southern end of the High Street. A succession of families living at the Manor House can be traced back as far as the 17th Century and although little is known about the early history of Sutton Court, it is also thought to date from the 17th century5.

5 Robert Smith, pg 19, A History of Sutton AD 675 – 1960, 1970

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 6 Agenda Item 11 Page 28

Victorian History 2.6 The rapid growth of Sutton really occurred during the reign of Queen Victoria. With the arrival of the railway in 1847 the main focus of the High Street gradually moved south from its original location. Furthermore, with the development of the water mains system from 1863; the gas supply from 1856; and electric light from 1856, the significant infrastructure was in place in order to facilitate a population boom. This coincided with a change in ownership of most of the land in Sutton as Thomas Alcock became lord of the manor in 1845. He was responsible for significant property development and by 1852 he had started a suburb to the east of the High Street (the Benhill estate) which was for large middle class houses and to the south near Carshalton Road (Newtown) which was for the workers. The last owner of the Manor House, George Orme, died in 1895 with no male heir. A year after his death the estate of 13.5 acres was sold for £13,000 to a speculative developer, who immediately broke it up into building plots. High class residences increased rapidly, particularly to the south of the station: Brighton Road had 15 houses in 1869 and by 1878 there were 55 houses6.

2.7 In 1801 the population of Sutton was 579, less in fact than Cheam (616), Wallington (793), and Carshalton (1449). However by 1851 Sutton’s population had risen to 1387 which meant it was the second largest settlement behind Carshalton and ten years later, it was significantly the largest settlement in the Borough.

2.8 Development along this southern stretch of the High Street was predominantly Victorian terraces and occurred from around the late 1840s to the very early 1900s. Around the station, the building uses included purpose- built banks, hotels and shops with large detached residences in the surrounding streets. Figure 2 shows the changes in the extent of built development in the Borough from 1842. These maps clearly show a cluster of buildings around the Cock Hotel at the crossroads, the gradual development along the High Street, as well as the later development into the side roads and surrounding areas.

Edwardian History 2.9 By 1900 Sutton was a small town and its high street was lined with Victorian shops and several exceptional older buildings. By 1913 further development had occurred along the side roads and notable public/civic buildings started to appear (such as Sutton Police Station, Trinity Church, a hospital and hospital hall, the Masonic hall and Post Office). The development of these services and institutions, in addition to the existing commercial uses meant that the area was largely self-sufficient. Development continued through the Edwardian period, with the development of an attractive estate along the south of Cheam Road. However, even though there was considerable development in the area, a large amount of land was left for development into the 1920s and 1930s.

6 Robert Smith, pg 95, A History of Sutton AD 675 – 1960, 1970

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 7 Page 29 Agenda Item 11

Inter-War History 2.10 By 1934/35 many of the vacant sites in the town centre had been developed with a number of cultural and leisure facilities complimenting the existing commercial and civic functions of the centre. This period saw the development of four picture theatres/cinemas, a skating rink, baths and also a telephone exchange, additions that reinforced the town centre’s self- sufficiency.

2.11 These uses developed around the edges of the High Street retail core and together, with the extension of retail into the side streets, saw the loss of a few of the large, detached, mansion houses. However, the overall character of this southern end of the town centre remained as a prosperous financial and retail area, surrounded by large, upper middle class housing.

Mid-Twentieth Century to Date 2.12 Minimal bomb damage during the Second World War did little to change the character of the Borough. The most significant development was in 1945, when many old houses were demolished to make way for flats and town houses. The impact of this development was fairly severe on the Victorian and Edwardian upper middle class housing estates, with the loss of many fine examples of original buildings. The minimal financial benefit which could be achieved from the redevelopment of smaller houses has meant that many smaller lower middle class and working class estates have not changed much.

2.13 In the last 50 years, new development has given little consideration to the context and human scale of the historic High Street and additional taller office and residential buildings have been constructed, mainly concentrated around the station. Two large shopping centres (St Nicholas Centre and Times Square) have been constructed in the middle of the High Street, to the north of the study area and multi-storey car parks have been constructed around the periphery. Morrisons, a large supermarket, occupies the majority of an entire block in the town centre. The large buildings in these new developments interrupt the rhythm of the historic High Street and often introduce building materials and colours not in keeping with the older buildings.

2.14 Newer development has in some cases replaced significant older buildings, often to the detriment of the character and appearance of the town centre and loss of historic context. For example, the old Municipal Office building, located on the northern corner of the High Street and Throwley Road (just outside the character appraisal area), was a highly decorative building making a positive contribution to this central High Street location. The town centre has suffered from both the loss of the building and the design of the building built in its place.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 8 Agenda Item 11 Page 30

2.15 Changes to the road network, particularly the construction of the one-way gyratory roads7, have not respected the historic road pattern and changes to road names further obscure the historic layout and uses. Within the study area examples of this are Church Lane (now St Nicholas Road), Church Road (now St Nicholas Way) and Throwley Road (now segmented into Throwley Road, Throwley Way and Greyhound Road). Changes to the road layout and direction of movement have also affected the entrance and exit points to the town centre, views and the significance of landmark buildings.

2.16 Recent investment in the High Street has involved environmental improvements to the public realm with new paving, street furniture, lighting and also a de-cluttering of existing signage and street furniture. The improvements and simplification of the public realm along the High Street has had a positive effect on the buildings abutting it by allowing a less cluttered environment in which the detail of the historic buildings, particularly above ground floor level. The modern treatment of the shop fronts at ground floor level is on the whole poor and detracts from the historic character of the High Street.

7 Established between the mid-1970s and mid-1980s

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 9 Page 31 Agenda Item 11

1842 1865

1896 1965

Figure 2 High Street Crossroads z Changes in Extent of Built Development 1842 -1965

Character Appraisal Area N

Copyright Ordnance Survey 2010 100008655X Agenda Item 11 Page 32 THREE Spatial Analysis

Historic Road Pattern 3.1 The underlying urban form of the character appraisal area is based on the historic alignment of the High Street and the progressive development of the east-west roads. What is now the High Street is likely to have originated as a dirt track dating from the Middle Ages, developing into a section of the main route from London to Brighton. Brighton was an increasingly popular seaside resort and this was a busy road, however, it was in poor repair and in 1755 a turnpike Act was passed to provide for the road’s repair and maintenance8.

3.2 As well as a route to Brighton, in the early part of the 19th Century, the road would have been used regularly by the Prince Regent who rented Sutton Lodge on Brighton Road9, and it would have been a busy and lively route on Derby Day as one of the main routes to Epsom Downs.

3.3 Cheam Road and Carshalton Road date from around 1755 and formed a crossroad with the High Street, where there was a small cluster of buildings. This historic road layout formed the basis for the development of Sutton town centre and the location of many of the surrounding roads today. The remaining roads slowly developed around the crossroads, often following field boundaries and crossing the High Street at roughly equal distances. Grove Road dates from before 1867, and Sutton Court Road, Hill Road and Throwley Road date from the late 1800s, these regularly spaced roads have created similarly sized blocks along the High Street which support a legible structure to the public realm. The age of the Victorian terraces on the High Street show the gradual development of the area, most of which occurred from the mid-1800s through to the early 1900s.

3.4 Figure 3 shows the age of buildings, structures and roads within the character appraisal area and the structural impact that the historic road pattern has had on development.

Urban Form 3.5 Sutton town centre’s main shopping area is focussed on the linear High Street with few lateral retail off-shoots. The High Street is pedestrianised south of the High Street / Grove Road / Sutton Court Road junction, although the busy

8 Law Commission’s Statute Law Repeals: Consultation Paper, Repeal of Turnpike Laws, 25 June 2010. Until the late 19th Century, Britain had no national framework for maintaining its highways, instead roads were repaired by the general population, however this meant that most roads were poorly repaired and maintained. A new system of turnpike roads was introduced (the first in 1663) where travellers were required to pay a toll to continue along the road. The revenue was then used to repair and maintain the road. 9 Listed Building Citation for Sutton Lodge.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 11 Page 33 Agenda Item 11

one-way gyratory road system crosses the High Street twice10 and these junctions introduce traffic dominated areas which interrupt the quieter pedestrian environment.

3.6 The public realm and streetscene is defined by the ground floor of buildings, most of which directly abut the pavement, forming a uniform building line. A comfortable and clear sense of enclosure is formed by this building line, as well as the height of the terraces (3-4 storeys) in relation to the width of the historic road between them. While the junctions of the High Street and the gyratory roads are dominated by traffic, they do provide open spaces which contrast with the sense of enclosure elsewhere on the High Street and allow for longer views in and out of the area.

Spaces within the Area 3.7 Within the character appraisal area, the sense of enclosed space, opening into wider spaces at the junctions forms a rhythm of its own, starting outside Sutton Station and continuing down the High Street to Trinity Square (Hill Road / Throwley Road). Figure 4 shows an analysis of the town centre, including pedestrianised areas, major town centre gateways, and focal spaces.

3.8 The pavement area outside the station, although not particularly wide, provides a small area of public space and sets the image of the centre for those alighting at the station. It is also a focal space and main gateway into the High Street Crossroads character appraisal area. The environment is cluttered and the direction to the main shopping area is not immediately obvious, however the Old Bank pub building (no. 1 High Street) and the former Station Hotel across the road (no. 2 High Street), are both adorned with decorative features and are designed with chamfered corner entrances indicating a sense of welcome that visually marks the beginning of the town centre. The scale of the remainder of the terraces on either side of the High Street create a comfortable sense of enclosure, leading into the main shopping area but many are covered with unattractive fascia which detract from the quality of the space and the arrival experience.

3.9 Moving down the High Street, the set back of the 1960s retail/office building on the corner of Carshalton Road (no. 2 Carshalton Road) provides the space to view the domed roof of the adjoining building (no 42 High Street), the locally listed Barclays Bank and allows long views of the Trinity Church tower and spire. This area has benefited from the recent High Street Renewal Project with much of the street clutter removed and new seating installed. Cheam Road, leading into this space, is a gateway to the town centre and is marked by two landmark churches, Trinity Church and Sutton Baptist Church, which historically indicated a change in land uses from residential to town centre uses. Although newer tall buildings now surround them, the churches mark the start of this historically significant area, particularly the importance of Cheam Road as a major route to Epsom.

10 The gyratory crosses the High Street at Grove Road / Sutton Court Road and again at Cheam Road / Carshalton Road.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 12 Agenda Item 11 Page 34

3.10 Trinity Square, at the northern end of the character appraisal area is the main urban public space within the town centre. The space was created by the closure of Hill Road and Throwley Road to through-traffic and by the 1960s demolition of two buildings at the end of the terrace. The square has recently undergone extensive upgrade works as part of the High Street Renewal Project. Kiosks and other street clutter have been removed which has opened the area and new uniform grey paving has been laid and new street furniture and play pieces installed.

Views and Vistas 3.11 The linear layout of the High Street and the topography of the area, with the hill sloping down northwards, provides for long views, particularly from the Station area down, through the main shopping area, to the northern end of the town centre. Views looking up the hill to the south are dominated by the taller buildings around the station. Figure 4 shows views to and within the area. The recently upgraded Trinity Town Square 3.12 Long views of Trinity Church tower and spire from Throwley Road are only possible because of the earlier demolition of two buildings on the end of the western terrace and the subsequent creation of the town square. The spire can also be seen from the corner of Carshalton Road and the High Street and is a key historic landmark building in the town centre.

3.13 Good views of both Trinity Church and Sutton Baptist Church are gained when travelling along Cheam Road. Together the churches indicate an important entrance to the town centre when approaching from the west. Sutton Police Station performs a similar function on the eastern side of the High Street, although only for pedestrians as the introduction of the one-way road system means vehicles now pass the building on the way out of the centre.

3.14 The location of the historically important Barclays Bank and Cock and Bull pub buildings on the corner of junctions allow longer views than would otherwise be View from Throwley obtained. This allows a good view of all storeys and of Road to Trinity Church the decorative features on the Barclays building, tower and spire beyond. particularly when viewed up hill, from the north.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 13

Page 35 Agenda Item 11 8

9 4

3

2 1 0

9 2 1

St Nicholas ST NICHOLAS ROAD Church PCs

THROWLEY WAY

8 4 Surrey

House 71 to 81 to 71 Surrey House

Chancery THROWLEY House ROAD

College of THROWLEY ROAD Liberal Arts

7 6

The Upper Walk HILL ROAD 7 2

PH 6 8

6 to 9 7 0 67 Georgian

6 6 Epworth Mansions

Lodge The Lower Square

ULC Shelter 63

The Upper Walk HIGH STREET

Trinity 6 0

Methodist 59 Civic Centre 5 8 Church

5 6 57 55

15 Shelter 51 5 2

4 6to50 9 Hall

Bank 49 Cheam Road 1 1 4 Bank CHEAM ROAD 8 2

CARSHALTON ROAD Police Station

ON Patrick Dunne Hse Sunday 2

Sutton School

RK ROAD 2

a 1 3

Baptist 21 9 Bank 43

Church Hall

1 9

41 Police Station Sutton Sunday Hall School

Baptist 37 PH 4 2 City House Church Watermead Patrick Dunne Hs

HIGH STREET House 35 Hall 33 BANK MEWS

3 6

3 2 3 4 Bank House 9 to 15 3 0 1 to 7

SUTTON PARK ROAD

2 6

ORME ROAD

19to21 Raffety

Administration Place 17 House

4

2 South Point a 2

1 6 1 8 30

1 4

36 15 1

13 7

44

9 11 9 50 48 9 Masonic Hall

54 HIGH STREET 3 1

5 1

7 1 1

68 to 74

Telephone Exchange PO Bank

2

Copthall House 1 PH

Works 1e

ROAD Sutton

1d Station

2 1c

4

Greensleeves Manor 1

3 1b

THE QUADRANT 0 1

Sorting Office 1a 2 1 9 5 2 1 1

2

2a

2 BRIDGE ROAD Sutton Station 4 4

6

8a Shelters

8 Quadrant House

ROAD MULGRAVE

14 1 1

16

Tudor Court

2 4 6

1 3 5 22 Station Parade Mulgrave 1to 6(over shops)

7 Mulgrave Court

Cyrillian House Chambers 8 to 1 2 1 2 4 6 6

St George's 1

Court 4

1 3 5 8 a

Figure 3 High Street Crossroads z Age of Buildings / Structures

Character Appraisal Area Before 1867 1936 - 1965 Road: Before 1755 N 1868 - 1897 1966 - 1976 Road: 1755 1898 - 1913 1977 - 1993 Road: before 1867

1914 - 1935 1993 - 2010 Road: 1868 - 1897 Copyright Ordnance Survey 2010 100008655X

Agenda Item 11 Page 36 8

9 4

3

2 1 0

9 2 1

St Nicholas ST NICHOLAS ROAD Church PCs

THROWLEY WAY

8 4 Surrey

House 71 to 81 to 71 Surrey House

Chancery THROWLEY House ROAD

College of THROWLEY ROAD Liberal Arts

7 6

The Upper Walk HILL ROAD 7 2

PH 6 8

6 to 9 7 0 67 Georgian 85

6 6 Epworth Mansions

Lodge The Lower Square

ULC Shelter 63

The Upper Walk HIGH STREET

Trinity 6 0

Methodist 59 Civic Centre 5 8 Church

5 6 57 55

15 Shelter 51 5 2

4 6to50 9 Hall

Bank 49 Cheam Road 1 1 4 Bank CHEAM ROAD g 8 512

CARSHALTON ROAD Police Station

ON Patrick Dunne Hse Sunday 2

Sutton School

109 2

RK ROAD

a 1 3

Baptist 21 9 Bank 43

Church Hall

1 9

41 Police Station Sutton Sunday Hall School

Baptist 37 PH 4 2 City House Church Watermead Patrick Dunne Hs

HIGH STREET House 35 Hall 33 90 BANK MEWS

3 6

3 2 3 4 Bank House 9 to 15 3 0 1 to 7

SUTTON PARK ROAD 90 2 6

ORME ROAD

19to21 Raffety

Administration Place 17 House

17 4 2 South Point

a 2 97 1 6 1 8 30

1 4

36 15 1

13 7

44

9 11 9 9 90 50 48 Masonic Hall

54 HIGH STREET 3 1

5 1

7 1 1

68 to 74 90 Telephone Exchange 59 PO Bank

2

Copthall House 1 PH

Works 1e

ROAD Sutton

1d Station

2 1c

4

Greensleeves Manor 1

3 1b

THE QUADRANT 0 1

Sorting Office 1a 2 1 9 5 2 1 1

2

2a

2 BRIDGE ROAD Sutton Station 4 4

6

8a Shelters

8 g Quadrant House

ROAD MULGRAVE

14 1 1

16

Tudor Court

2 4 6

1 3 5 22 Station Parade Mulgrave 1to 6(over shops)

7 Mulgrave Court

Cyrillian House Chambers 8 to 1 2 1 2 4 6 6

St George's 1

Court 4

1 3 5 8 a

Figure 4 High Street Crossroads z Townscape Analysis

Character Appraisal Area Listed Buildings Landmarks Locally Listed Buildings N Focal Space Reference Number Nominated for Local List Views Pedestrianised Area

Town Centre Gateway Negative Impact on Area Copyright Ordnance Survey g 2010 100008655X Page 37 Agenda Item 11 R FOU

Character Analysis

Introduction 4.1 This section of the appraisal sets out the details of the special architectural, historic, landscape or townscape quality and appearance of the area.

4.2 The character appraisal area focuses on the development on either side of the High Street, from Sutton Station down hill to Trinity Square. This is now busy town centre environment that has developed from early service and accommodation beginnings with the Cock Hotel, through to more formal Victorian terraces with a uniform building line and fairly regular street layout.

4.3 For the purposes of assessment and in line with the development of the High Street terraces, the character appraisal area has been divided into 6 sub- areas, as shown on Figure 1. These sub areas are: x Sub Area 1: Numbers 2 – 18 High Street. x Sub Area 2: Numbers 26 – 42 High Street, Bank House & Sutton Police Station. x Sub Area 3: Numbers 46-76 High Street and 7-9 Carshalton Road. x Sub Area 4: Numbers 49-67 High Street, 2-8 Cheam Road, 6-9 Hill Road and Trinity Methodist Church. x Sub Area 5: Numbers 17-43 High Street, 1-9 Cheam Road, Morrison Supermarket and Sutton Baptist Church. x Sub Area 6: Numbers 1 – 13 High Street and 1-9 Grove Road (including the Masonic Hall).

4.4 The character of each sub-area is discussed in detail below.

Land Uses 4.5 At ground floor, the High Street area covered by this character appraisal is primarily a mix of commercial uses which have been a dominant feature of the High Street since the buildings were constructed in the mid-late 1800s. Today the commercial uses are predominantly food and drink sales (pubs, bars and restaurants) interspersed with other retail uses and financial and professional services. Upper floors are occupied by a variety of uses including residential, office and storage, as well as some vacancies. The current ground floor uses are shown on Figure 5.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 16

Agenda Item 11 Page 38 8

9 4

3

2 1 0

9 2 1

St Nicholas ST NICHOLAS ROAD Church PCs

THROWLEY WAY

8 4 Surrey

House 71 to 81 to 71 Surrey House

Chancery THROWLEY House ROAD

College of THROWLEY ROAD Liberal Arts

7 6

The Upper Walk HILL ROAD 7 2

PH 6 8

6 to 9 7 0 67 Georgian

6 6 Epworth Mansions

Lodge The Lower Square

ULC Shelter 63

The Upper Walk HIGH STREET

Trinity 6 0

Methodist 59 Civic Centre 5 8 Church

5 6 57 55

15 Shelter 51 5 2

4 6to50 9 Hall

Bank 49 Cheam Road 1 1 4 Bank CHEAM ROAD 8 2

CARSHALTON ROAD Police Station

ON Patrick Dunne Hse Sunday 2

Sutton School

RK ROAD 2

a 1 3

Baptist 21 9 Bank 43

Church Hall

1 9

41 Police Station Sutton Sunday Hall School

Baptist 37 PH 4 2 City House Church Watermead Patrick Dunne Hs

HIGH STREET House 35 Hall 33 BANK MEWS

3 6

3 2 3 4 Bank House 9 to 15 3 0 1 to 7

SUTTON PARK ROAD

2 6

ORME ROAD

19to21 Raffety

Administration Place 17 House

4

2 South Point a 2

1 6 1 8 30

1 4

36 15 1

13 7

44

9 11 9 50 48 9 Masonic Hall

54 HIGH STREET 3 1

5 1

7 1 1

68 to 74

Telephone Exchange PO Bank

2

Copthall House 1 PH

Works 1e

ROAD Sutton

1d Station

2 1c

4

Greensleeves Manor 1

3 1b

THE QUADRANT 0 1

Sorting Office 1a 2 1 9 5 2 1 1

2

2a

2 BRIDGE ROAD Sutton Station 4 4

6

8a Shelters

8 Quadrant House

ROAD MULGRAVE

14 1 1

16

Tudor Court

2 4 6

1 3 5 22 Station Parade Mulgrave 1to 6(over shops)

7 Mulgrave Court

Cyrillian House Chambers 8 to 1 2 1 2 4 6 6

St George's 1

Court 4

1 3 5 8 a

Figure 5 High Street Crossroads z Land Uses Ground Floor

Character Appraisal Area Civic / Community Shop Commercial / Leisure N Food and Drink Office

Financial and Professional Services Copyright Ordnance Survey 2010 100008655X Page 39 Agenda Item 11

4.6 A few specific historical uses have survived and can be seen in the area today: Barclays Bank on the corner of the High Street and Cheam Road was purpose built as the London and Provincial Bank; and a public house, originally the Railway Tavern, now O’Neill’s, has been on the adjoining site since before 1884. The surrounding civic and community uses also remain in their purpose-built buildings, specifically the Masonic Lodge, the churches, the halls, the police station and the railway station (although this is the fourth railway station building).

4.7 Historic land uses in the southern end of the High Street included banks and other financial services which were higher class businesses that suited the affluent surrounding residential areas comprising large detached residential dwellings. Today, the land use pattern along the High Street, particularly the number of financial and professional services in the area, reflects these historical uses, as well as the current location of the retail heart of the town centre, further to the north.

4.8 The analysis of each sub-area will look at the: x current existing land uses; x former land uses and the influence of these on plan form and historic building types; and x any particular historic patronage.

Architectural Character 4.9 The proposed conservation area has a predominately Victorian architectural character. The buildings lining the High Street generally have a vertical grain with 3- and 4-storey buildings establishing a strong pattern and rhythm of roofscape, whereas the areas off the High Street contain a mix of building heights and types including standalone churches, the police station and more modern buildings with offices uses above ground floor (post 1950s).

4.10 The design of newer buildings tends not to respect the pattern, rhythm, scale and architectural qualities of the historic buildings and therefore these buildings have a negative impact on the character appraisal area (see Figure 6). A positive contribution to the area is made by the older Victorian terraces, as well as the civic and community buildings: the churches, halls, police station and train station. Unfortunately many of the original shopfronts in the study area have been obscured or replaced, and now present unsightly frontages that detract from the architectural quality of the buildings at upper storeys. The four remaining traditional shopfronts show the value of shopfront design that is sympathetic to the historic buildings and these shopfronts continue to make an important contribution to the character of the area as a whole.

4.11 The analysis of each sub-area will look at the: x architectural and historic qualities of buildings and the contribution that they make; x contribution of key unlisted buildings of merit;

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 18 Agenda Item 11 Page 40

x prevalent local and traditional building materials; x general building condition; and x extent of loss/intrusion/damage.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 19

Page 41 Agenda Item 11 8

9 4

3

2 1 0

9 2 1

St Nicholas ST NICHOLAS ROAD Church PCs

THROWLEY WAY

8 4 Surrey

House 71 to 81 to 71 Surrey House

Chancery THROWLEY House ROAD

College of THROWLEY ROAD Liberal Arts

7 6

The Upper Walk HILL ROAD 7 2

PH 6 8

6 to 9 7 0 67 Georgian

6 6 Epworth Mansions

Lodge The Lower Square

ULC Shelter 63

The Upper Walk HIGH STREET

Trinity 6 0

Methodist 59 Civic Centre 5 8 Church

5 6 57 55

15 Shelter 51 5 2

4 6to50 9 Hall

Bank 49 Cheam Road 1 1 4 Bank CHEAM ROAD 8 2

CARSHALTON ROAD Police Station

ON Patrick Dunne Hse Sunday 2

Sutton School

RK ROAD 2

a 1 3

Baptist 21 9 Bank 43

Church Hall

1 9

41 Police Station Sutton Sunday Hall School

Baptist 37 PH 4 2 City House Church Watermead Patrick Dunne Hs

HIGH STREET House 35 Hall 33 BANK MEWS

3 6

3 2 3 4 Bank House 9 to 15 3 0 1 to 7

SUTTON PARK ROAD

2 6

ORME ROAD

19to21 Raffety

Administration Place 17 House

4

2 South Point a 2

1 6 1 8 30

1 4

36 15 1

13 7

44

9 11 9 50 48 9 Masonic Hall

54 HIGH STREET 3 1

5 1

7 1 1

68 to 74

Telephone Exchange PO Bank

2

Copthall House 1 PH

Works 1e

ROAD Sutton

1d Station

2 1c

4

Greensleeves Manor 1

3 1b

THE QUADRANT 0 1

Sorting Office 1a 2 1 9 5 2 1 1

2

2a

2 BRIDGE ROAD Sutton Station 4 4

6

8a Shelters

8 Quadrant House

ROAD MULGRAVE

14 1 1

16

Tudor Court

2 4 6

1 3 5 22 Station Parade Mulgrave 1to 6(over shops)

7 Mulgrave Court

Cyrillian House Chambers 8 to 1 2 1 2 4 6 6

St George's 1

Court 4

1 3 5 8 a

Figure 6 High Street Crossroads z Building Character Analysis

Character Appraisal Area Listed Building Buildings making a positive contribution Locally Listed Building N Buildings with a negative impact on area Neutral building

Traditional shopfront Copyright Ordnance Survey 2010 100008655X Agenda Item 11 Page 42

Appraisal of Sub-Areas

Sub Area 1: Sutton Station, Numbers 2 – 18 High Street and Sutton Court Estate Wall

4.12 This sub area forms the south-eastern most corner of the Conservation Area and is an important arrival point to the town centre for those using public transport and also those in vehicles arriving from the south, via Brighton Road. The area includes Sutton Station and a row of 8 Victorian three-storey shops at 2 – 18 High Street, as well as the last remaining feature of Sutton Court Estate, a boundary wall.

Sutton Station 4.13 The first Sutton Station was opened in 1847 when the London and Brighton Railway constructed a branch line from Croydon to Epsom. The first station building was a small wooden structure (now used by Sutton Cricket Club) and was replaced in 1865, again in 1885, and finally was replaced with the current building in 192811. The station building itself remains largely unchanged since 1928 however today the area in front of the station is cluttered with ticket machines, signs, guard rails and other street furniture obscuring the building and interrupting the rhythm of the 7 bays, pillars and windows.

4.14 As one of only a few remaining traditional building frontages, the station building makes a positive Sutton Station, 1928 contribution to the town centre environment, however it does not have landmark qualities and does little to mark this important entrance to the town centre or support a town centre focal space. This key town centre site is allocated for redevelopment, allowing for: a landmark building; a

public transport interchange; and high Sutton Station, 2010 quality urban space. New buildings on the site could be used for a variety of town centre uses including offices, leisure and shops12 (see Appendix 1). In the absence of significant architectural or historical attributes, this site has the potential and capacity for

11 Frank Burgess, pg 5., No Small Change: 100 Years of Sutton High Street, 1983 12 This site is allocated as a development site in both the adopted Supplementary Planning Document: Development Framework for Sutton Station and Adjacent Land (July 2005) as well as in the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan Preferred Options Document (April 2009).

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 21 Page 43 Agenda Item 11

redevelopment in order to bring about positive changes to the town centre environment, particularly the public realm.

Sutton Court Estate Wall 4.15 Sutton Court Estate is likely to date from the early 17th century however little is known of the early history of this Estate and no photos or illustrations of the Estate survive. It is shown on Rocque’s map from around 1760 with the grounds extending from approximately where the railway lines are located today, in the south, to where Carshalton Road is today, in the north. Mr Martindale, who occupied Sutton Court from 1756-90, is said to have had a famous stud of horses, a variety of stables, and two cottages for the stablemen adjacent to Sutton Court13. Three tenants followed Mr Martindale until demolition around 1896, when Sutton Court Road was constructed, running through the middle of the estate and joining the High Street near the junction of Grove Road.

4.16 The only remnant of the old estate is the nomenclature of Sutton Court Road itself and a section of the enclosing wall which is a ‘typical Tudor structure of chalk blocks, flints with some brick’14, now in poor condition with a large amount of vegetation growing on and through it. The setting of the wall, to the rear of the High Street terrace and adjacent to an access road and car parking spaces, creates an unattractive surrounding environment which, along with the condition of the wall itself, should be improved. The estate wall is 1865-1884 map showing the extent of Sutton Court Estate nominated for local listing (ref. #97).

4.17 By 1896 the former estate was divided up into smaller land parcels which were then built on. Those fronting Sutton Court Road accommodated a number of large detached and semi-detached houses; a row of 10 land parcels, fronting the High Street, accommodated Victorian shop buildings. The High Street buildings were constructed between 1868 and 1897 and appear to have been developed in phases but with unifying common features, form, scale and materials. Sutton Court Road had followed the chalk pit and field boundaries which resulted in a dog-leg before it joined the High Street, however the straightening of Sutton Court Road (mid 1980s-mid 1990s) resulted in the loss of the two northern most buildings and reduced the historic terrace of ten down to eight.

13 Robert P. Smith, pg 19, A History of Sutton: A.D. 675-1960, 1970 14 ibid

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 22 Agenda Item 11 Page 44

Tramlink 4.18 The proposed extension of Tramlink into Sutton (see Appendix 1 for the proposed Tramlink route) would require widening the carriageway to allow for a tram stop / public transport interchange on the southern side of Sutton Court Road. This would result in the loss of part of the Sutton Court Estate wall and the end two or three buildings in the terrace. While it is not anticipated that Tramlink will come forward before at least 201715, the route and the tramstop have been provided for in local planning policy16. The future development of Tramlink would require a thorough assessment of the impact on the heritage values of the buildings, the wall and the historic context in which the development is set.

High Street near the Station, 1890 High Street near the Station, 2010 High Street Terrace 4.19 The eight remaining buildings at nos. 2 – 18 High Street are dressed to differing degrees however the buildings have the same proportions (3-bays wide and 3-storeys high), and as a group they create a strong building and roof line with an historic association to the position and slope of the High Street, Sutton Court Road and Sutton Court Estate. The entire terrace is nominated for local listing (ref. #90).

4.20 The Old Bank public house, adjacent to the Station, was initially occupied by Messrs. Bowling, Ironmongers, subsequently a bank, and today a pub The Old Bank Public called The Old Bank. This building and the adjoining House, no. 2 High Street two are in good condition at first and second storeys, retaining wooden sash windows and the original dressings of decorative lintels, string courses and decorative corners/edges of buildings (quoins).

15 The London Plan indicates that, subject to funding and undertaking planning and feasibility work, an extension might be added to the network post 2017. See Policy 3C.11 (and Table 3C.1). 16 See both the adopted Core Planning Strategy (December 2009) and the Development Framework for Sutton Station and Adjacent Land (Supplementary Planning Document)(July 2005) as well as the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan: Preferred Options Document (April 2009).

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 23 Page 45 Agenda Item 11

4.21 The shopfront at no. 6 High Street is one of the better frontages in the area and it retains some original features including carved consoles on either side. The four pilasters clearly articulate and support elements of the shopfront including the arched fascia which is well proportioned. The lettering respects the size and shape of the fascia does not dominate the frontage. The adjoining building at no. 8 High Street is well dressed with stucco mouldings and keystones above the windows, as well as stucco panels of shields and foliage. Nos. 10 – 12 High Street are plainer buildings with contrasting gauged red brick lintels above the windows and red brick detailing in the cornice on the parapet.

4.22 The painted brickwork on the two end buildings, on the corner of Sutton Court Road and the High Street (nos. 14-18 High Street), detracts from the uniformity of the Victorian terrace. The windows have also been replaced and dormer windows have been added. The pair of buildings also differs in that they do not have parapets obscuring their roofs however their proportions and fenestration clearly tie them to the remainder of the terrace. The blank end wall, facing Sutton Court Road is decorated with a mosaic. Decorative window 4.23 None of the original shop fronts remain, and most dressing, no. 8 High Street have large, obtrusive fascia boards that detract from the quality and detail of the dressings at first and second storeys. Traditional shopfronts should be reinstated which would support a distinctive Victorian Sutton High Street and not detract from the quality of the buildings at upper storeys.

4.24 The original brickwork, detailing and windows Painted brickwork at nos. 14- should be retained / restored and where 18 High Street possible any altered features should be reinstated, in keeping with the original buildings, the architecture and detailing of the sub-area. This is particularly relevant for the two buildings at nos. 14-18 High Street.

4.25 Both the nomenclature of Sutton Court Road and the remnant wall from Sutton Court Estate are historically significant features connecting the area to its historic foundations. In addition, the Victorian architectural features of the Brown brick buildings with red buildings, as well as the location and length of brick detailing at nos. 10-12 the whole terrace (albeit now two buildings High Street short) respects the established historic

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 24 Agenda Item 11 Page 46

positioning of the High Street and Sutton Court Road. These aspects all serve as an important reminder of previous land uses in the area and should be retained and enhanced.

Development Potential 4.26 This sub area is surrounded by sites allocated for future development, all of which have the potential to impact on the sub-area, either through works to the buildings/structures themselves, or through changes to the character and setting of the surrounding area. Appendix 1 shows the location of the allocated sites surrounding this area, which are: Sutton Station and Car Park; the buildings to the South of Grove Road; the buildings to the north of Grove Road; and the Shops Opposite the Station17. Strengths 4.27 The development of Sutton Station would allow x Scale and rhythm of for a new landmark building of 20-25 storeys, the terrace public transport interchange and high quality x Detailing at upper urban space. A building of this height would storeys need to be carefully designed to ensure minimal impact on the 3-storey terrace on the adjoining x Historic reminders of site. As part of the redevelopment of this site the road layout and and the sites to the South of Sutton Court Road, estate wall a pedestrian link is proposed, allowing for x Human scale of access from the station through to a proposed buildings and tram/bus stop and interchange on Sutton Court spaces in between Road. Improvements to the public realm in this Opportunities area, particularly in front of the station, which is a x Key town centre major town centre gateway, could also improve gateway and focal the setting of historic buildings,. space x Surrounding 4.28 There is active pressure for change in this area. development sites The building and sites to the South of Sutton x Reinstatement of Court road are currently vacant and have an traditional existing planning permission for redevelopment, shopfronts, windows including buildings up to 14-storeys high. There and brickwork. is also development pressure in relation to the Key Considerations sites north of Sutton Court Road; Bank House is x Tramlink route and currently being retrofitted and a planning associated building application has been lodged for a building up to demolition 17-storeys on the vacant site at 17 Sutton Court x Impact of major Road. development sites including Sutton 4.29 The demolition of existing buildings and the Station heights of new buildings have the potential to x Relationship with the impact on the historic terrace and therefore terrace opposite future developments need to consider and respect the nature of this part of the sub-area, both individually and cumulatively as development progresses.

17 These sites are allocated for development in the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan: Preferred Options Document, April 2009.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 25 Page 47 Agenda Item 11

Sub Area 2: Numbers 26 – 42 High Street and Sutton Police Station

4.30 This area comprises mainly 4-storey commercial buildings lining the High Street (nos. 26 – 42) and includes a listed former bank (Grade II), the listed Sutton Police Station (Grade II), and two modern buildings with office and retail uses. The area is particularly historically important as the site of the Cock Hotel, constructed on the crossroads of the turnpike road.

4.31 What is now known as Sutton High Street was previously a well used turnpike road from London to Brighton, constructed well before 1755. Carshalton Road/Cheam Road was also an important road through Sutton, connecting a chain of old towns between Croydon and Guildford and for this reason was included as a turnpike road18. The Cock Hotel was located at the crossroads, on the corner of Carshalton Road and ‘Cock Hill’ (now the High Street) and was one of only two coaching inns in Sutton (the other was the Greyhound, further down the High Street). The inns provided a resting and changing place for horses as well as food and drink for passengers en route19.

4.32 The original Cock Hotel and Cock ‘Tap’ were built on the corner shortly after 1755 and remained there until 1896 when the old Cock Tap beerhouse was demolished and the ‘new’ Cock Hotel was built in its place. Both the old and new hotels stood alongside for a brief period, as shown in the 1896 photo below, before the old hotel was demolished. The old Tap and the new hotel were both set back from the road, creating a forecourt at the junction and this setback remains today, providing an area of public space, continuing the historic association with both the road layout and former regionally significant uses.

The original Cock Hotel, painted by Thomas The new Cock Hotel shortly after its opening in Rowlandson in 1790. The tollhouse is to the 1896, built on the site of the old Tap beerhouse. right and the tollgate, with the sign on its beam The old hotel is still standing and is visible in the is in the centre. background to the right.

18 Robert P. Smith, pg 31, A History of Sutton: A.D. 675-1960, 1970

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 26 Agenda Item 11 Page 48

The Cock Sign 4.33 Historically, inns suspended their signs prominently over the centre of the carriageway to attract passing stage-coaches. A simple sign, like that shown in the 1790 illustration above, hung over the road and marked the old hotel until its demolition in 1897. At that time a new sign was erected which stood in the forecourt of the new hotel until about 192020. This sign is today located in the centre of the road at the junction of the High Street and Carshalton Road and should be retained in the immediate area as a rare and historically significant feature that serves as an important reminder of the historic turnpike road, Cock Hill, and the former landmark hotel buildings. The sign is The Cock sign with Trinity Church tower and spire in the background. nominated for inclusion on the local list (ref.# 109).

Sutton Police Station 4.34 The Cock Hotel at the crossroads and the Sutton Police Station on Carshalton Road would have acted as landmark buildings for those entering the town centre from the east. Today, the one-way road system around the town centre means that for those in vehicles, the Police Station is not seen when approaching the town centre, but when leaving via Carshalton Road. Pedestrians, however, gain longer views of the building from Throwley Way and the corner of Manor Park (see Figure 4).

4.35 The Police Station is a late Victorian listed building, built in 1908, and included on the national register because it is “an unusually elaborate example of a Metropolitan Police Station built in a suburban area”21. The building is red brick with Portland stone dressings and each end of the central 5-bay building is framed by an Ionic pilaster. There are also features around the door, including the carved word ‘POLICE’, and an ‘oeil de boeuf’ window in the side wing. Few changes have been made to the building and it remains as an interesting and important town centre building.

Sutton Police Station shortly after it was built in Sutton Police Station today. 1909

19 Frank Burgess, plate 136, Sutton: A Pictorial History, 1993 20 Frank Burgess, page 11, No Small Change; 100 Years of Sutton High Street, 1983 21 Listed Building Citation

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 27 Page 49 Agenda Item 11

Former Cock Hotel Site 4.36 A five-storey office building with ground floor retail, at no. 2 Carshalton Road, stands on the site of the ‘new’ Cock Hotel (demolished in 1961)22. The office building makes a negative contribution to the character of the area and redevelopment offers the opportunity to construct a building that better reflects the significant history of the site, as well as better complementing the surrounding and adjoining buildings, particularly the listed Sutton Police Station. 5-storey at no. 2 Carshalton 4.37 Today a 3-storey building with a domed roof Road and 3-storey building with stands in the place of the old Cock Hotel at no. domed roof on the site of the 42 High Street. This building coexisted with the Cock Hotel ‘new’ Cock Hotel and can be seen in the 1933 photo to the right. The building is nominated for local listing (ref. # 90) and is in the High Victorian style with six over nine pane sash windows set regularly in red brick and stone dressings in quoin strips. The first storey windows originally matched the six over nine pane windows on the second storey, however the lower portion of the sash has since been replaced. The dome roof and globe finial remain and provide variety and interest to the skyline.

High Street Terrace 4.38 The adjoining terrace is a series of six, 4-storey buildings with the listed Edwardian Cock and The terrace in 1933 with the domed building and Cock Bull public house on the northern corner of the Hotel visible at the end High Street and Carshalton Road. The length of this terrace and the position of the buildings was determined by the historic road layout, with Sutton Court Road to the south (discussed in sub-area 1 above). This terrace is nominated for local listing (ref.# 90).

4.39 Above ground level, the buildings form a uniform terrace, however minor changes are apparent: many of the original sash windows have been replaced; the remaining windows and stone window surrounds, with keystones, have been painted; and the entire Cock and Bull building above ground floor is now painted with a parapet added. Fortunately, 2 of the original 3 canted The same uniform terrace as oriel windows remain, one of which retains above, with domed end building. 22 Frank Burgess, plates 138 &139, Sutton: A Pictorial History, 1993

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 28 Agenda Item 11 Page 50

most of its original glazing and glazing bars (at nos. 32-34 High Street) and reminds us how splendid the architecture once was.

Cock and Bull Pub 4.40 The Cock and Bull was built around the turn of the 20th Century and is a listed building on account of the ground floor carved stone detailing. The photo below shows the building in 1902 and the art nouveau decoration on the ground floor, extending into an oriel window above the doorway on the chamfered corner. The photo shows the bank building with the stone façade extending along the length of the 3- bay building.

4.41 These details remain today however the carved stone façade now extends across the adjoining Original canted window with building at 28 High Street. It is likely that this glazing bars at 32-34 High occurred in 1961 when the bank extended its Street ground floor use into the adjoining shop. Comparison of the 1902 photo and the photo of the building show that painting the brickwork at upper storeys has obscured the decorative detailing, however the traditional shopfront remains and continues to make a positive contribution to the town centre environment.

4.42 This sub-area, including the site of the turnpike crossroads and the Cock Hotel and ‘Tap’, is crucial to the history and development of Sutton Art Nouveau decoration on town centre and the borough as a whole. The the base of the oriel window remaining features referencing this historical significance are: the road layout itself; the Cock Hotel sign; the building lines, including setbacks; and the location of the buildings themselves. This sub-area contains two nationally listed buildings, Sutton Police Station and the Cock and Bull pub, the quality and uniqueness of which positively contribute to this southern part of the High Street. Original features of the remaining buildings in the terrace, such as a canted oriel window with original decorative glazing bars and the details around and above windows should be protected, enhanced and restored. The London and County Bank building Development Potential in 1902 (Photo: Frank Burgess) 4.43 The sites to the north of Sutton Court Road

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 29 Page 51 Agenda Item 11

are allocated development sites (Site S2: North of Sutton Court Road, see Appendix 1) and could accommodate buildings of potentially over 11 storeys23. These development sites are located to the rear of the older buildings along the High Street and the height, design and positioning of future development could impact on the listed Cock and Bull pub building (26-28 High Street) as well as the remainder of the Victorian terrace. The access road to the east of the Cock and Bull pub, off Carshalton Road, presents an unattractive environment and any redevelopment of these sites should consider the improvement of this access road on the The Cock and Bull pub today setting of the listed building. The small scale character of these buildings and the wider historic context of the area should be carefully Strengths considered with any development to ensure the x Site of historically historic importance of the area is not obscured. significant Cock Hotel and crossroads x Two listed buildings and other buildings of interest x Views of Trinity Church spire x Traditional shopfront Opportunities x Redevelopment opportunities x Reinstatement of traditional shopfronts x Reinstatement of windows, particularly oriel windows x Reinstatement of brickwork, particularly the Cock and Bull pub Key Considerations x Respect and enhance the reminders of the Cock Hotel and crossroads

23 As outlined in the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan: Preferred Options Document (April 2009), and Gillespies’ Urban Design Framework for Sutton Town Centre (February 2009). A planning application has been lodged for a building up to 17 storeys in height. No decision has been made in respect of this application.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 30 Agenda Item 11 Page 52

Sub Area 3: 46-76 High Street and 7-9 Carshalton Road

4.44 This sub area includes two modern buildings on the corner of the High Street and Carshalton Road, a 3-storey Victorian terrace of 2-bay buildings at 46-76 High Street and two semi- detached buildings at 7-9 Carshalton Road.

4.45 In 188024 a terrace of 14 Victorian buildings were constructed down hill from the Cock Hotel, between Carshalton Road and the newly constructed Throwley Road. The underlying land had been in use as fields and as an old chalk pit before the buildings were constructed for shop uses. Throwely Road followed the field boundaries, resulting in a sharp 90 degree turn to the south and a gentler curve to the east, through a former flour mill. Although the introduction of the gyratory roads in the 1970s / 1980s changed the function of the roads and the direction of travel, the layout still survives today and is seen in Throwely Road, a portion of Throwley Way and Greyhound Road.

High Street Terrace 4.46 The historic road layout determined the location of the buildings, even to the extent that the corner building curved, in line with the site boundary. Eight of the original 14 buildings remain (nos. 60-76 High Street) and are now nominated for local listing (ref. #85). Most are in fair condition with: sash windows; Flemish bond brickwork; original yellow, red and grey brick arched lintel decoration; and polychrome brick bands continuing Terrace with original sash windows and across the facades. The window detailing brick detailing. The dormer windows has been painted at no. 72 High Street and are visible. the entire building façade at the northern end of the terrace is painted (no. 76 High Street). This is an original corner building and the visible pattern of the brickwork under the paint shows that the detailing continues around the corner to front Throwley Way. This building has a significant 3 storey, 5 bay unsympathetic rear extension which is visible along Throwley Way as pedestrians enter the The ‘Cock Hill’ stretch of the High town centre from Manor Park. Street north of the cross roads in 1890

24 Frank Burgess, plate 57, Sutton: A Pictorial History, 1993

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 31 Page 53 Agenda Item 11

4.47 Unlike most of the other Victorian terraces in the study area, these buildings do not have parapets and the original dormer windows are visible on six of the eight buildings. The dormer windows are however in poor repair and all of the original 6 pane casement windows have been replaced with a variety of different windows.

4.48 This terrace compliments one of a similar scale, built across the road (sub- area 4), ten years earlier, in 1870. As a cohesive group of buildings on either side of the High Street, they form a comfortable sense of enclosure, contributing to the quality of space between the buildings on the now pedestrianised High Street.

4.49 The historic merit of this sub-area is in the group of buildings that form the High Street terrace. They serve as an important reminder of the gradual development of Sutton High Street in the mid-late 1800s, as well as maintaining the historic association to road layouts and field boundaries. The quality and detailing of the buildings above ground level is good and little has changed in since their construction in 1880. Ground floor shopfronts should be restored to further distinguish the value of these buildings and contribute to a distinctive public realm.

Modern Buildings 4.50 The sense of enclosure established by the Victorian terraces is disrupted by the newer buildings at 46-54 and 56-58 High Street which date from 1986 and the early-mid 1950s. The frontages of these buildings are wider than the older buildings and at 4- and 5-storeys they are also taller. The windows and fenestration are different, and the rhythm established in the earlier buildings is not respected. The materials and colours are not compatible with Modern buildings at 46 – 58 High glass, concrete and green panelling used on Street the 1950s building and dark red brick with tinted glass windows in the 1980s building. These newer buildings do not respect the scale of the surrounding or adjoining buildings are not in keeping architecturally with the remainder of the terrace. They make a negative contribution to the character of the area and present the opportunity for redevelopment that better respects the architectural qualities and heritage of the area. Similarly, the protection and restoration of the surviving buildings would ensure that the positive historic aspects do not deteriorate further.

Carshalton Road 4.51 The two semi-detached buildings at 7-9 Carshalton Road, were built around the time of the High Street Nos. 7-9 Carshalton Road terrace and display the same window layout,

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 32 Agenda Item 11 Page 54

architraves / lintels and brick detailing around the windows, however the entire building façade has been painted and this detailing is now obscured. The buildings are both in poor repair with large cracks visible in the painted brickwork and a Strengths variety of replacement windows have been x Unified Victorian installed. They are set back from Carshalton High Street terrace Road, originally with a garden/forecourt, x Original detailing however the addition of shop fronts by 1913 and many original obscured the ground floor and detract from the windows at upper original building. While there are similarities storeys between these two buildings and the main x Views of Trinity terrace on the High Street, they do not Church tower obviously form part of the terrace, do not Opportunities contribute positively to the character and x Development appearance of the area and therefore present opportunities a redevelopment opportunity. x Reinstatement of traditional dormer Development Potential windows and 4.52 There are no allocated development sites in or shopfronts near this sub-area however the modern Key Considerations buildings at 46-58 High Street and the semi- x Appropriate detached buildings at 7-9 Carshalton Road do redevelopment of not make a positive contribution to the area. existing Well designed redevelopment that respects the unsympathetic road layout, building setbacks, height and properties character of the Victorian terrace would significantly improve the environment.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 33 Page 55 Agenda Item 11

Sub Area 4: 49-67 High Street, 2-8 Cheam Road, 6-9 Hill Road and Trinity Methodist Church.

4.53 This sub area is close to the heart of the town centre retail core, and adjoins Trinity Town Square to the north and Cheam Road to the south. The architectural character of the area is varied, with a row of Victorian shops, the listed Trinity Church (Grade II), a row of four mock Tudor buildings and a new blank façade on a single storey building which is painted black. The character of the public realm is also varied, with areas of enclosure and relative quiet on the pedestrianised High Street, the open area of the town square, as well as areas that are dominated by traffic on Cheam Road, travelling east along the gyratory.

4.54 Fernwood Villa and substantial grounds dating from at least 1842, was bounded by Cheam Road to the south, Church Lane to the north (now St Nicholas Road) and Cock Hill (now the High Street) to the east. Church Lane provided access to both St Nicholas Church and the Fernwood Villa. The trees in the garden are marked on an 1842 map, indicating that they were large and well established, and the 1865 map shows the trees, house and paths in greater detail, extending right up to the High Street and Cheam Road.

4.55 Around 1870 Hill Road was built between Cheam Road and Church Lane, dividing the Fernwood site in two. The remainder of the site was broken up into separate land parcels for development. In 1870 a terrace of 11 Victorian shops were built to the south of Hill Road, along eastern boundary, fronting the High Street. The 9 central buildings remain Four of the terrace at 51-61 High today however many are in poor repair. The Street. The buildings to the right building proportions of these Victorian shops are not painted and the original are uniform, at 3-storeys, however detailing is visible. development occurred in phases and the different detailing of each group adds variety to the terrace.

High Street Terrace 4.56 The six buildings from nos. 51-61 High Street were built together and have feature tripartite windows, some of which have been replaced. The facades of the three buildings from nos. 51-55 High Street, have been plastered over No. 67 High Street, now the end and painted, obscuring the brickwork and building in the terrace.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 34 Agenda Item 11 Page 56

detailing, while the three adjoining buildings at nos. 57-61 High Street, are unpainted, revealing the original yellow brickwork with red brick arched architraves. The adjoining two buildings, at nos. 63 – 65 High Street are red brick with chamfered blockwork lintels. At second storey the lintels are cusped with the painted blockwork extending across the façade.

4.57 The northern most building, at the end of the terrace (no. 67 High Street), was the first bank in the town and was converted to a shop in 1896 by J. Sainsbury Esquire. It was one of the earliest Sainsbury branches and traded there until 196025. The unpainted red brick building is 4-bays with arched windows on the second storey. These windows are decorated with stepped, fan-like lintels and keystones while the third storey windows are plainer with keystones that extend into the detailing of the parapet. An additional building with 4-bays was located on the corner of the High Street and Hill Road but was demolished in the mid to late 1960s. The windowless side elevation of no. 67 now forms one of the enclosing walls of the town square and is decorated with the Sutton Heritage Mosaic, completed in 199426.

4.58 As a group, the 1870 buildings (nos. 51-67 High Street) form a varied terrace; differences in the number of bays, the fenestration, materials and detailing add variety and interest to the terrace while the building lines, heights and width create a unifying rhythm. Together with the terrace directly across the High Street (sub area 3) a comfortable human scale and sense of enclosure is established, following the positioning of the historic turnpike road and the development of Sutton as a town centre.

4.59 The building originally constructed on the corner of the High Street and Cheam Road was the southern most building in the 1870 terrace and had the same detailing as the adjoining six. The replacement Lloyds Bank building that stands there today dates from before 192627 and is a 3-bay red brick building with a chamfered corner, stone detailing and original sash windows. Stucco open & broken scroll pediments with a decorative cartouche of a vase with overflowing fruit adorns each of the first floor middle windows.

Lloyds Bank building, corner High 4.60 The High Street terrace in this sub area, and Street and Cheam Road. across the road in sub area 3, is characteristic of a small, human scale Victorian High Street. Together they enclose and frame the public realm of the pedestrianised High Street and provide links to the commercial development of the area over the 1870s and 1880s. Their positioning has been determined by the historical layout and development of roads which often followed plot boundaries and created small block sizes resulting in an easily legible environment. The character and

25 Frank Burgess, plate 59, Sutton: A Pictorial History, 1993 26 Sara Goodwins, pages 24-25, Sutton: Past & Present, 2004 27 1926 Pile’s Local Directory

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 35 Page 57 Agenda Item 11

appearance of the group of buildings and the public realm between them creates an interesting and comfortable environment which should be preserved and enhanced.

Mock Tudor Buildings 4.61 These four buildings, dating from 1914- 1926, are located at nos. 2-8 Cheam Road28. The 2-storey buildings were built in pairs with distinctive detailing around the windows and gables. Some of this detailing has now been obscured, however the original canted bay windows and one original shopfront remains. The shopfront retains the original stallriser, arched windows with original mullions and transoms, high rectangular leadlight The four mock tudor buildings in 1932 windows and a recessed door and entranceway. The fascia in the picture to the right is oversized which dominates and detracts from the human scale and elegance of the original window at street level. This frontage is one of only 4 surviving traditional frontages in the character appraisal area and it makes a significant contribution to the street scene. These four buildings have been nominated for local listing (ref. #51) however only the The four mock tudor buildings today surviving shopfront (no. 8 Cheam Road) is being taken forward as part of the local listing process.

4.62 These buildings, particularly the remaining original shopfront and the detailing at first storey, make a positive contribution by providing variety and character to the area and the town centre as a whole. At 2- storeys, their small scale allows views of the Trinity Church town and spire from the east, however the adjoining blank frontage (no. 10 Cheam Road) makes a negative Original shopfront at 8 Cheam Road contribution to the surrounding buildings and the area and presents the opportunity for sensitive redevelopment, while preserving views of the Church.

Civic / Community Enclave 4.63 Trinity Methodist Church and halls were built on the corner of Hill Road and Church Road (now St Nicholas Way) in 1907. The Gothic buildings are constructed from Kentish ragstone with Bath stone dressings and the tall

28 These properties were listed in the 1926 Pile’s local directory.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 36 Agenda Item 11 Page 58

square tower, decorative buttresses and spire form an important town centre landmark. The church is in a prominent corner location for those entering the town centre and is best viewed from Cheam Road / St Nicholas Way. As a tall landmark feature in the town centre, the church tower and spire can also be viewed from afar, from the junction of the High Street and Cheam Road, as well as from Throwley Road and Trinity Square (see Figure 4).

4.64 At the time of construction, a Public Hall (built 1878) was across Hill Road, St Nicholas Church (built 1862-64) was nearby at the end Trinity Methodist Church tower of the old Church Road and the Baptist Church was located on the corner of Hill Road and the High Street, together these formed an enclave of civic/community buildings and functions in the area. This civic/community enclave remains today despite the area having undergone changes since the end of the 1800s: the Public Hall was replaced with a modern office building in 1984; the Baptist Church moved to its current location on Cheam Modern, blank façade at no. 10 Road; the gyratory roads (St Nicholas Way) Cheam Road were introduced; and Council’s Civic Offices were built across St Nicholas Way.

4.65 The Cheam Road Picture Theatre (no. 10 Cheam Road) was built in 1911 and was one of the earliest in the town. The façade and inside have since been altered, but the main structure remains29. Today a former nightclub (Kinetic) with an unattractive and blank façade fronts Cheam Road making a Former ‘Hospital Hall’ on Cheam negative contribution to the area which Road detracts from the surrounding historic buildings and interrupts views, particularly of Trinity Church.

4.66 A small hall is located between Trinity Church and the building and poor façade of the former nightclub adjacent. The hall is shown on a 1913 plan as ‘Hospital Hall’ which would have related to the hospital that was located behind the hall on Hill Georgian Mansions, nos. 6-9 Hill Road Road.

29 Frank Burgess, page 25, Now and Then: More views of Sutton old and new, 1985

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 37 Page 59 Agenda Item 11

4.67 The building at nos. 6-9 Hill Road (Georgian Mansions) was constructed following the demolition of the Cottage Hospital which was on the site from 1902-193130. It is a 9-bay building of three storeys, the central 3-bays projecting under a tympanum with decorative cartouche. The building is also decorated with stone quoins, stone architraves around the central window, and red brick lintels. The building was occupied by a general grocer’s (Surrey Homes Stores) at ground floor with flats above and today it is occupied by The Moon on the Hill Strengths pub. This building is complemented by the x Listed Trinity Church Georgian buildings across Hill Road, which is a 31 x Views of the Church larger 15-bay building, built by 1935 . tower from surrounding areas 4.68 The gradual development of the churches, the x Traditional shopfront hospital, the halls and later the cinema, x Variety of spaces established much of the early infrastructure x Historic ‘community required to ensure the development of a local hub’ uses community and a town of some significance with Opportunities a growing population. Much of this still remains x Development today and reminds us of this significant early opportunities period of development. x Reinstatement of traditional windows, Development Potential brickwork and 4.69 The Council’s Civic Offices, located across St shopfronts Nicholas Way to the west of the sub-area, is an x Repair and upgrade allocated development sites (CW1: Civic Centre of some buildings Site, see Appendix 1), the redevelopment of x Enhance views to which could impact on this sub-area, particularly Trinity Church on the listed Trinity Church. The old Cheam (redevelopment of Road Picture Theatre (no. 10 Cheam Road) also 10 Cheam Road) presents a development opportunity however the Key Considerations development of both these sites would need to x Impact of carefully consider the setting of the church and development of views of the church building and tower from surrounding sites important town centre locations, particularly the Cheam Road town centre gateway and the x Retention of views historic crossroads (see Figure 4). to Trinity Church and church tower

30 Frank Burgess, pg 49, Now and Then: More views of Sutton old and new, 1985 31 Both Georgian buildings, on either side of Hill Road, are mentioned for the first time in the 1935 Pile’s local directory.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 38 Agenda Item 11 Page 60

Sub Area 5: Numbers 17-43 High Street, 1- 9 Cheam Road, Morrison Supermarket and Sutton Baptist Church

4.70 This sub area is characterised by mixed building qualities, including Barclays Bank, a high quality locally listed building and the nationally listed Sutton Baptist Church (Grade II). It includes buildings that span a long timeframe, from pre-1867 through to the present day, and a range of building types and uses including the church, Morrisons large format supermarket and row of traditional High Street shops (17-43 High Street).

4.71 From at least 1842 there was a small cluster of buildings around the crossroads and the Cock Hotel while the majority of buildings on the High Street were further down hill (to the north) at the original centre of the town. Following the introduction of the railway station in 1847, and later, water, gas and electricity, development gradually began to shift up-hill towards the railway station. The terrace in this sub-area is the oldest in the character appraisal area, dating from between 1843 and 1867. The remaining terraces in the area developed over the next 50 years, until around 1900.

4.72 Grove Road, running along the southern edge of this sub-area, was lined with trees which extended up to the High Street. The road was also lined with large, detached, late Victorian mansions which developed from the late 1800s and whose residents would have supported the banking and business functions at this end of the High Street.

4.73 By 1934/35 retail uses began extending out from the High Street into the side roads and 1896 map showing the High Street and the most of the large dwellings had large, detached houses on Grove Road and been altered or demolished, with to the south of the railway tracks. only two remaining largely untouched. Today, aerial photographs reveal that a row of four dwellings remain just beyond the sub-area; the dwelling at 36 Grove Road, has retained it’s original set-back from the road (historically allowing a sweeping entry/exit for carriages) while the adjacent three are obscured behind the shopfronts from 44-66 Grove Road.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 39 Page 61 Agenda Item 11

4.74 The historic road layout of the area has determined the size of this sub-area block; it is a large block when compared to others in the character appraisal area and by the 1930s building extensions and infill development was established to the rear of existing buildings, in the centre of the block the development of banks of garages shows the importance of the motor vehicle. The completion of the Sutton Baptist Church in 1934 complemented the other civic functions across Cheam Road (in sub-area 4).

High Street Terrace 4.75 On the High Street, the terrace of six buildings (nos. 19-29 High Street) is the oldest within the character appraisal area, dating from between 1843 and 1867, and is nominated for local listing (ref. #90). The terrace stopped at Grove Road to the south, with the Railway Tavern (discussed below) and smaller shops to the northern end of the sub-area.32 The oldest terrace in the study area, nos. 19-29 High Street 4.76 The fenestration is the same on all six buildings in this terrace; two arched sash windows with keystones and a string course on the upper level and three rectangular sash windows contained under a floating cornice with consoles at first floor level. Most of the original sash windows remain and the buildings are in moderate repair, however no. 25 is in very poor repair with crumbling detailing, plants sprouting and cracks appearing in the plastering and Barclays Bank Building in 1900 blockwork. (Francis Frith photograph)

Barclays Bank 4.77 This is a four-storey locally listed building, built as the London and Provincial Bank in 1894, and is located at the busy and historically significant town centre junction of Cheam Road and the High Street. Historically, this is the crossroads of the turnpike road, and is opposite the site of the historic Cock Hotel and Tap. It is a tall, grand and decorative building, providing a distinctive local landmark and contributing Locally listed Barclays Bank building to a sense of arrival to the town centre when arriving from Epsom/Cheam direction.

32 Ibid. The smaller shops included Mr Anscomb’s bakery business and Mr Watts’ fruit, vegetable and pork shop.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 40 Agenda Item 11 Page 62

4.78 The ground floor comprises a series of arches and is dressed in rusticated stonework. The rounded entranceway on the corner is surrounded by a decorative architrave and a segmental pediment (open). These features demonstrate the importance of the bank and the ground floor and make a positive contribution to the town centre environment. The second storey is relatively plain, with fluted columns (engaged) and simple cross windows. The third storey is heavily dressed with decorative carvings surrounding the windows, the columns and dentil. The fourth attic storey is above a decorative frieze and built into a decorative parapet with balustrades. Scrolled pediments each topped with a globe finial were originally positioned above each set of three attic storey windows and obscured the attic roofs behind. This detail has since been removed but the attic storey windows and roofs remain. The grand entranceway to Barclays Bank O’Neill’s Pub 4.79 This pub adjoins Barclays Bank to the south (nos. 37-39 High Street) and is a 3-storey dark brown brick building with chamfered corner. The same brick has been used in the detailing around the windows and as horizontal and vertical elements. The original windows are in place but the shaped parapet has been painted. The decorative door surround

extends up into a double storey oriel window. O’Neill’s pub on the site of the A public house, originally the Railway Tavern, historic Railway Tavern has been on this site since the days of the old Cock Hotel33, however the old building with a rounded second storey window had been replaced by 1896. The access and service lane adjacent to the pub allows views of the corner of the building however the lane is also used as a rubbish area and the space has a negative impact on the building and surrounding area. The Railway Tavern in 1885. The wooden pillar and beam to the left is the Morrisons Supermarket supporting sign for the Cock Hotel 4.80 This supermarket development and High Street entrance dates from 1986 and occupies the entire central portion of this large block where there was once a mix of shops with other infill buildings to the rear. The development has three frontages; a single storey High Street entrance; 2-storey retail units and the entrance to Morrisons multi-

33 The Railway Tavern is noted on an 1865-1884 map, and is well established in an 1885 photograph (Sara Goodwins, page 27, Sutton: Past & Present, 2004).

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 41 Page 63 Agenda Item 11

storey car park on Grove Road; and a long 2-storey façade facing Cheam Road.

4.81 The frontages are unattractive additions to the streetscene and do not compliment the surrounding historic environment. The single storey High Street entrance interrupts the rhythm and roofline of the other 3- and 4- storey buildings, leaving a ‘gap’ in the High Street. The long, horizontal façade facing Cheam Road does not include entry/exit

points or other active uses and does not New buildings at 31-35 High Street relate well to the adjoining listed Sutton interrupting the historic High Street Baptist Church, or the historic buildings across Cheam Road. The Grove Road frontage includes a shop unit at 30 Grove Road, however this is bounded by an unattractive access/service road and the entrance to the Morrisons car park on either side. These spaces and uses are unattractive and the large format single-use is out of character when compared to the fine-grain Victorian buildings on the High Street, extending down the side streets.

4.82 The building at 33-35 High Street, adjacent to the Morrisons entrance dates from 1957. The 3-storey building respects the building and roof line of the surrounding historic buildings, however it presents a wide frontage to the High Street, extending across what was the site of two old shops. The building has a horizontal emphasis, which together with the design and materials, does not relate to the historic The Coral building, no. 17 High Street context of the High Street. The Morrisons entrance and this 3-storey buildings are not attractive additions to the High Street and carefully designed redevelopment would be appropriate.

Coral Building 4.83 The Coral building, on the corner of the High Street and Grove Road (no. 17 High Street), is a purpose- built two-storey bank building, built in Bauhaus style in 1937. The building originally on this site was the end building in the Victorian terrace which was used as a shop, and subsequently the National Provincial & Union Bank, which was demolished to make way for the building there today. This building has been nominated for local listing (ref. #17). Sutton Baptist Church entranceway

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 42 Agenda Item 11 Page 64

Sutton Baptist Church 4.84 This is a listed building, constructed in 1934 in the Free Gothic style with imposing proportions. It is one of the best examples of a contemporary brick building in the borough and the only decorative features on the plain red brick façade are panels of roof tiles laid end-on. The triple lancet windows have simple clean lines and are a feature on each of the elevations. The church building marks an key gateway to the town centre and can be viewed when approaching from the west.

Shops at 1-9 Cheam Road 4.85 Nos. 1-9 Cheam Road is a row of six 2-storey shops dating from before 192934. The shops are in poor condition with a variety of replacement windows and unattractive and ill- Two-storey shops at nos. 1-9 proportioned fascia. As a two-storey Cheam Road. structure, the terrace has a horizontal emphasis, however sets of three tall windows Strengths and pilaster detailing provide vertical elements, x Listed Sutton Baptist breaking up the façade. Church x Locally listed Development Potential Barclays Bank 4.86 This sub area contains two significant x Town centre landmark buildings, Barclays Bank and Sutton gateway Baptist Church, as well as the oldest Victorian x Historically terrace in the character appraisal area. This significant historic setting and the small scale, fine grain crossroads site character of the area has suffered from the x Oldest Victorian large-format single-use Morrisons supermarket terrace in the area development and the 1957 building at 33-35 x Mixed architectural High Street. These existing unsympathetic qualities developments provide the opportunity for new Opportunities development that better respects the historic x Development buildings and the historic context of the area. opportunities The redevelopment of Morrisons could address fronting the High the ‘gap’ on the High Street as well as Street, Grove Road unattractive frontages on Grove Road and and Cheam Road Cheam Road and the adjoining building at 33- x Repair of some 35 High Street could better respect the rhythm buildings of the High Street. x Reinstatement of traditional windows, 4.87 There are two allocated development sites that brickwork and could impact on the area; the Civic Centre Site shopfronts (CW1) across Cheam Road to the north-west Key Considerations and the shops and Morrisons car park entrance x Impact of new fronting Grove Road (S1: North of Grove development on the Road). Redevelopment of the Civic Centre site existing historic should consider the impact of buildings, with environment, particularly the large 34 First listed in the 1929 Pile’s local directory. Morrisons site.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 43 Page 65 Agenda Item 11

heights of between 6-10 storeys, on the setting of the listed Sutton Baptist Church. The redevelopment of the Grove Road frontage extends up to the rear of the High Street terrace and adjoins the Coral building, which are both nominated for local listing. Building heights in this area could be between 4 and 6 storeys, with a landmark building up to 10 storeys on the corner of Grove Road and Sutton Park Road35. Building designs, including heights and materials need to carefully consider the historic context of the area, particularly closer to the 2 and 3-storey buildings along the High Street.

35 As outlined in the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan: Preferred Options Document (April 2009), and Gillespies’ Urban Design Framework for Sutton Town Centre (February 2009).

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 44 Agenda Item 11 Page 66

Sub Area 6: Numbers 1 – 13 High Street, 1-7 Grove Road, and Sutton Masonic Hall

4.88 This sub area comprises a High Street terrace dating from between 1868 – 1896, a 1930s replacement building on the corner of the High Street and Grove Road, a row of 1930s shops (nos. 1-7 Grove Road) and the Masonic Hall at no. 9 Grove Road.

High Street Terrace 4.89 Historically this was a terrace of 8 Victorian shops, dating from before 1896, however today only four of the original buildings remain with Mitre House constructed in place of the end four buildings, on the corner of Grove Road. This entire terrace, from 1 to 15 High Street has been nominated for local listing (ref. #90).

4.90 The relationship between this High Street terrace and the terrace across the road (in sub- area 1) creates a comfortable sense of enclosure, at a human scale, as well as an immediate introduction to the town centre’s historic environment of a Victorian High Street The old Station Hotel at no. 1 when arriving via the Station and Brighton High Street. The pitched roofs of Road. the weatherboard building to the rear are just visible. 4.91 The southern most building, opposite Sutton Station (no. 1 High Street), was formerly the Station Hotel and is now a public house, this includes the 3-storey weatherboard building to the rear which was also historically part of the Hotel. The 3-storey brick building fronting the High Street had contrasting brick lintels with keystones over the windows; this brickwork has since been painted and a few of the original windows at upper storeys have been bricked over or replaced. The ground floor retains some original carved detailing in the pilasters and the upper floors are generally in good condition, although some vegetation is sprouting above the entranceway.

4.92 The three remaining historic buildings in the Carved detailing at no. 1 terrace (nos. 3-7 High Street) continue the 3-bay High Street rhythm, fenestration, and arched window detailing that is also seen in the hotel building on the corner. All of the original sash windows remain however the buildings have been painted, obscuring the original brick detailing, and all shopfronts have been replaced which detract from the quality of the upper storeys. Vegetation is visible above the parapets at nos. 3 and 5 High Street.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 45 Page 67 Agenda Item 11

4.93 The 3-Storey Mitre House was built in 1932 and replaced the four buildings on the corner of Grove Road. A 2-storey building continues around the corner on Grove Road with 10 bays, 5 bays under a stepped parapet, 2 bays to the east, and 3 bays on a rounded corner to the west. Both buildings have nine over nine pane sash windows which are set regularly into brown brick, with red lintels and Terrace at nos. 3-7 High Street stonework keystones. The corner building has further stone dressings establishing a strong vertical element.

Masonic Hall 4.94 Sutton Masonic Hall at 9 Grove Road was purpose built for the Freemasons in 1897 by a locally known architect, Richard Creed, and local builder, Duncan Stuart & Sons of Wallington. The architectural detail of the building is interesting with the central three bays projecting under a tympanum supported by pilasters on the second storey and decorative blockwork at the ground floor, 3-storey Mitre House on Grove Road including a moulded bull’s eye and keystone above the door. Unfortunately all of the windows have been replaced or altered and the bull’s eye above the door has been filled in with a ventilation grill. This building has been nominated for local listing (ref. #59) and the architect is responsible for two nationally listed buildings in Sussex and Essex36.

Development Potential 4.95 A new road link, from opposite the railway station on Brighton Road/Mulgrave Road through to Grove Road is allocated for in the The Masonic Hall, no. 9 Grove Development Framework for Sutton Station Road and Adjoining Land SPD (July 2005), as well as the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan: Preferred Options Document (April 2009). The construction of this road would remove traffic congestion from the High Street and allow for environmental improvements around the station entrance however it would require the demolition of the buildings at 2- 4 Mulgrave Road as well as the Masonic Hall. The impact of the demolition of these buildings and the construction of a busy road would require the careful assessment of the impact on the surrounding historic environment and the character appraisal area as a whole.

36 The former Essex County Cricket Club Pavilion, a Grade II listed building, erected in 1886; Pells County Primary School at Lewes in East Sussex, a Grade II listed building, built in 1896.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 46 Agenda Item 11 Page 68

4.96 Development site S5: Shops Opposite Station is located to the south of the former Station Hotel (no. 1 High Street) and there is the potential for building heights of up to 10 storeys stepping down to 4 storeys further south. Across the High Street, Sutton Station is also included as a development site (S4) and together these sites Strengths have the potential to significantly change the x Town centre character of the public environment. As a major gateway and focal town centre gateway it is important that any new space development is well designed to enhance the x Comfortable existing historic assets already in the area and not relationship with the dominate the 3-storey human scale buildings in terrace across the both this sub-area and those across the road (in High Street sub-area 1). Opportunities x Development opportunities x Road link x Repair of some buildings x Reinstatement of traditional windows, brickwork and shopfronts Key Considerations x Impact of new development on the existing historic environment x Impact of the proposed road link, particularly on the Masonic Hall

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 47 Page 69 Agenda Item 11

Public Realm 4.97 The recent High Street Renewal Scheme involved comprehensive changes to the soft and hard landscaping, the removal of a range of street clutter and the installation of new, uniform street furniture along the High Street. The works include Trinity Town Square/Throwley Road and extend up to the junction of Grove Road / Sutton Court Road. The public realm in this High Street section of the character appraisal area is now in good condition and the removal of street clutter allows for clearer views of the surrounding environment, including historic buildings.

4.98 The High Street area outside Sutton Station and the east/west roads would benefit from an extension of the scheme using a range of compatible materials. As a key town centre gateway, the area around the Station should be upgraded to improve the arrival experience to the town centre and the proposed conservation area. The High Street outside the station is a busy vehicle road and the pedestrian footways along this stretch are narrow and can become congested which does not allow easy views of the surrounding historic buildings or allow space to dwell. The junction of the High Street with Grove Road/Sutton Court Road is busy and the pedestrian crossing points would benefit from upgrading and removal of barriers.

4.99 Where possible, a reduction in street clutter is desirable. This includes posts, signs, railings, columns, apparatus, structures, advertisements and these should be kept to a minimum in order to enhance views in the proposed conservation area and not detract from the detailing and features of the historic buildings and environment. If designated as a conservation area, the existing street signs could be updated and consideration could be given to information boards in order to indicate the extent of the conservation area and to bring attention to the special character and history of the area.

4.100 The public realm is well defined and comfortably enclosed by a uniform building line at street level and by a consistent roofline at 3-4 storeys. Any taller buildings should be designed to reduce their visual impact. To achieve this, form, materials, colour, base and skyline need particular attention and an oppressive sense of enclosure should be avoided.

Problems, Pressures and Capacity for Change 4.101 Sutton town centre, as one of only four metropolitan centres in South London, is key location for regeneration and growth. A higher intensity of development could put pressure on and threaten the historic fabric of the area and it is important that any new development respects the local context and distinctive local character of the appraisal area.

4.102 There are a number of buildings within the character appraisal area that impact negatively on the area and the surrounding buildings. These are shown on Figure 6 and are generally newer buildings that do not respect the cohesive form and architectural qualities of the Victorian buildings such as the scale of the buildings, the rhythm of bays and windows and the colours and materials used. Those sites identified in Appendix 1 are allocated for

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 48 Agenda Item 11 Page 70

development37 and along with those that negatively impact on the area, present the opportunity for redevelopment and have the capacity for change within an otherwise largely developed town centre. With careful design and consideration of the surrounding historic environment, new development on these sites has the potential to positively contribute to and enhance the character appraisal area.

4.103 Sites within the Conservation Area with the potential for redevelopment are: x Sutton Station and Car Park (Allocated Development Site S4); x Land to the North of Sutton Court Road (Allocated Development Site S2), including Bank House (1-7 Sutton Court Road). The access road to the west and the land to the rear of this site is Council owned; x No. 2 Carshalton Road, corner of the High Street which has a negative impact on the area; x Nos. 46-58 High Street, which have a negative impact on the area. Nos. 46-54 High Street are the site of the former Municipal Offices and are owned by the Council; x Nos. 10-12 Cheam Road. The modern façade of this building has a negative impact on the area; x Nos. 33-35 High Street which has a negative impact on the area; and x The Morrisons building, at no. 31 High Street and also fronting Cheam Road and Grove Road, has a negative impact on the area. This includes Allocated Development Site S1: North of Grove Road.

4.104 Sites in the vicinity of the Conservation Area where development has the potential to impact on the area are: x Land to the South of Sutton Court Road (Allocated Development Site S3); x The Civic Centre Site (Allocated Development Site CW1); and x Shops Opposite the Station (Allocated Development Site S5).

4.105 As both a town centre gateway and a focal space, the area outside Sutton Station is a key space. The quality and finish of the buildings and the public space should mark the entrance to this area as well as the town centre as a whole. The redevelopment of Sutton Station provides the opportunity for a larger and improved station forecourt which would also allow views of the historic buildings and adjoining terraces marking the beginning of the town centre (the Old Bank and the former Station Hotel at nos. 1 & 2 High Street).

4.106 Four traditional shop fronts remain within the Conservation Area, providing variety, interest and historic references at street level, as well as enhancing the overall character of the area. There have been some inappropriate replacement shopfronts which detract from the quality of the historic buildings at upper storeys as well as presenting a cluttered and unattractive image in the town centre. There is the potential for enhancements to many of the shopfronts in the character appraisal area. The reinstatement of traditional

37 These sites have been identified in the Sutton Town Centre Area Action Plan: Preferred Options Document, April 2009.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 49 Page 71 Agenda Item 11

shop fronts or modern replacements with sympathetically designed and correctly proportioned signage, stall risers, windows and canopies would enhance individual buildings as well as contributing to the over all historic character of the High Street Crossroads as a locally important area.

4.107 The council intends to pursue a shopfront improvement scheme, the funding for which is likely to be dependent on a partnership approach between the council, English Heritage, land owners and developers (s.106 agreements). The production of shopfront design guidance, expanding on that already contained within Sutton’s Urban Design Guide38, is considered necessary and the council is currently looking at ways of producing and distributing this guidance.

4.108 Many of the original sash windows at upper storeys have been replaced with a variety of different window types and materials, including uPVC frames. The replacement windows are often proportioned differently, with larger, thicker dividing bars (transoms and mullions) which alters the original appearance of the building or terrace, including the horizontal or vertical emphasis of different buildings. In most cases one or some of the original windows remain, albeit often in poor repair, providing a template for the reinstatement of windows at upper storeys.

4.109 Many parts of the High Street terraces have been painted or rendered which obscures detailing, particularly around windows. The removal of paint from brickwork would reveal original detailing and clearly tie specific buildings to the remainder of the terrace, enhancing the overall character of the terraces. A range of different bricks (red, brown and yellowish) and a variety of dressing materials (brick, stucco and stone) have been used in the construction of the historic buildings within the area. These materials create a colour palette that is cohesive yet there are interruptions as much of the brickwork has been painted and modern buildings have deviated from the prevailing palette.

4.110 In addition to replacement windows and painted brickwork, some buildings are in poor repair with cracks in the brickwork and deteriorating detailing. Vegetation is sprouting from a few High Street buildings which will further erode the buildings. This lack of maintenance at upper storeys is problematic in that further neglect could lead to pressure for change and redevelopment detracting from the cohesive nature of the terraces. Sensitive improvements to the buildings would enhance the area, support retention of the historic terraces, as well as increasing the value of individuals’ properties.

38 SPD 14: Creating Locally Distinctive Places, Sutton’s Urban Design Guide

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 50 Agenda Item 11 Page 72 FIVE

Summary of Special Interest

5.1 The early historic context of this area, developing around the crossroads of a busy turnpike road, provided the foundation for the development of Sutton town centre today. It is an area that reminds us of the importance of the High Street as a major route from London to Brighton, as well as a busy route to Epsom on Derby Day. The Cock Hotel and ‘Tap’, located at the crossroads, marked a key location around which development grew. The crossroads is still a busy area in the town centre and reminders of the importance of the area still remain in the road layout, the location of the buildings and the Cock Hotel sign in centre of the road. Despite the development of the gyratory roads in the 1970s and 1980s, many of the historic roads remain today. These older roads established the size and shape of the blocks in the area and have determined the length and width of the High Street terraces.

5.2 The buildings, road layout and development pattern provide clues that remind us of the historic development of the area: from busy crossroads surrounded by a small rural community; to a developing Victorian town with large estates, mansion houses and gardens extending up to the High Street; and finally through to a town centre with a range of civic, community and leisure uses supporting the development of a town of some significance.

5.3 With the introduction of the railway to the south, this southern part of the High Street provides a fundamental historic link by showing the evolution and development of Sutton town centre, with the heart of the centre moving up the hill, towards Sutton Station and the connections to central London.

5.4 The defining qualities and overall character of the area are created by its surviving historic road network and purpose built Victorian shopping parades along a developing high street. While a few key buildings existed well before the mid-1800s, the High Street terraces developed over about a 50 year period, up to the early 1900s. The detailing on individual buildings is different, which provides variety and visual interest however there is a unifying scale, rhythm and appearance.

5.5 The buildings along this southern stretch of the High Street are in terraced blocks of 3 or 4 storeys which form a continuous building line, forming the edge of the public realm. The area between building frontages is from 14 – 17 metres wide and the relationship between the height of the building and the width of the road creates a comfortable sense of enclosure at a human

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 51 Page 73 Agenda Item 11

scale. The number of bays and frontage widths are uniform within individual terraces, but vary between terraces within the character appraisal area.

5.6 Views of key historic buildings in the area help to improve legibility when arriving in the town centre, as well as when moving around and through the area. The scale, height and detailing of these buildings also provides interest to the streetscene and skyline in the character appraisal area.

5.7 The grand Bank buildings, the Victorian terraces lining the High Street and a number of important community and civic buildings, mainly to the edges of the character area, all contribute to the character and local interest of the area. The scale and rhythm of these buildings, along with the palette of materials, differences in detailing and the location of specific key landmark buildings, contributes to a unique yet legible environment that is specific to the history and development of the Sutton High Street and town centre.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 52 Agenda Item 11 Page 74 SIX

Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1 This assessment demonstrates the historic importance of the High Street Crossroads in the growth and development of Sutton town centre. This combined with the architectural interest and the aesthetic value of the area provides character and a sense of identity to the town centre and is considered to be sufficiently significant to merit designation as a Conservation Area.

6.2 However the character appraisal also identifies opportunities to improve the proposed Conservation Area and emphasises the need to preserve and enhance its local history. Evidence of past intrusion on the historic fabric of the area can be seen in the loss of several historically significant buildings, including the Cock Hotel, and past permissions for some inappropriate and unsympathetic infill development and poor quality shop fronts with overly dominant fascia. Furthermore the character appraisal also recognises the need to prepare the Conservation Area designation in the context of a regeneration agenda for the town centre and seeks to provide helpful guidance where there are competing planning objectives.

6.3 Accordingly the designation of the High Street Crossroads area as a Conservation Area is recommended in order to provide the appropriate development guidance to landowners and developers, emphasising the need to preserve and enhance positive historic features and the local history of the area.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 53

Page 75 Agenda Item 11

1c 83 to 87 to 83

9 4

3

2 1 0

9 2 1

St Nicholas ST NICHOLAS ROAD Church PCs

THROWLEY WAY

8 4 Surrey

House 71 to 81 to 71 Surrey House

Chancery THROWLEY ROAD GIBSON ROAD House

College of THROWLEY ROAD Liberal Arts

7 6

The Upper Walk HILL ROAD 7 2 Library PH 6 8

6 to 9 7 0 67 Georgian

6 6 CW1 Epworth Mansions

Lodge The Lower Square

Civic Centre SiteULC S h e l t e r 63

The Upper Walk HIGH STREET

Trinity 6 0

Methodist 59 Civic Centre 5 8 Church

5 6 57 55

15 Shelter

CHALK PIT WAY 51 5 2

4 6to50 9 Hall

Bank 49 Cheam Road 1 1 4 Bank CHEAM ROAD 8 2

CARSHALTON ROAD Police Station

Patrick Dunne Hse Sunday 2

SUTTON Sutton School 2

a 1 3

Baptist 21 PARK ROAD 9 Bank 43

Church Hall

1 9 CHALK PIT WAY

41 Police Station Sutton Sunday Hall School

Baptist 37 PH 4 2 City House Church Watermead Patrick Dunne Hse

HIGH STREET House 35 Hall 33 BANK MEWS North of 3 6 S2

3 2 3 4 Bank Sutton Court Road House 9 to 15 3 0 1 COU to SUTTON 7

SUTTON PARK ROAD

2 6

ORME ROAD

19to21 Raffety

Administration Place 17 House

6 3 4

2 *South Point

a 2 * 38 t o 5 0 1 6 1 8 * North of Grove 30Road S3 South of

1 4

36 15

1 Sutton Court Road Sentinel House

13 S1 7

44

9 11 9 50 48 9 Masonic Hall

54 HIGH STREET 3 1

5 1

7 1 1

68 to 74 11to 23 1 to 10 Telephone Exchange PO Bank

2

Copthall House 1 PH S4

Works 1e SuttonSutton Station

GROVE ROAD 1d Station

2 1c and Car Park

4

Greensleeves Manor 1

3 1b

THE QUADRANT 0 1

Sorting Office 1a 2 1 9 5 2 1 1

2 1 3

2a

2 BRIDGE ROAD Sutton Station 4 4

6

8a Shelters

S5 8 Shops Quadrant House

ROAD opposite MULGRAVE

14 1 1 Station 16

Tudor Court

2 4 6

1 3 5 22 Station Parade Mulgrave 1to 6(over shops)

7 Mulgrave Court to 8 to

Cyrillian House Chambers 1 2 1 2 4 6 6

St George's 1

Court 4

1 3 5 8 a

1 3 5 8 2 4 6 Seymour 1 3 5 House 5 1 0 2 4 6 1 Charter House 3 2 Bridge

5 4 7 to 6 7 6 House WELLESLEY ROAD

8 8 Garden Hall House 1 to 17 John's Court 1 3 2 34 41 5 4 10 7 6 1 to 28 1 to 10 8 Roof Car Park 1 to 12 40 1 to 7 Raymond Court Grosvenor C BRIGHTON 42 9 to 12 Sutherland 1 to 6 Regent 7 to 12 8 13 to 11 Tan 1

1 to

14

11

8 o 18 o Mulgrave Manor Mulgrave Appendix 1 High Street Crossroads z Allocated Development Sites and Proposals

Character Appraisal Area Indicative Road Link Character Appraisal Sub-areas Tramlink N S4 Allocated Development Sites Potential Tram Stop Copyright Ordnance Survey *** 2010 100008655X Agenda Item 11 Page 76

Appendix 2 Features of Merit

Listed Buildings x Sutton Police Station, Carshalton Road (south-east side), Sutton. Grade II listed building. x Nos. 26 & 28 High Street (east side), Sutton. Grade II listed building. x Sutton Baptist Church, Cheam Road, Sutton. Grade II listed building. x Trinity Methodist Church and Hall, Cheam Road (north side), Sutton. Grade II listed building.

Locally Listed Buildings x Barclays Bank, 43 High Street, Sutton.

Proposed Local List x Sutton Court Estate Wall, boundary of 2 Sutton Court Road, Sutton (ref. #97). x Nos. 1 – 15 High Street, Sutton (ref. #90). x Nos. 2 – 18 High Street, Sutton (ref. #90). x No. 17 High Street, Sutton (ref. #17). x Nos. 19 – 29 High Street, Sutton (ref. #90). x Nos. 30 – 42 High Street, Sutton (ref. #90). x Nos. 60 – 76 High Street, Sutton (ref. #85). x No. 8 Cheam Road, Sutton (ref. #51). x No. 9 Grove Road, Sutton (ref. #59). x The Cock Sign, junction of the High Street and Cheam Road / Carshalton Road (ref. #109)

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 55 Page 77 Agenda Item 11

Appendix 3 Glossary of Terms Defined in Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment

Conservation: The process of maintaining and managing change to a heritage asset in a way that sustains and where appropriate enhances its significance.

Conservation Area: An area of special architectural or historic interest identified by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) under the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990. There is a statutory duty to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of such areas.

Designated Heritage Asset: A World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Listed Building, Protected Wreck Site, Registered Park and Garden, Registered Battlefield or Conservation Area designated as such under the relevant legislation.

Heritage Asset: A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape positively identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions. Heritage assets are the valued components of the historic environment. They include designated heritage assets (as defined in this PPS) and assets identified by the local planning authority during the process of decision-making or through the plan-making process (including local listing).

Historic Environment: All aspects of the environment resulting from the interaction between people and places through time, including all surviving physical remains of past human activity, whether visible, buried or submerged, and landscaped and planted or managed flora. Those elements of the historic environment that hold significance are called heritage assets.

Setting: The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.

Significance: The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic.

High Street Crossroads Conservation Area Character Appraisal, April 2011 56 Agenda Item 11 Page 78

Darren Richards Executive Head Planning and Transportation

Jeff Wilson Head of Strategic Planning London Borough of Sutton Environment and Leisure 24 Denmark Road Carshalton SM5 2JG

Printed on recycled paper - this paper can be recycled Page 79 Agenda Item 11

London Borough of Sutton

THE EXECUTIVE – 3 MAY 2011

REFERENCE FROM PLANNING ADVISORY GROUP

Ward Location: Borough wide Executive Councillor: Jayne McCoy

Extract from the Minutes of the meeting held on 26/04/11

--/11 URGENT ITEM BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE CHAIR - CONSULTATION RESPONSE AND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO THE LOCAL LIST

Further to Minutes 49/09 and 42/10, Members discussed the consultation responses to the 57 proposed additions to the Local List (covering over 175 buildings and structures) details of which were set out in an Appendix to the report.

Members considered all the issues raised by the consultation responses (also set out in an Appendix) and discussed, in detail, the objections received by landowners to the proposed inclusion of their buildings on the proposed additions to the Local List. Members were satisfied that each of the nominations objected to did merit inclusion on the Local List and after having considered the range of responses thought that some of the objections may have been based on a misunderstanding of the consequences of having a building on the Local List. It was therefore proposed that the letters confirming inclusion on the Local List also explain, in greater detail what Local Listing actually means and the differences between this and the National List and addressing the range of concerns raised by objectors including the implications regarding future development/redevelopment, internal alterations and fears regarding increased insurance costs. This letter should be sent to all the landowners and other people who had responded to the consultation as well as to ward councillors and MPs.

A letter of representation from Mr Sparkes and the officer response, to that letter, were also discussed at length.

Resolved: (i) That the proposed additions to the Local List be forwarded to The Executive for approval.

(ii) That the Schedule of Potential Additions to the Local List be forwarded to The Executive for approval for review in due course.

(iii) To RECOMMEND that The Executive agrees the proposed additions to the Local List.

(iv) To RECOMMEND that The Executive approves the Schedule of Potential Additions to the Local List for review in due course

(v) To RECOMMEND that subject to the views of The Executive, Full Council approves the additions to the Local List as part of the Site Development Policies DPD: Submission draft for purposes of the Examination in Public in June 2011 and for Development Control purposes. Page 80

This page is intentionally left blank Page 81 Agenda Item 11

London Borough of Sutton CMT – 30 March 2011 Planning Advisory Group – 26 April 2011 The Executive – 3 May 2011 Council – 9 May 2011 Report of the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation CONSULTATION RESPONSE AND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO THE LOCAL LIST Ward Location: Borough wide Author: Sally Blomfield (x6253) Area Served : Borough wide Lead Councillor: Jayne McCoy/Graham Tope

Key Decision Report

Summary This Report sets out the response to the public consultation on the proposed additions to the Local List, outlines the key issues raised, and identifies those buildings and structures which are recommended for approval as additions to the Local List. (Appendix 3) The Report also identifies a number of additional properties which were nominated for addition through this round of consultation. There are no resources at this stage to conduct an assessment of these additional nominations, or carry out the necessary consultation with landowners and the wider public and therefore a list has been identified (Appendix 4) for inclusion in the Sites DPD as Potential Additions to the Local List to be reviewed at a later stage. Recommendations a. I recommend that the Planning Advisory Group considers the consultation responses received, and, subject to its views, agrees that the responses and the proposed additions to the Local List be forwarded to the Executive for approval. b. Subject to the views of the Executive , I recommend that the Council approve the additions to the Local List as part of the Site Development Policies DPD: Submission draft for purposes of the Examination in Public in June 2011 and for DC purposes. c. I recommend that the Schedule of Potential Additions to the Local List be approved for review in due course. 1. Background 1.1 Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5) sets out Government policy on heritage assets 1. This review of possible additions to the Local List will help to identify the significance of the most important local assets, in accordance with the requirements of PPS5 (Policy HE2) 2. 1.2 In October 2009, the Planning Advisory Group (PAG) agreed (Minute 49/09) that residents and local groups be invited to nominate buildings and structures for inclusion on the Local List and that Officers undertake a comprehensive review of the Borough. Accordingly, a nominations form was circulated in November 2009. As

1 Heritage assets are defined as any building, monument, site, place, area or landscape having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions. 2 Policy HE2.1 2…lpas should ensure that they have evidence about the historic environment and heritage assets in their area and that this is publicly documented.” Agenda Item 11 Page 82

a result of this process there were over 115 nominations covering over 450 buildings and structures. All the nominated properties and structures were assessed through a formal review procedure which entailed a site visit, a review of historic OS and older Maps, a review of the archives in respect of those properties where the historical value was thought to be significant; an assessment of the integrity of the property/structure; and finally, an assessment against each of the approved Local List criteria. The review panel was made up of Kath Shawcross (the Borough Archivist), John Philips (the Borough Historian), and, Sally Blomfield (Principal Planner in Strategic Planning with the Heritage and Built Environment portfolio). Furthermore the long and shortlists were discussed at meetings of the Conservation Area Advisory Consultative Group (CAACG), an organisation made up of local historians and amenity societies. The delay in assessing and short listing the nominations was partly due to staff reductions and partly to the need to focus on other plan making priorities. 1.3 On 7 December 2010 the PAG agreed (Minute: 42/10) the shortlist of proposed additions to the Local List comprising 57 of the nominations (which accounts for 175 individual properties and structures). PAG recommended approval by way of DDN for consultation purposes of the shortlist. Buildings should be locally listed through the development plan process and the intention is therefore to approve the additions for inclusion in the Appendix of the Site Development Policies DPD (the Sites DPD) for purposes of submission to the Secretary of State. 1.4 PAG also agreed the consultation programme, however, requested that it be extended to six weeks from the recommend four week period and that a presentation be taken on the item to all the Local Committees. 2. Consultation Arrangements 2.1 Consultation ran from the 5 January 2011 to 16 February 2011. The consultation arrangements included: • A presentation to all Local Committees, to the Sutton Town Centre Partnership Meeting, to the Economic Development Advisory Group, and to the CAACG; • Letters to all those who had originally made a nomination to advise them of the outcome of consideration of all nominations; • Letters to the owners of the shortlisted properties; • A press release; • An article in the Sutton Guardian and the Council’s free magazine ‘Sutton Scene’; • An exhibition at Sutton Central Library throughout the consultation period which was staffed on Wednesday 19 January and Monday 7 February 2011; • Posters in prominent locations in the High Street, including in the foyer of Sutton Station; • Leaflets and reference copies of the consultation documents lodged at all the Libraries in the Borough and at the Civic Offices and Denmark Road Offices; • Information provided on the Council’s internet and consultation web pages; and • Publication of a hotline number to help people with any queries they may have. 3. Key Issues Raised Through the Consultation / Shortlisted Nominations 3.1 In total there were 70 respondents, the majority of which were from individuals, local groups and local organisations. It is notable that only 33 property owners responded when over 175 were consulted. The full list of respondents is set out in Appendix 1. 3.2 All representations received are set out in the schedule in Appendix 2. 3.3 Appendix 3 sets out the respondents’ views regarding each of the shortlisted Page 83 Agenda Item 11

proposed additions to the Local List and, having considered these responses, officers’ recommendations on which properties and structures should be included on the Local List. 3.4 There was considerable overall support for the work that has been undertaken both in respect of the Local List and the Proposed Conservation Area of Sutton Crossroads. Many felt concerned about the considerable loss of much loved heritage features, hoped that these reviews would prevent further loss, and considered that this work was long overdue. However, there were a number of negative comments and these are summarised below. All the responses are set out in full in Appendix 2. Criticisms of the Local List Review Process Representations 3.5 Mr Sparkes made a significant number of comments regarding the review process: the review was not comprehensive but ad hoc as it relied on nominations; Mr Sparkes should have been invited to be more significantly involved in the review process; the criteria used and the application of the criteria has led to a number of buildings being nominated on the basis of aesthetic grounds rather than historic interest and this has led to an imbalance with the number of working class as opposed to middle class properties having been shortlisted. He questioned the integrity of the review and therefore its outcomes. His concerns and criticisms are set out in more detail in Appendix 2a. Officer Response 3.6 To date there has been no guidance on how to prepare or conduct a review of the Local List. However, English Heritage has just published, and is currently consulting on, draft Good Practice Guide for Local Listing (the consultation period closes in May 2011). Having looked at this draft Guide, I am happy to confirm that the council’s review processes and criteria actually conform to the draft Good Practice model. In line with the practice of adjoining LPAs, the council makes clear that an overriding consideration in the assessment of whether a property should be included on the list is whether it remains substantially unaltered and retains the majority of its original features. 3.7 A number of working class properties have been shortlisted and consulted on. However, Members should note that a significant number of working class Victorian properties, including residential terraces, are already designated as part of Conservation Areas (e.g. Carshalton and Beddington Villages) or as parts of Areas of Special Local Character (9 out of 22 ASLCs). Representations 3.8 A couple of respondents thought the review represented a waste of money and wanted to know why the review was proposed. Officer Response 3.9 The review was carried out in accordance with national guidance which requires local planning authorities to identify any heritage asset which has a degree of significance which merits consideration in planning decisions. Whilst it was undertaken in accordance with the English Heritage draft Good Practice Guidance it was undertaken in a cost effective manner relying on nominations rather than officers undertaking a comprehensive Borough wide review.

Agenda Item 11 Page 84

Nominations to the Local List Not Supported by Landowners Representations 3.10 20 landowners supported and were delighted by the inclusion of their property on the Local List, however 13 were not (including 3 of the 4 churches consulted). The main concerns regarding inclusion on the Local Listing relate to: loss of value (there was concern that properties will be difficult to sell because of additional planning constraints); in particular the churches expressed concern that they would not be able to develop to meet existing and future church needs because of additional planning constraints; and concerns over increased insurance costs. Officer Response 3.11 Whilst there is not the same level of statutory controls and protection over Locally Listed buildings as those on the Statutory List, applications to develop/demolish buildings on the Local List would be subject to a Proposed Policy DM4 – Historic Environment of the Site Development Policies DPD by which the Council will safeguard and encourage the preservation and enhancement of the character and appearance of Locally Listed buildings. The identification of properties on the Local List does not represent an embargo of development, although any development proposed must have regard to and respect the local significance. 3.12 It is now a national requirement that any application for development affecting an historic asset must be accompanied by a ‘Statement of Significance’. However, having undertaken this work on the Local List, Statements will be easier for developers to complete and for the Development Management team to assess. 3.13 I have sought advice from an Insurance Broker regarding increased insurance costs for Listed and Locally Listed Buildings 3 and have been advised that whilst some insurance companies will ask if a property is listed (and some may express concerns if it is Grade I Nationally Listed) the sum insured should reflect the rebuilding cost – listed or not. Indeed different rates are not normally applied. Long List Nominations not Shortlisted by the Council Representations 3.14 Mr Sparkes disagrees with a number of the council’s decisions not to shortlist properties from the long list considered by PAG in December 2010 for inclusion on the Local List and considers these decisions should be reviewed. Officer Response 3.15 Officers are satisfied that the review process has been undertaken in accordance with the draft Good Practice Guide issued by English Heritage. Furthermore, officers are satisfied with the consistency of the review process. However each site identified by Mr Sparkes has been checked again against the criteria and, following a site visit to the Sutton Hospital site with an Officer from English Heritage, I recommend that an additional building/structure be added to the five already proposed on the Sutton hospital site, along with the Foundation Stone. Additional Nominations Representations 3.16 Throughout the consultation a number of additional properties were nominated for consideration and these are listed in Appendix 4.

3 PRIMO Plc Insurance Brokers Page 85 Agenda Item 11

Officer Response 3.17 There was an opportunity early on in the consultation process to research and site visit some of these additional nominations. However, only where the landowner’s support has been forthcoming have properties which merit Local Listing been recommended for inclusion (see Appendix 3). 3.18 However due to other priorities of policy work and the number of properties proposed, not all additional nominations could be reviewed in time. Furthermore because of the June deadline for submission of the Sites DPD, there was no opportunity to consult with landowners. It is therefore proposed that the properties/structures in Appendix 4 be approved as a schedule of Potential Additions to the Local List subject to further review. Mechanism to Enable Further Reviews Representations 3.19 The Sutton and Cheam Society, the CAACG, and Ms T Reeves are concerned that this review should not be seen as a one-off exercise and there should be a mechanism to enable periodic reviews/amendments to the Local List. Officer Response 3.20 English Heritage’s Draft Good Practice Guide recommends a regular review of the Local List to ensure that it remains relevant however indicates that it is up to the local planning authority to determine the frequency or review triggers. The council has an agreed programme of review of Conservation Areas and I would recommend that the review of buildings and structures within these areas should contribute to an ongoing review of the Local List. 4. Next Steps 4.1 Following the council’s approval of the Proposed Schedule of Additions to the Local List and the Proposed Schedule of Potential Additions for Further Review, appropriate amendments will be proposed to the draft Sites DPD for purposes of submission to the Secretary of State in June this year. 5. Financial Implications 5.1 There are no financial implications for the Council when adding buildings to the Local List. The Council would not be liable for costs or financial aid should the owner wish to repair or develop the building or structure.

5.2 As noted above, the next steps in the designation of the Additions to the Local List will be through the preparation of the Sites DPD and will therefore be covered by the costs already budgeted and approved for in connection with this document (the Executive Minute 181/11). 6. Influence of the Council’s Core Values 6.1 Consultation over the additional buildings to be included on the Local List will involve significant partnership working and making services open and accessible. 7. Contribution to the Achievement of the Council’s Policy Aims 7.1 The Council’s goals include achieving environmental sustainability. The protection of buildings of heritage value will help to achieve these goals. 8. Equalities Impact Assessment 8.1 None.

Agenda Item 11 Page 86

APPENDIX 1 List of Individuals/Organisations that made representations on the Proposed Additions (landowners are identified with an asterix) Gov. Bodies The Sutton & Merton Primary Care Trust* Councillors Cllr P Picknett Cllr R Clifton Local Groups Chiltern Church* St Andrew’s Reform Church* The Sutton and Cheam Society Carshalton Methodist Church* Belmont & South Cheam Residents’ Association The Conservation Area Advisory Consultative Group Friends of Carshalton Park Mr Sparkes/Belmont Local History

Mr A Wallace* Individuals Mr C Brown Mr & Mrs Dodwell Ms J Knight Ms T Reeves Mrs P Macdonald Mr B Steel Mr N Parks* Prof. and Mrs Millard* Mr Lepetit* Mr A Ross* Mr B Russell* Mr J Loughrey* Mr A Stanton* Ms A Burke* Mr A Martin* Mario Fuller Ms V Manning* Ms S Evans* Mr P Knapp* Mr P Perry Mr R Walker* Mr J Gibbons* MS K Gillett (general support) Mr N Ford* Mr and Mrs Darroch* Mrs A Faircloth Mr D Rymill (Supplied more information in support of some Page 87 Agenda Item 11

of the nominations) Mr M Mills & Ms K Ganley* Miss Grant GR Angrex Mrs V Warwick Mrs J Crichton Rev P Barker Mr N Tiramani (tenant 16 Malden Road) Mr & Mrs Ayres* Mrs Mewett Mr & Mrs Macdonald Mr B Edwards S Holwells Mr D Baldry T & M Grant* Mr P Campbell Smith Ms J Smith Mr J Brown Mr & Mrs Macdonald P A Beattie I Johnson Mr E Ridgewell* Mr J Pomeroy Mr D Sarosh* Mr R Wilson Ms C Page Dr and Mr Wood* Mrs Morris* Mr Smith* Mr A De Souza*

Companies Finerty Brice* Flats to Let Ltd* NHP Group *

Page 88

This page is intentionally left blank Proposed Additons to the Local List Schedule Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name General

All Support The Sutton & Cheam Society welcomes and fully supports the Schedule of Proposed Additions to the Local List as PALL100 set out in the consultation document, particularly those within its Area of Benefit i.e. the former Borough of Sutton and Cheam - Cheam, Worcester Park, Belmont and Sutton (Planning Areas A and B). 33508 Mr Tony Golledge Sutton and Cheam Society General Observation The Society is concerned that the proposal may have the air of a one-off exercise never to be repeated. It believes PALL104 that there is a need for a mechanism by which further submissions can be submitted in the future. 33508 Mr Tony Golledge Sutton and Cheam Society General Observation I was interested to see the nominations for inclusion in the list but wondered when and how this went out to PALL17 Consultation? I tend to read council notice boards when I pass them (hence my responding to the heritage

consultation) but I did not see anything asking for nominations. There are some beautiful houses in the area and it is Page 89 501850 Karen Gillett good to see some of them nominated.

All Support CAACGS representatives, at a recent meeting, unanimously agreed to support both the revision of the Local List and PALL35 the proposed additions to it. We suggest that there should be included a mechanism to allow for periodic alterations or amendments to the List as circumstances permit. 34251 Mr Derek Bradford Conservation Area Advisory Group All Support In response to LBS's public consultation, I commend the Council on this long overdue initiative, being that the PALL43 borough has already lost wonderful treasures such as the arcade in Sutton High Street, the swimming baths that I remember so well from my childhood. In places like Carshalton Village, there is so much heritage that in our busy 156234 Tracey Reeves lives it often goes unnoticed and we take it for granted thinking that it will always be there. The borough's heritage definitely needs protecting now. Site 1: Nos 1-5 and 2-12 Cornwall Road, Cheam

1-5 & 2-13 Cornwall Road, Support The Society is especially pleased by the inclusion of this group of properties which have significant Group Value. Agenda Item 11 Cheam (Ref# 1) PALL101 33508 Mr Tony Golledge Sutton and Cheam Society

13 April 2011 Page 1 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 1: Nos 1-5 and 2-12 Cornwall Road, Cheam

1 Cornwall Road (Ref# 1) Object You wrote to my wife and me, as owners of the above property, on 5 January 2011 to invite our views on being PALL107 added to the Local List of buildings or structures that are locally important either historically or architecturally. You explained how, during 2010, as part of a review of local buildings, various local groups and individuals had 504504 T P and M L Grant Grant nominated our property, among others, as meriting being added to an existing relatively small Local List. You did not identify who had nominated our property. You claimed that there were benefits to being included in the List: Kudos from living in a Local Listed house; Gaining a high property value because of the architectural or historical associations; Being able to conserve a small slice of local heritage. You also said that whilst inclusion on the List does not affect existing planning controls, i.e. we will still be able to replace our lovely front facing Edwardian sash windows with modern double glazed ones; we will still be able to cover our attractive front facing polished red brick with pebble-dash, etc without planning hindrance, this property would be subject to much closer planning scrutiny were we to submit a proposal to, say, extend the kitchen at the back of our house to create the currently popular kitchen/dining room. However, having consulted a local senior estate agent and a surveyor whose business principally concerned alterations to private residences, we have concluded that there are no benefits to being included on the Local List.: We enjoy the kudos, as you put it, from living in our Edwardian house without it being on

a Local List. We cannot imagine any scenario where people would think more highly of our property because it is on Page 90 a Local List. The kudos comes from its integral charm, not from being on a Local List. Instead of obtaining a higher property value, we understand that the reverse is the case and that potential buyers of our property would think twice and/or ask for a reduction because of the fear of not having, in their view, reasonable plans passed by the Borough's planners, plans that would be passed were they to buy a relatively similar property further up the same road or nearby but that was not on the Local List. Being on the list does not confer to us, the property owners, the ability to conserve a small slice of local heritage. That comes from owning our Edwardian property. What it does seem to do is to confer a right to the council to interfere to a much greater extent than normal in the conservation of local heritage. We have lived here for almost 28 years and without any help from being on a Local List, we like to think that we have satisfactorily conserved our Edwardian home as have all previous owners of this property since it was built. And we are certain that the same can be claimed by all our neighbours whose properties have also been jointly nominated for inclusion on the Local List. As these properties have been suitably preserved by their owners for the last 100 years, there would appear to be no need whatsoever to add them to a List that would affect their owners adversely. These properties attract owners who value their Edwardian charm and we are unaware of any proposals over the last 28 years, including the relatively recent planning applications for No 6 Cornwall Road, which have or would have, if granted, damaged their appearance. As, therefore we do not consider that there are any benefits and, instead, that there may be serious drawbacks, we therefore object vehemently to our property being added to the Local List of buildings or structures that are considered to be locally important either historically or architecturally. Essentially we consider that, as current and past owners of the group of Edwardian houses at the northern end of Cornwall Road have preserved their properties in an excellent manner over the last 100 years, there is no reason to consider that they would now benefit from what we consider to be unnecessary scrutiny from the Borough's Planning Department particularly when its planning controls would allow, for example, Edwardian windows and doors to be adulterated with modern double glazed excrescences without interference, something that current and past owners would not contemplate.

13 April 2011 Page 2 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 1: Nos 1-5 and 2-12 Cornwall Road, Cheam 6 Cornwall Road (Ref# 1) Observation I refer to your letter of the 05 January 2011 advising that following a comprehensive review of buildings and PALL108 structures to be added to the Local List by the council, it has been decided that over 180 should be added to the List including my property. I am surprised with this news and somewhat confused with the decision bearing in mind that 504860 Edward A Ridgwell in 1999 I was notified that, following being nominated for inclusion on the Local List, the council had decided that the Borough had more than it required of Edwardian Buildings and my property together with neighbouring houses was not included. I am not aware of there being any significant loss of similar buildings in the ensuing years. One point that I wish to make is that I do not consider the properties either site of No 6 are ideal specimens. Both have flat roof garages with No 8 (Councillor Wallace) having a double up and over door with the garage projecting way beyond the building line detailed on the House Deeds. The whole balance of development is spoilt with the prominent non- Edwardian features. It is somewhat ironic that your website has a photograph of No 8 taken at an angle but quite clearly showing the overpowering protruding garage. In addition, uPVC windows have been used as replacements in a style not matching the original wood double hung sashes, which were featured strongly in the original design of the elevations. I have been advised that should my property by placed on the Local List, I could be faced with the following situations:- Insurance . A higher premium would be levied to cover the additional cost of specialist workmanship and materials. Property Value. Potential buyers would consider the restrictions in place on a listed

property and adjust their valuation accordingly. In most cases the value would be lower. Proposed Works. Due to Page 91 your reference to the consideration of proposed work the cost of any work would be much greater because of the professional advice required to meet your special requirements. Will the council confirm how I would be compensated for the financial adjustments? No doubt you will be raising these observations with the Councillors. 1-5 & 2-13 Cornwall Road, Support I would like to confirm our support for the proposal to include 1-5 and 2-12 Cornwall Road in the Local List. I believe Cheam (Ref# 1) that they meet Local List criteria 2, 5 and 6. PALL11 33103 Mr Tony Wallace Belmont and South Cheam Residents Association 1-5 & 2-13 Cornwall Road, Support Having lived in Cornwall Road from 1969 until 1986, I am very supportive of the proposal of adding the above Cheam (Ref# 1) properties to the local list in order to ensure that they should continue to be looked after in the necessary manner. PALL114 505365 John Pomeroy Agenda Item 11 2 Cornwall Road (Ref# 1) Object My comments are as follows: Professional advice sort suggests that there is a greater possibility in diminution of the PALL117 property value because potential buyers would consider the additional restrictions that could apply because of the listing since the property cannot be extended or altered without special permission or much greater scrutiny from the 505389 Darius Sarosh local planning authority. Furthermore if the planning regulations are changed which continually takes place, the locally listed properties could be the first to be considered for further restrictions to be applied. I therefore find it disingenuous by the statement made in the letter that such properties often have higher property values . If you have evidence to the contrary please provide it or withdraw the statement you have made. Another important

13 April 2011 Page 3 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 1: Nos 1-5 and 2-12 Cornwall Road, Cheam consideration for listed properties is insurance. Many listed buildings can be under insured with a normal insurance policy which will usually only cover the cost of "normal" repairs. BUT if a listed building is damaged you as the local planning authority will usually insist that repairs are like for like. Many insurance policies including mine do not allow the additional costs for specialist workmanship and materials. If there is a shortfall in the amount covered it will be my responsibility to pay the difference or insure the building for a higher amount. I do not accept that for the kudos of living in such a property and conserving a part of local heritage I should be financially penalised. In your letter you state Whilst inclusion on the Local List does not in fact change the existing planning controls that already apply, owners are advised to carefully consider the proposed works'. This indicates that should I wish to undertake any alterations the cost of getting the plans approved would be much greater because the professional advice I would have seek to meet your special requirements. The owners of these houses are extremely proud of the houses and have retained them as they were built over 100 years ago. I personally have and will continue to retain the features of the house I purchased and do not need the additional scrutiny from the Planning Officers which the listing will impose. As you state as the local list does not in fact change the existing planning controls which provide the necessary controls for the Council and in these days of cut backs and austerity why is the Council wanting to take on

additional costs and resources to monitor such a listing when, critical front line services are being reduced and the Page 92 residents in Cornwall Road themselves have taken on the responsibility of retaining the local heritage. The latter is in line with the Big Society which our local MP Paul Burstow promotes and what you are proposing is in stark contradiction! Your letter does not cover the points mentioned above and need the Council to respond to the following; Your evidence that listing leads to higher property values Will the Council pay for the cost of additional insurance because of the building being listed? Will the Council give an undertaking that further planning controls will not be imposed because of the listing should there be a change in legislation? What is the additional cost to the ratepayers of the additional resources required to monitor the listing? Why is the Council proposing the listing when the residents themselves retained the local heritage? Absolute clarity on what the listing means to the residents on what they can and cannot do without special permission. Amongst the residents I have discussed this matter there is considerable confusion. In the meantime based on the insufficient information provided I do not personally see any benefits but serious downsides to the owners who will also be financially disadvantaged if the listing goes ahead as well as additional unnecessary costs to the Council for no purpose as the planning controls are already sufficient. I therefore strongly oppose the listing. 1-5 & 2-13 Cornwall Road, Support Having lived in Cornwall Road for a number of years I have always admired this group of Edwardian houses built ina Cheam (Ref# 1) similar and co-ordinated style and hoped one day that I may have the opportunity to purchase as a family home. PALL124 Clearly such an accolade would add to their value and also ensure our heritage is retained in the future. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require any further information. 504202 Sian Holwell

3 Cornwall Road, Cheam (Ref# 1) Object Whilst we recognise that this part of Cornwall Road is historically special and do not want to see its character PALL133 eroded; we have reservations about its inclusion in the local list. Whilst inclusion does not change the existing planning controls, it does require additional paperwork and justification if planning were to be sought, which is a cost 503899 Ian and Cathy Ayres we would have to bear. It may also make planning harder to obtain without the expense of having to go to appeal. Inclusion gives the council the right at some future date to withdraw 'permitted development rights' through use of an

13 April 2011 Page 4 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 1: Nos 1-5 and 2-12 Cornwall Road, Cheam 'Article 4 direction'; this would be a significant burden and may increase the cost of maintaining our home. These houses are old and need regular maintenance - including looking after roofs and windows. I doubt if you would be willing or indeed could give assurances that the council would not exercise this right in the future. Although it is unlikely that inclusion on a local list would reduce (or increase) the value of our home, it may make it harder to sell as prospective buyers would need to be willing to take on the obligations that go with inclusion. For these reasons we would prefer that our home is not included on the local list. 1-5 & 2-13 Cornwall Road, Support I am writing to express my support for the Edwardian houses at the northern end of Cornwall Road being added to Cheam (Ref# 1) the local list of properties of special local interest. PALL140 518110 Emma Wood 1-5 & 2-13 Cornwall Road, Support My husband and I live at 4 Cornwall Road and support the inclusion of this group of properties in the local list. These Cheam (Ref# 1) properties are a group of handsome Edwardian houses all of which are in a good condition. As a child I lived in PALL24 Cornwall Road and I remember these properties quite clearly and from memory they have not changed since that

time, some 40 years! We are now privileged to be living in one of them and feel that every effort should be made to Page 93 502686 Wayne and Sarah maintain them in their current state. Darroch

Houses on Cornwall Road, Support We are pleased to know that the houses in the Mulgrave Road end of Cornwall Road are being considered for Cheam (Ref# 1) inclusion in the local list. A particular feature of our property is a pre-war pagola which surrounds the back garden. PALL5 As a group the Edwardian houses have a unique quality and local planning has recognised this in decisions related to a currently being constructed back garden semi-detached. 499201 Prof. Peter H Millard

Ref. 1 (Cornwall Road, Cheam) Object 1. The council assessment document identifies criterion (ii) for this group of buildings. However, I do not see how PALL55 this group of buildings satisfies the terms of criterion (ii). 2. Modern garages have been added to the front of the houses. 3. Just because a building is attractive and in good original order, that is not sufficient for it to merit Local 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Listing. This group of buildings do not meet any of the six criteria. Site 2: St Johns Church, Belmont Agenda Item 11 Ref. 2 (St Johns Church, Belmont) Observation Observations and concerns. 1. This building would be better being added to an existing adjacent ASLC, rather than PALL54 being added to the Local List. 2. This building best meets criterion (v) - Townscape View, because is is a prominet part of the vista of Belmont Village . However, criterion (v) is not identified in the council assessment document. 3. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Criteria (i) historical importance has been identified in the council assessment document. However, I would query the historical importance of this building in either a locality or borough context. 4. If this church is to added to the Local List, then surely most churches in the borough should also be added to the Local List?

13 April 2011 Page 5 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 4: 1 and 3 Station Road, Belmont

Ref. 4 (1, 3, 5 Station Road, Object This nomination wa snot shortlisted. I agree. Thsi nomination does not merit Local Listing. It does not satisy and of Belmont) the criteria. PALL56 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 5: No's 12 -18 Station Road, Belmont

Ref. 5 (no's 12 -18 Station Road, Observation This parade was not shortlisted by the council. However, although it may not merit Local Listing, I feel this parade Belmont) should definitely be added the existing adjoining The Crescent ASLC. Note: No. 20 is also part of this parade. PALL57 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 6: Belmont Page 94 Ref 6. (site in Belmont Village) Object This nomination was not shortlisted. I agree with this. I strongly believe that nominated feature is NOT a surviving PALL58 part of the C19th Folly farmstead structure. Cartographic evidence supports my view. I understand this is consistent with the independent investigative work carried out by council heritage staff. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes

Site 7: Nos 75 and 90 The Gallop, 81 Chiltern Road and Church with adjacent buildings, South Sutton

75 & 90 The Gallop, 81 Chilton Support The Society is especially pleased by the inclusion of this group of properties which have significant Group Value. Road and Church (Ref# 7) PALL102 33508 Mr Tony Golledge Sutton and Cheam Society 81 Chiltern Road and Church Object Thank you for your letter of 5 th January in which you advise that Chiltern Church could fall into the above mentioned (Ref# 7) category and hence be added to a local list. You state in appendix 3 that no 81 Chiltern Road is the Church PALL16 Vicarage - this is not and indeed has never been the case. We are writing to object to this step being taken for Chiltern Church. As Trustees we would point out that the church has been progressively extended throughout its life 501960 Mr Brian Adams in a variety of architectural styles. This includes a rear extension with a flat roof and a major two storey extension at Chiltern Church the front in the year 2000. The roof and none of the windows, except a couple at the front, are original. In summary very little is original apart from the front fascade and it could be argued that this has lost its impact by the addition of the said two storey extension. We feel that the normal planning process should, for any property, ensure that any development is done in a manner sympathetic to its historic character and environment and hence a local list should not be needed. Also the extension of the local list at a time when cost savings are being sought by the Council, does not seem the best use of the Council's funds. In terms of detail then the reason for the selection of the Church is

13 April 2011 Page 6 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 7: Nos 75 and 90 The Gallop, 81 Chiltern Road and Church with adjacent buildings, South Sutton stated satisfying as criteria 2 and 6 and the narrative states - This is a group of flint built buildings. The Group also includes 77 and 90 The Gallop. These are a very distinctive group of flint with brick dressings. Tile hung bays on 75 and 77. Date from the 20s or 30s buildings. Criteria 2 says Is of architectural interest by a locally significant architect or a good example of local construction techniques'. In this connection we do not believe the architect was local. Criteria 6 - says Has group value - buildings which individually may not merit inclusion but collectively represent a notable example of architectural style, or which make a significant contribution towards the character and identity of an area'. We struggle to see why a group inclusion should need to include a building which has been altered and changed so extensively. If you are seeking to create a local group then it would seem reasonable that you should also consider 79 The Gallop. 77 The Gallop, Sutton (Ref# 7) Support In relation to the 4 houses and Chiltern Church on the junction of The Gallop and Chiltern Road of which our PALL20 property number 77 is the house on the corner of both roads I am writing to confirm the following: Whilst we have not been mentioned in the initial list for the inclusion as a part of the group of buildings of historical interest , our 500408 Mr Alan J Stanton property is stated on the list as a part of the group in other text and is included as a building of brick and flint with tile hung bays and is positioned directly opposite the church and next door to number 75 The Gallop. During our conversation you noted the exclusion and confirmed an alteration would be made. We are delighted to be included Page 95 in the local list and place great value on it. Site 8: Bowmont House', Clifton Avenue, Sutton

Ref. 8 ('Bowmont House', Clifton Object Re: 'Bowmont House', Clifton Avenue, off Downs Road, Belmont. This building has been shortlisted. However, I Avenue, off Downs Road, OBJECT or have reservations. I do am very dubious as to why this building should warrant Local Listing. I belive Belmont) there are plenty of other better candidates which have not been shortlisted. Moreover, the council assessment PALL59 document identifies criterion (i) and criterion (ii); however, I do not see how it meets either of these criterion. Re: Criterion (i). As a local historian I can advise that this building is of no known historical importance. The history, and 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes original function or purpose and ownership, of the buidling are all unknown. Therefore, how can it satisfy criterion (i)? Also, no supporting information or evidence is given in the assessment document or the nomination paperwork. Re: Criterion (ii). the builing does not seem to satisfy the terms of this criterion. Just because a buidling is in good original condition, that does not mean it warrants Local Listing. Just because this building may have recently been saved from demolition, that does not mean it warrants Local Listing. Additional Information: This building was built either around turn of the century or in the Edwardian period. It is shown on the 1914 OS map. Contrary to the nomination paperwork, I can advise that this building was NOT related to any nearby buildings that once existed on the site. A building that appears almost on the site on the 1876 OS map is NOT the same building as Bowmont House - the former was a small mud cottage. Agenda Item 11 Site 9: 16-26 Cotswold Road, Sutton

13 April 2011 Page 7 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 9: 16-26 Cotswold Road, Sutton Ref. 9 (no's 16-26 [odd], Cotswold Object This group of buildings was shortlisted. Although I do not absolutely object, I certainly have serious reservations Road, Belmont) however about whether this shortlisting really merits Local Listing. The council assessment document identifies PALL60 criterion (ii) for this group of buildings. However, I do not see how this group of buildings satisfies the terms of criterion (ii) as thet are actually expressed.. Just because a building is attractive and in good original order, that is not 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes sufficient for it to merit Local Listing. I feel that this group of buildings do not really meet any of the six criteria. I think there are better candidates and nominations for Local Listing which have not been shortlisted. Observation: There are many other buildings broadly in the south Sutton area which are in very good external original order, from the late Victorian and Edwardian periods, which equally should merit Local Listing, yet none have been shortlisted. Ref 9 (no's 16-26 [odd] Cotswold Observation Additional Information These properties are Edwardian, not late Victorian. I can provide more precise dating Road, Belmont) information if the council would like it. I can check my records and research papers in order to be sure. They were PALL75 probably built about 1906 though. I think I may mention them in my book - 'Belmont: A Century Ago'. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes

Site 10: Nos 9-69 Egmont Road, Sutton Page 96

Ref 10 (Egmont Road) Observation I feel the Council should investigate whether parts of the housing in Egmont Road merit ASLC status, because PALL61 there seems to be a good case in light other ASLCs that already exist in the borough. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes

Site 12: 241-243 and 245-247 Brighton Road, Sutton

Ref. 12 - PART OF ONLY - (no's Support Re: no's 241/243, Brighton Road, Belmont. ('Pelton Villas') This was my nomination. It has been shortlisted by the 241/243 Brighton Road, Belmont) council. I SUPPORT. (no's 241/243 only) I have already supplied supporting information. The council assessment PALL62 paperwrok only states one citerion though: criterion (i). However, because of the prominent use of flint, a local and Surrey building material, I feel this building also meets criterion (ii). 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes

Ref. 12 - PART OF ONLY - (no's Object Re: no's 245/247 etc, Brighton Road, Belmont. (excluding no's 241/243). ONLY PART OF Ref. 12 I OBJECT. 245/247... Brighton Road, These buildings were not shortisted. I agree. (NB. I SUPPORT no's 241/243 - see separate commnet submission!) Belmont) PALL63 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 13: Sutton Hospital Site, Cotswold Road, Belmont

Sutton Hospital Site, Cotswold Object Reconsider this listing - In my opinion they are not worthy of inclusion Road, Belmont (Ref# 13)

13 April 2011 Page 8 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 13: Sutton Hospital Site, Cotswold Road, Belmont PALL30 500455 Cllr. Janet Lowne Site 14: Cotswold Road, Belmont

Victorian Pillar Box, Cotswold Support I am delighted to read that you have decided to shortlist two of the Victorian letter boxes in your area. It is extremely Road, Belmont (Sutton Hospital) encouraging to see them being given recognition locally. Your photograph of the wall box at the hospital entrance (Ref# 14) has shown that we have noted this box incorectly in our records. It is actually the second variant of this sub-type, PALL136 rather than the first as we had it recorded. I am afraid there is a downside to this, as the second variant is much more regularly found than the first. It means that the period of manufacture needs to be amended to 1886/1901, and 499598 Mr Andrew R Young there are around 2000 survivors throughout the British Isles (UK and Irish Republic). I note that you have described Letter Box Study Group this box in the 'site' column as a pillar box. It should really be recorded here as either a wall box, a wall letter box or possibly just as a letter box. Ref. 14 (Royal Mail letter box, Support Re: letter box by Sutton Hospital entrance, Cotwold Road, Belmont This feature was shortlisted. I agree. I had Cotwold Road, Belmont) overlooked nominating this feature myself (probably because I was more concerned about the immediate danger to Page 97 PALL64 the nearby former SMDS buildings which I did nominate). Due to the age, condition, rarity of this feature - and due to its historic connection with the adjoining former SMDS site, built 1882-1884 (which is also nominated and 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes shortlisted) - I SUPPORT. Also, I believe this feature also meets criterion (vi) Group Value, due to its connection with the adjoining SMDS site. This feature should probably form part of the SAME actual Listing as the neraby SMDS building, as they are connected historically and geographically, and need to be understood in the same historic context. Additional Information This letter box features at this location in photographs taken in the early C20th. It is the same shaoe and size. The site of the letter box has moved slightly however. Photographs show that this letter box was originally mounted in a brick/stone column or gate post in part of the entrance gateway and gate, but thsi column has since been demolished - and presumably the letter box was resited at that time to its present location. This Victorian letter box model has been dated to 1882-1885. These dates are contemporary with when the SMDS site was erected (1882-1884). This letter box was part of the SMDS gateway and therefore formed part of the SMDS complex (Cotswold Road site). Site 15: No 35 Chiltern Road, Sutton

Ref 15. (35 Chiltern Road, Observation I gather this property is owned by a local councillor. If it was necessary, was an interest declared? And one trusts Belmont / south Sutton) the ownership of this property or the owner had no influence on the process of shortlisting this property? Agenda Item 11 PALL65 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 20: Nos. 16-22 Park Hill, Carshalton

13 April 2011 Page 9 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 20: Nos. 16-22 Park Hill, Carshalton 18b Park Hill, Carshalton (Ref# 20) Observation I am keen on perservation and conservation and in theory this sounds great. I especially would like to preserve the PALL130 mature trees on my property and surrounding area - is this covered or is it just the building? Also what level of listing would my property have and what are the restrictions for that level? I may be looking to sell my flat in the next year 500755 Shelley Evans or so and would like to know if listing the building will have a detrimental effect?

18 Park Hill, Carshalton (Ref# 20) Support I live at 18a park hill and like the idea of it being listed. PALL26 499644 Mr James Loughrey

Ref. 20 (Park Hill, Carshalton) Observation I believe a local councillor and the nominee lives and owns a property very close to these properties. PALL66 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Page 98

Ref. 20 (possible milestone or Observation This was my nomination. It was only a tentative nomination. I had not actually seen the feature at first hand. boundary stone, The Crescent) Additional Information: This feature is located the rear garden of, I think, no. 20 The Crescent, Belmont. Since my PALL71 submission I have seen a photograph of this feature. The stone does not look anything like the 1745 turnpike road/ 'Cornhill' obelisks. It is smaller and poorer quality. It has a pointed top. The stone has been painted over partly with 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes white paint. I would suggest that this feature may very well be a parish boundary stone, relating to either Sutton/Cheam or Cheam/Banstead. I know there were lots of parish boundary stones in the Belmont Village area in the C19th before the area was developed. Whatever this feature is, it is unlikely to be in its original position. Observation This feature may warrant addition to the Local List at a later point. Closer inspection of the feature would be required. I would suggest the feature is highlighted by the council as being a possible candidate for addition to the local list, for whenever the next review occurs. Site 21: Nos 24-42 Park Hill, Carshalton

36 Park Hill, Carshalton (Ref# 21) Object We bought our property because it is old, has character and this is interesting. As such we would never intend to do PALL119 anything substantial that would alter its appearance. However I am not convinced in the value of the scheme from a tax payers point of view. In what are no doubt difficult times financially for all public bodies, it undertaking such a 499575 Mr Mark Smith scheme worth the money. I believe if you were to survey the majority of people in the borough they would rather money went towards essential services, there is no doubt a scheme like this takes up time and money. For example ensuring all pathways and roads were free from ice and snow during the cold snap would be preferable (which they were not). Can you send or post on the website the breakdown of all costs associated with this project. Which I assume I am entitled to see under the freedom of information act. If it won't alter current planning restrictions then you do need to ask what's the point? I have seen some letters posted around that point on the website relating to the zone created in Carshalton. Can you substantiate your claim the property values will increase, do you have evidence from any other such schemes. Also as an owner my concern that this would be a step towards tighter

13 April 2011 Page 10 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 21: Nos 24-42 Park Hill, Carshalton restrictions which may in the future result in quite substantial extra cost for any maintanance we will need to carry out on the property. The reason I have emailed you directly is because not one of the web addresses in the letter you sent out is functioning which makes me wonder if the council has the ability to carry out any such project work efficiently and effectively with out wasting my tax payers money. 34 Park Hill, Carshalton (Ref# 21) Object I see the local authority is continuing to waste money on some woolly idea to try and justify the existence of some PALL19 over-staffed department. There is nothing of significant architectural merit or past history to this house that I can ascertain. It was built on the cusp of the 19/20th centuries (as I understand it) using imported Canadian sash 500758 Peter G Knapp windows, cheap tiles and off the peg fire surrounds and constructed in stock method of the time. The tiles, windows and fireplaces have long since had to be dealt with to make the house liveable for contemporary expectations within the rules of local conservation areas and I am unaware of any historic figure having lived here. What a waste of time. Ref. 21 (Park Hill, Carshalton) Observation I believe a local councillor and the nominee lives and owns a property very close to these properties. PALL67 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Page 99 Site 22: Bungalow near “Sutton Lodge,” Brighton Rd

Ref. 22 (bungalow near Sutton Observation This was not shortlisted. I understand. I only made this as a very tentative nomination. Sorry I could not provide Lodge, Brighton Road, south very much information with my submission. Thank you to the council for assessing this property. Sutton) PALL68 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 24: 11 and 13 Cotswold Rd

11 Cotswold Road, Belmont (Ref# Support Thank you for selecting my property, 11 Cotswold Road SM2 5NG, for inclusion in your Local List of buildings of 24) historic or architectural importance. I am delighted to accept this listing and look forward to receiving final PALL18 confirmation. 500823 Mr Richard Walker

13 Cotswold Road, Belmont (Ref# Support I agree with all your historic development and I feel we must keep all historic buildings. This one was built in 1834 as Agenda Item 11 24) a Farm Cottage. PALL4 499202 Mr Rod Lepetit

13 April 2011 Page 11 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 24: 11 and 13 Cotswold Rd Ref. 24 (no's 11/13 Cotswold Support This was my nomination. It has been shortlisted by the council. I SUPPORT. I have already supplied supporting Road, Belmont) information. The council assessment paperwork only states one criterion though: criterion (ii). HOWEVER, I feel this PALL69 building also meets criterion (i) due to its historical importance or significance. Conisider its age, its historical context, and close connection to Sutton Lodge, John Overton and Sutton Lodge Farm. It is a rare survival from the 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes mid C19th of a link to the borough's rural past and heritage. Additional Information I supplied information with my nomination about the history of this building. It was built around 1860 by the large prominent farmer, John Overton, of nearby Sutton Lodge. The property was probably built to house his farm workers: census returns seem to support this, and rate books show that Overton continued to own the building. Site 28: 38 The Crescent ref. 28 (Ayott Lodge, the Crescent, Support I nominated this, but it was not shortlisted. I would like to re-argue the case that this SHOULD be added to the Local Belmont) List. The council assessment says it's been significantly altered. That's not the cse. In fact, it is in excllent origional, unaltered condition. It meets criteria (i). Built c. 1883. Maldon Road (Wallington) houses have been shortlisted, so

PALL95 Page 100 should this. Just because something is in a ASLC, that is not an acceptable reason why it should not be locally 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes listed. You already have historical info about thsi property from my orginal nomination.

Site 31: 2-12 (even numbers), 39-57 (odd numbers), Downs Rd ref. 31 (no's 2-12 even Downs Rd, Support RE: no's 2-12 even Downs Rd [only, not ref. 31a]. I nominated this, but it was not shortlisted. I would like to re-argue Belmont) the case that this SHOULD be added to the Local List. It meets several of the criterion. Built 1876. Historically PALL96 importance - yes. More than Highland Cottages (wallington) which have been shortlisted. The external condition is no more altered than Highland Cottages (wallington) which have been shortlisted. Actually, probably less altered. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes This is unfair and inconsistent. ** I shall write seperatelywith more information.** You already have historical and background info about this property from my orginal nomination. Please refer to that. Site 32: 99-101 Downs Rd

101 Downs Road, Belmont (Ref# Support I am writing to express our thanks for the letter explaining about the Local List concerning historical buildings and 32) structures. We would like to know whether there would be grants in place to help with things like a new roof etc. PALL36 503325 Kristine Ganley Ref. 32 (99/101 Downs Road, Support This was my nomination. It has been shortlisted by the council. I SUPPORT. I have already supplied supporting Belmont) information. The council assessment paperwork only states one criterion though: criterion (i). HOWEVER, I feel this PALL70 building ALSO satisfies criterion (ii) and criterion (iii) Local Community Interest. Re: Criterion (ii). It was built in 1832/33 by an identifiable local Sutton builder. It is partly made of flint. It is a very rare example in the borough of an 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes agricultural building. Re: Criterion (iii). It is of considerable local community interest. Consider: its age; its rarity; its agricultural heritage; its historical and geographical context within Belmont and the borough and south Sutton

13 April 2011 Page 12 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 32: 99-101 Downs Rd generally; and also its close connection to farming, Sutton Lodge, John Overton and Sutton Lodge Farm. It is a rare survival from the early C19th of a link to the borough's rural past and heritage. It is the OLDEST building in Belmont; in fact it predates the existence of 'Belmont', when the area was known as Sutton Downs. Moreover, apart from Sutton Lodge, it is THE oldest builing in the whole of south Sutton broadly. It is the ONLY surviving C19th agricultural building in the whole of south Sutton broadly. Observation: Due to its age (before 1840), this building may even merit statutory listing by English Heritage. Can the council help to achieve this? Additional Information I supplied information with my nomination about the history and historical context of this building. The council has agreed to erect a heritage plaque on this building due to its local and historical interest. Site 34: 98-112 and 114-120 Central Road, Worcester Park

Caldbeck Parade, 98 - 112 and Object We have never come across a more absurd proposal than that the shops in this parade should be listed as being of 114 - 120 Central Road, local historic or architectural importance. There is nothing attractive about these buildings especially the rear which Worcester Road (Ref# 34) is a grotty alley covered with broken grey pebbledash walls and at least six sets of black metal staircases and there PALL14 are hundreds of similar parades. In these times of financial stress local government should be looking to get smaller, in line with its depleted finances, not engaged in useless activities for its own sake. It will cost the Council i.e. the Page 101 500676 The Directors council tax payers, dear and also the property owners, whose repairs cost more and and are more restrictive on listed buildings. We demand to know who is responsible for putting this ridiculous notion into your head. Turning to the listing criteria, the building is not of historical interest, no well-known historical events, people or designers are connected with it, it is not of architectural interest by a locally significant architect, it is not a good example of local construction techniques, material or design, it is not of local community interest, it is not important to the setting of nearby buildings and open spaces, it is not important in relation to the townscape view, and it does not have group value. The local council must not curtail its freedom of movement by listing this building. It should concern itself with the chronic traffic chaos int he area which may require the road to be widened. Is this a plot to prevent road improvements for ever? We demand to know whose agenda is behind this and what that agenda is. We object with all the emphasis at our command to the listing. Caldbeck Parade, 98 - 112 and Support I have received your letter proposing to add my property to your Local List of buildings or structures of local historic 114 - 120 Central Road, or architectural importance. I am in agreement that it is necessary to keep the character of Worcester Park as it is, Worcester Road (Ref# 34) and am happy that you feel my property should be added to the list. PALL2 500123 Valerie E Manning Agenda Item 11 Site 36: Iron railings alongside Belmont Park and Shanklin Estate, Brighton Road

Ref. 36 (Iron fence railings, Object RE: Iron fence railings, Brighton Road, Belmont (near Belmont Park and Shanklin Estate) I OBJECT to this Brighton Road, Belmont, near shortlisting. This shortlisting has been made on the basis that these railingswere the boundary fence of theSouth Belmont Park and Shanklin Estate) Metroplitan District School (SMDS) -Brighton road site (latterly Belmont Hospital, now the site of the 'Belmont PALL93 Heights' housing estate). HOWEVER, I dispute this or at least seriously question this. What evidence is there that

13 April 2011 Page 13 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 36: Iron railings alongside Belmont Park and Shanklin Estate, Brighton Road 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes these railings relate to the SMDS or the same institutional buildings at a later time? I feel that this nomination and shortlisting is based on supposition rather than evidence. Photographic evidence strongly suggests that these railings are NOT old enough or at least were NOT at their current location for the period that has been claimed. If the council heritage dept had consulted me as they had agreed to do, I couldI have told the council the above before they shortlisted this feature for local listing as part of the local listing consultation process. What evidence did the council obtain in their assessment process? Examination of various photographs from the 1890s, 1900s and 1910s indicate these railings were NOT present at that time. Photographic evidence suggests these railings were erected no earlier than the 1920s or 1930s at the earliest. Therefore, they cannot relate to the SMDS because that instution closed in 1902. I would suggest that what is most likely is that the railings were possibly erected when the post-war prefabs were built in the Belmont Park area and the ground was re-levelled to create a deep drop from the pavement, and the disused Shanklin Road' was built. If the age and style of these iron railings suggest a C19th date, then they must have been moved from a different site. Given the severe doubt about the authenticity and justification or basis of this shortlisting, this feature should not be added to the Local List, or at least not at this time. Evidence

and further research is required. Note: The council shortlisting document states that the SMDS was manged by the Page 102 Metroplitan Asylums Board (MAB). This is INCORRECT. The SMDS was managed by the SMSD. The SMSD dissolved and its instutitions closed down in the early 1900s. The two SMDS/SMSD sites at Belmont were then purchased by the MAB; but the MAB did not manage the SMDS/SMSD institutions at Belmont. And the Brighton Road SMDS buildings bought by the MAB was only used or managed by the MAB as different institutions for a few years. Site 37: Homeland Drive, Road Bridge (over the railway line)

Ref. 37 (railway bridge, Homeland Object The council did not shortlist this nomination. I AGREE. Additional information: This may not be the original (early Drive, near Shanklin Estate, 1860s) railway bridge at this location. I am not certain, but I think I have read in a book about this railway line that Belmont) thsi bridge was rebuilt or strengethened around 1930s/1940s. I may have even been damaged by bombing in PALL72 WW2. I can check this out if the council would like me to. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 40: Old Milestone, Chiltern Road

Ref 40 ("old milestone", Chiltern Observation Like the council, I am unclear what feature this nomination refers to. Road, south Sutton) PALL73 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 47: The Coach House, at rear of 78 Bute Rd, Wallington

13 April 2011 Page 14 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 47: The Coach House, at rear of 78 Bute Rd, Wallington Ref. 47 (outbuilding to rear of no. Object I object. I do not see how this building meets any of the six criteria. Original condition alone does not merit local 78, Bute Road, Wallington) listing. Criterion (i) is cited, but what is its historical importance? Criterion (ii) is cited, but it is does not seem to PALL76 meet the terms of that criterion given how they are written. No photograph of this building is provided in the consultation papers. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 48: 31-43 Clifton Road, Wallington

31 Clifton Road, Wallington (Ref# Support I have lived in this property since Dec. 1982. I regard myself as its temporary custodian and have sought to preserve 48) the original fabric, such as was found in place, as much as possible and indeed have made a contemporary PALL22 restoration of one of the fire surrounds. I have no particular comments beyond stating that I am quite happy for LBS to go ahead and make the designation. 500428 Mr Alan H Martin

35 Clifton Road, Wallington (Ref# Support I am pleased to see the addition of our property at 35 Clifton Road, Wallington, on the schedule. 48) Page 103 PALL23 499399 Mr A. G Ross 43 Clifton Road, Wallington (Ref# Object As you are aware my home is the last on a row of Victorian properties which have been identified. However, I do not 48) think it appropriate to add it to the list for a number of reasons. Whilst No. 43 is an older property, it has in the past PALL31 been used as a House in Multiple Occupation and could revert to such usage in the future, inclusion on the list would in all probability make such a conversion financially impractical, given the current regulations relating to HMO 499607 Mr Barry Russell properties. Given the future likely increased need for HMO style accommodation I feel its inclusion would be therefore inappropriate. Furthermore, as we agreed, the other properties identified in Clifton Road share a similar architectural style with each other whilst No. 43 is far less so and indeed out of keeping with the run of properties. ref. 48 (no's 31- 43 [odd] Clifton Object I object. Just because a building is in good original external conditional, that does not in itslef warrant LocaL Listing. I Road, Wallington) don't see how this shortlisting sufficiently meets any of the six criterion. No historical or architectual importance is PALL91 cited. It's already part of a ASLC. This recognises the character and appearance of these buildings. I don't see anything sufficiently remarkable or special about these buildings to merit them Local Listing. The cited criterion are 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes (v) Townscape View and (vi) Group value: these are dubious and, alone, are weak grounds for Local Listing.

Townscape view?- it's in a side, residential road. And anything can consitute a group. Agenda Item 11 Site 49: Seymour House, Charter House and Bridge House, Mulgrave Road and Bridge Road

Seymour House, Chanter House Support The Society is especially pleased by the inclusion of this group of properties which have significant Group Value. and Bridge House, Mulgrave Road / Bridge Road (Ref# 49) PALL103

13 April 2011 Page 15 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 49: Seymour House, Charter House and Bridge House, Mulgrave Road and Bridge Road 33508 Mr Tony Golledge Sutton and Cheam Society Ref. 49 (1930s apartment blocks, Object I think this shortlisting best meets, in addition, criterion (v) - Townscape View . south of Grove Road) PALL74 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 53: Carshalton War Memorial Hospital

Carshalton War Memorial Hospital Object We have reviewed the document, including the reasons stated and wish to object to the proposal to add this building (Ref# 53) to the schedule of locally listed buildings. Our reasons are as follows: 1. As the entry in the Assessment Schedule PALL105 testifies, there is nothing special about the architectural quality or design or the building that merits its addition to the

local list. 2. Our comment above is further reinforced by the conclusions of the Carden & Godfrey report submitted in Page 104 67320 Mr Andrew Grimes connection with the planning application for the development of the land to the north of the building in 2009 (LBS ref: Sutton and Merton Primary C2009/61580/FUL) who concluded at paragraph 3.2 that the existing building does not make a positive contribution Care Trust to the character and appearance of the Carshalton Park Conservation Area. 3. In our view there is no need to add the building to the schedule of locally listed buildings because the building is already located within the Carshalton Park Conservation Area where sufficient controls already exist over alterations and other proposals to the building. Any proposals for demolition would need to pass the rigorous policy tests imposed by both PPS5 and local planning policy. 4. The Council is aware that the PCT is seeking to dispose of the property and has initiated formal pre- application discussions. An officer of the Council (Eimear Murphy) has already indicated to us that redevelopment of the site may be considered acceptable if it can be demonstrated that the existing building is structurally not sound. Adding the building to the local list is not considered compatible with this advice from officers. 5. There is no need for the building to be retained for health related uses given the provision of modern and up to date facilities elsewhere in the local area. Indeed it is very clear that the building is no longer fit for purpose for health related uses. 6. The assessment in the schedule indicates that the local community interest arises from the fact that the building's original construction (in 1923, not the 1930s as indicated) was paid for by local subscription. This applies to many public buildings and is not considered sufficient justification for the addition of the building to the schedule of locally listed buildings. 7. We would also comment that the inclusion of an historic black and white photograph illustrating the building at a time when it was occupied and in good condition is misleading to those who read through the consultation document. As the Council will be aware, the building has been vacant and boarded up for the past 3 years. It is also noted that only one other historic photograph of a candidate building is included. This should be rectified by the inclusion of a comtemporary photograph that is representative of the building's current appearance. 8. Finally we would like to point out that the summary leaflet produced by the Council publicising the consultation states that the candidate buildings "are all either of historic interest (due to their connection with people or events of local importance) and / or have significant local architectural value". However the detailed information contained in the schedule of the main consultation document states that the Carshalton War Memorial Hospital meets neither criteria. We feel that the Council is therefore in danger of misleading the public given that one of the main ways members of the public will become aware of the consultation is through reading the leaflet. 13 April 2011 Page 16 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 53: Carshalton War Memorial Hospital

Carshalton War Memorial Hospital Support The design of the Hospital does have architectural significance, it is on a radial layout to have for maximum light and (Ref# 53) air, "the accommodation is devised on a radiating principle, whereby light and air is available to every part" a very PALL12 new idea reflecting utopian ideals. There are/were? internal period fittings which are of interest. There is also the fact that these cottage hospitals are disappearing. 34217 Mrs Jean Knight Friends of the Carshalton Water Tower / The Carshalton Water Tower and Historic Garden Trust Carshalton War Memorial Hospital Support The discription in the table is misleading. Your local archives will show that the building was constructed and opened (Ref# 53) in 1923, and will clarify the historical importance, layout and further details. It should be suggested that the criteria be PALL15 amended to show (i) and (iii). The notice located adjacent to the entrance has been removed whilst Denne Construction currently work on the site to complete accommodation adjacent to the original entrance. The sign may 500816 Mr PJG Peny need to be reinstated. Page 105 Site 57: Carshalton Methodist Church, Ruskin Rd

Methodist Church, Ruskin Rd and Object I am responding to the three letters you sent to our Church, our Ruskin Hall and our Cottage about adding our Ruskin Hall (Ref# 57) properties to the Borough's Local List. All three properties are in the ownership of the Methodist Church of Great PALL128 Britain and I am replying on behalf of our local Church Council. In short we are opposed to having our buildings added to the Local List and this letter explains our reasons. Carshalton Methodist Church seeks to be a good 33957 Rev Julie Underwood neighbour to the community. We are proud of our buildings and try to use our limited resources to maintain them in a Carshalton Methodist Church good state of repair, recognising our presence in the local environment. However, our priority is to serve the community in a broader sense with our resources being directed primarily to social rather than heritage requirements. We have looked carefully at your consultation document and in particular at Item 57 on the schedule of properties nominated for possible listing. This schedule contains some erroneous statements and we feel that these may have misled the Council in making its proposal to add us to the Local List. Item 57 states that our buildings are "right next to Carshalton Park conservation area" whereas we are actually within the conservation area. Therefore, the Council already possesses strong planning powers and we feel it does not need to replicate these by adding us to the Local List. Our comments on the separate proposals for the Church, the Ruskin Hall and the Cottage are as follows:- (1) The Church Your schedule lists just a single criterion for adding our church to the List - Agenda Item 11 architectural interest by a locally significant architect or a good example of local construction techniques, materials or design . No other criteria are stated as being significant. The Church architect was Andrew Mather (1891 - 1938) and he is remembered for his work on Odeon cinemas in the mid 1930s. He was not a renowned church architect and had no other connections with the London Borough of Sutton as far as we are aware. Our church is not "a striking example of 1930s architecture" as stated in Item 57. It was actually built in 1925, ten years before Mather achieved any claim to fame as a cinema architect. The church has a simple design but contains non of the art deco style of the 1930s. Our church was not created by a locally significant architect and has no particular merit in terms

13 April 2011 Page 17 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 57: Carshalton Methodist Church, Ruskin Rd of local construction techniques. We consider that it fails the stated criterion for the purpose of the Local List. (2) The Ruskin Hall Your schedule lists the same criterion - that of architectural interest by a locally significant architect or a good example of local construction techniques, materials - to justify adding the Ruskin Hall to the Local List. No other criteria are listed as being significant. Item 57 states erroneously that the Hall has interest because it has a "comparatively gothic feel even though it was built at the same time as the church". In fact, it predated the church by fifteen years and we have no evidence that it was designed by a locally significant architect. Andrew Mather, aged only 19 years at the time, would not have been the architect. The Ruskin Hall was built as a church but has been much altered over the years. Little of the church interior remains and much of the original glass has gone. The much altered remains of late gothic churches abound in London and do not have particular architectural interest. Our Ruskin Hall was not created by a locally significant architect and has no particular merit in terms of local construction techniques. We consider that it fails the stated criterion for the purpose of the Local List. (3) The Cottage Your schedule does not list the Cottage specifically even though you wrote to us as the owners. It was added to the Ruskin Hall building in the 1950s as a caretaker's flat with little external profile. It is situated away from the street and

all that passers-by see is a typical 1950s front door. The only other external profile is an uninteresting blank wall Page 106 containing modern double glazed windows. Our Cottage was not created by a locally significant architect and has no particular merit in terms of local construction techniques. We consider that it fails the stated criterion for the purpose of the Local List. I shall be grateful if you will inform councillors that our Church Council is opposed to your listing proposals for the reasons I have given. Site 58: All Saints Parish Church Rectory, Cator Rd

All Saints Parish Church Rectory, Observation The architect was Simon Starling and it is designed in a "Ranch style". Carter Road (Ref# 58) PALL13 34217 Mrs Jean Knight Friends of the Carshalton Water Tower / The Carshalton Water Tower and Historic Garden Trust Site 59: The Masonic Lodge, Grove Road ref 59 (Masonic Hall, Grove Road, Support I SUPPORT It seems a good candidate for local listing. Observation: concern that may be demolished as site is Sutton) earmarked for road redevelopment. PALL77 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 65: Nightingales Public House (formerly Jenny Lind Public House), 53 Carshalton Rd, Sutton

13 April 2011 Page 18 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 65: Nightingales Public House (formerly Jenny Lind Public House), 53 Carshalton Rd, Sutton Ref. 65 (former Jenny Lind pub, Support RE: Nightingale pub (formerly Jenny Lind) This was not shortlisted, but I think it should be added to local list. Carshalton rd) Reasons... The Jenny Lind pub was built in the 1850s. That's early for Sutton. It's in very good, unaltered external PALL94 condition. The original open balcony survives. The architectual style and age of this pub is very unusual in borough. It's also of local interest because of the famous singer Jenny Lind having visited and sung in that 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes neighbourhood in 1847. Given some of the other pubs which have been shortlisted, the Jenny Lind should also be shortlisted I feel, as it just as good if not better a candidate for local listing. Compare to Railway Inn, Cheam; Plough Inn, Wallington; The Grapes, Sutton - these have been shortlisted. The Jenny Lind pub is documented in 1854, by name. Site 72: 1-5 the Green

72- houses on Sutton Green Support The corner house in particular is a very fine building- pity about the surroundings! PALL1 407359 mr steel Page 107 3 The Green, Sutton (Ref# 72) Object On behalf of NHP I am writing to advise you that we object to the proposed Local Listing on the following grounds;- PALL118 The building has no specific historical significance and is not, as far as I am aware, associated with any famous person. The building has no significant architectural features. Being on the edge of Sutton town centre, the building 505393 David Gudaniec is not in an area of significant historical importance. If you do List this property then can you please note the NHP Group following;- The property is used as a registered, residential care home To provide a safe environment for residents all original internal doors and other joinery have been replaced The original roof covering has been replaced by tiles The first floor of the coach house at the rear has been extended with a dormer window and this area is used as a self contained flat The windows throughout have been replaced by modern double glazed units The brickwork has been covered by waterproof paint Sutton Green, Sutton Observation Additions to the Local List - The Green was once a lake. Is the cluster of buildings worthy of note? PALL40 34136 Mr Peter Mattey Belmont and South Cheam Residents' Association ref 72 (no's 1-5 [odd] The Green, Support I SUPPORT These houses seem to be a good candidate for Local Listing. Very good. Agenda Item 11 Sutton) PALL78 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 79: The Grapes public house, High Street

13 April 2011 Page 19 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 79: The Grapes public house, High Street ref . 79 (The Grapes pub, Sutton Observation Observation: If this pub merits Local Listing, then I feel there are several other pubs in the borough that also warrant high street) local listing but have not been shortlisted. For example, the Jenny Lind public house in Carshalton Road, in particular. PALL90 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 82: The Lodge in Manor Park, pre 1867

Ref. 82 (Manor Park Road things) Observation Criterion (v) Townscape View whas been cited. However, I don't see how this building/s makes an important PALL79 contribution to the townscape view. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes

Site 87: Iron railings outside old water treatment works, Carshalton Rd Page 108 Victorian Post Box, Carshalton Support I am delighted to read that you have decided to shortlist two of the Victorian letter boxes in your area. It is extremely Road (Ref# 87) encouraging to see them being given recognition locally. PALL137 499598 Mr Andrew R Young Letter Box Study Group Iron railings outside old water Observation Add the gates to this listing. treatment works, Carshalton Road (Ref# 87) PALL28 500455 Cllr. Janet Lowne Site 94: 1-26 Highland Cottages, Bute Road, Wallington

6 Highland Cottages, Bute Road, Support Delighted to receive your letter which will presumably give us all in the cottages greater security of tenure. You won't Wallington (Ref# 94) be knocking us down for flats in the near future. Appreciate that all building work will be more closely inspected but PALL3 will VAT be waived on all costs as it is with a Statutory List? 499200 Mr Norman Parks 1-26 Highland Cottages, Bute Support I own and live in one of these cottages and (along with other residents) I support any initiative which will help to Road, Wallington (94) ensure that their unique 'old world' character is retained. They are in an area that is not improving and unlike PALL52 Carshalton and Cheam I suspect there are far fewer buildings of interest in the locality which some might say increases the significance of their inclusion. I know that others living in the row would welcome guidance/support 501378 Mr John Gibbons from LB Sutton to ensure that neighbours (some of the cottages are rented) do not make unsympathetic changes. I

13 April 2011 Page 20 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 94: 1-26 Highland Cottages, Bute Road, Wallington support the proposed listing of Highland Cottages Ref. 94 (Highland Cottages, of Observation Important observation and query: I don't understand why these terraced properties have shortlisted for local listings, Bute Road, Wallington) but some of my nominations for some terraces in the Belmont area have not been shortlisted. There seems to be a PALL87 definite inconsistency occuring. The terraces I have nominated are just as old and are actually of more historical important in both a locality and borough wide context,because of their connection to Belmont's early development 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes but, moreover, to Banstead Asylum (Banstead Hospital), a once huge institutional building and a major employer in the Sutton area. These early Belmont terraces which I allude to were built to accommodate Banstead Asylum workers. Furthermore, many of the terraces I have nominated are certainly no more altered than the Highland Cottages terraces off Bute Road, which have been shortlisted. I strongly believe that some of my nominations which were not shortlisted, need to be re-assessed in light of the above. Site 95: Red Lion, 265 High Street

The Red Lion PH, 265 High Street Observation Amend this reference as it is now called the Winning Post public house. (Ref# 95) Page 109 PALL29 500455 Cllr. Janet Lowne ref 95 (Red Lion pub, Sutton high Support I support. Seems a reasonable candidate for local listing. Additional Info - I think the famous rock group Rolling stree) Stones performed in thsi pub in their eary days. Observation: If the Red Lion merits Local Listing, then I feel there PALL80 are several other pubs in the borough that also warrant local listing but have not been shortlisted. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 97: Sutton Court Estate Wall, rear of 2-16 High Street

97 (Sutton Court wall) Support I support. It seems a good candadate for local listing. Very good. PALL81 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes

Site 98: 2-8 Bourne Way Agenda Item 11 ref. 98 (2-8 [even] Bourne Way, Support Short row of residential cottagess. I support. Seems a very good candiadte for local listing. Very good. Important off Gander Green Lane, west Observation: Nice to see some C19th working class residential properties shortlisted, however I feel that they are far Sutton) too few shortlisted for listing or listed already. I feel this needs to be addressed. Sutton is an area that grew rapidly PALL88 in the latter C19th - where or how is or will that history and heritage be represented or reflected in the borough's Local List? 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes

13 April 2011 Page 21 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 98: 2-8 Bourne Way Site 100: Nonsuch Place, Ewell Road

Nonsuch Place, Ewell Road (Ref# Support I would be happy for my house to go on a local list of historic buildings. 100) PALL25 502679 Nigel Ford Ref. 100 (Nonsuch Place, Ewell Support I support. Seems a good candidate for local listing. Very good. BUT... According to the shortlist summary list have Road, Cheam ONLY two pairs of the semi-detached properties been shortlisted - why? Is this an oversight? There appear to be PALL82 THREE pairs of semi-detached houses that form Nonsuch Place, being of the same age and style. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes

Site 101: 78 Stafford Road, Wallington Page 110

78 Stafford Road, Wallington Support The partners of this firm are delighted that our business premises are being considered to join the Local List. We are (Ref# 101) very pleased that the quality and history of our building is being recognised. However, we feel that it is important that PALL10 we explain that the building has been subject to major renovation and alteration work during the ninety odd years of its existence. Originally the building was a seed grain seller on the ground floor, with domestic accommodation for 499385 Mr Bernard F Finerty the family above. It is now a fully configured office with air conditioning, energy efficient lighting and IT and Finerty Brice Chartered telecommunications trunking throughout the building. We are not envisaging any major restructuring or development Accountants of the building, but given its present use and functionality, most of the original features such as fireplaces and internal divisions have been removed over time. Site 102: 12-20 Maldon Road, Wallington

16 Maldon Road, Wallington Observation I am infact very concerned that Sutton Council intend to replace the roof and windows to the above property (Ref# 102) sometime this year and there has been no consultation regarding the replacements e.g. I feel that a slate roof would PALL123 be more in keeping than modern tiles. Also, I feel that it is imperative to install box-sash style (sliding windows) to a): maintain existing design and b): I am registered disabled. Currently my box-sash windows allow me an escape onto 503897 Mr Nicholas A. Tiramani the balcony at the front of the house in the event of a fire, top hinged double-glazed windows do not. I would be very interested in your views on my comments. ref. 102 (Maldon Road, Wallington) Observation Important Observation: There are some similar properties in the south Sutton area simlar in date, size and style to PALL89 these Maldon Road ones in Wallington. However, none in south Sutton have been shortlisted or identfied. This should be remedied for the sake of consistency and to ensure other valid similar candidates also listed. I could 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes easily suggest some properties to the Council if they would like? There are some specific examples in the Grange Road/Mulgrave Road area of south Sutton which I could identify. Site 104: 440 – 444 Gander Green Lane

13 April 2011 Page 22 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 104: 440 – 444 Gander Green Lane 440-444 Gander Green Lane Support (Ref# 104) PALL48 503226 Mr David Rymill Ref. 104 (no. 440-444 Gander Object This seems a weak candidate for the Local List. It doesn't seem to adequately meet any of the six criteria. And very Green Lane) little of the buildings history seems to be known. Such an addition may risk to de-value the borough's Local List. PALL83 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 105: 57-59 St James Rd

57 - 59 St James Road (Ref# 105) Support The owner of the properties is happy for them to be listed and would like to be informed of any future stages of the PALL139 local list.

518116 Mrs J Morris Page 111

Site 109: The Cock Sign, High Street ref 109 (The Cock Sign, Sutton Support I support. Seems a good candidate for local listings. very good. Query: Do we know how old it is? high street) PALL84 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 111: Poplar Place, 119-121 Cheam Common Road

Poplar Place, 119-121 Cheam Support Common Road (Ref# 111) PALL46 503226 Mr David Rymill Agenda Item 11 ref. 111 (no's 119/121 Cheam Support I support. Although the originality of the external condition of this building is not good, it nevertheless seems a good Common Road) candidate for local listing. very good. Observation: I observe a good consistency in the shortlisting of this property in PALL85 comparison to Ref. 32 (99-101 Downs Road, Belmont). 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Site 115: 435 London Road

13 April 2011 Page 23 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 115: 435 London Road 435 London Road (Ref# 115) Support PALL47 503226 Mr David Rymill

Site 117: The Stables, Rear of the Creamery, 16 Station Road ref. 117 (stable or outbuilding to Object RE: Stable or outbuilding to rear of Station Road, Belmont, off The Crescent. This building has been shortlisted. rear of Station Road, Belmont, off However, I OBJECT or have reservations. I am very uncertain as to why this building should warrant Local Listing. I The Crescent) belive there are plenty of other better candidates which have not been shortlisted. Moreover, the council assessment PALL92 document identifies criterion (i) and criterion (ii); however, I do not see how it meets either of these criterion. Re: Criterion (i). As a local historian I can advise that this building is of no historical importance. It is merely a small 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes stable at the rear of a shop. That does not make it of historical significance. Re: Criterion (ii). the builing does not

seem to satisfy the terms of this criterion as it it actually written. Just because a buidling is in good original condition, Page 112 that does not mean it warrants Local Listing. Additional Information: This building was built in the Edwardian period. It is shown on the 1914 OS map. The parade of shops in Station Road which this building is to the rear of, was built in about 1903. It is reasonable to assume that the stable outbuilding is of the same date. It seems to allign to the building plots. The building does not appear on the 1896 OS map. The aforesaid parade did NOT represent the first shops in Belmont. Site 118: Miles Hall, St Andrew’s Church, Northey Ave

Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as a local resident and member of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the Northey Ave (Ref# 118) Local Listing, which would bring no benefit to members of the congregation and could limit our freedom to undertake PALL106 necessary changes in future, or add to costs. 503896 Rev Peter Barker Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object We write as members of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the Local Listing. Northey Ave (Ref# 118) Whilst wishing to identify ourselves with the letter of objection from the Church Secretary, on behalf of the Elders, we PALL110 would like to add the following comments. Our church is a living and changing body, and we do not look inwards but to the community. Our buildings have evolved to meet the needs of the local community over the last 90 years 504897 Maggie and Nigel and to serve to the community in future they must be able to continue to evolve. The Community's interests are not Macdonald necessarily best served by preserving existing buildings, even if they are somewhat unusual in the context of others around them. We therefore object to the proposed listing of the Miles Hall as it could undermine our ability to meet these needs in future. The preservation of our heritage (or legacy) of buildings is not something that we ignore. Whilst we will of course honour the constraints of the Grade II listing of our main Church building, we do need to be able to adapt and change our other buildings in a way which is responsible and appropriate.

13 April 2011 Page 24 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 118: Miles Hall, St Andrew’s Church, Northey Ave Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as a local resident and a member of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the Northey Ave (Ref# 118) Local Listing. Whilst wishing to identify myself with the letter of objection, which is coming from the Church Secretary, PALL113 on behalf of the Elders, I would like to add the following comments: Our church is a living and changing body, and we do not look inwards but to the community. Our buildings have evolved to meet the needs of the local community 505322 Mrs P A Beattie over the last ninety years and to serve the community in future they must be able to continue to evolve. I therefore object to the proposed listing of the Miles Hall as it could undermine our ability to meet those future needs. The preservation of our legacy of buildings is not something that we ignore. Whilst we will of course honour the constraints of the Grade II listing of our main Church building, we do need to be able to adapt and change our other buildings in a way which is responsible and appropriate. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Support I am writing as a member of St. Andrew's to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the local listing. I have read the Northey Ave (Ref# 118) letter written to you by our Church Secretary and would like to add the following comments: St Andrew's is a living PALL115 and lively community doing our best for the future of those living in the area. Any listing of the Miles Hall could undermine our ability to meet these needs in due course. 504506 June Smith

Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as a member of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the Local Listing. Whilst Page 113 Northey Ave (Ref# 118) writing to identify myself with the letter of objection which is coming from the Church Secretary, on behalf of the PALL120 Elders, I would like to add the following comments. Our Church is a living and changing body and we do not look inwards but to the community. Our buildings have evolved to meet the needs of the local community over the last 90 504830 Mr J Brown years and to serve the community in future they must be able to continue to evolve. I therefore object to the proposed listing. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as a local resident (since 1950) and a member of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Northey Ave (Ref# 118) Miles Hall to the Local Listing. Whilst wishing to identify myself with the letter of objection which is coming from the PALL121 Church Secretary, and on behalf of the Elders, I would like to add the following comments. Our Church is a living and changing body and we do not look inwards but to the community. Our building has evolved to meet the needs of the 503799 Joan L.M. Crichton locality over the last 90 years and to serve the community in future they must be able to continue to evolve. I therefore object to the proposed listing of the Miles Hall as it could undermine our ability to meet the needs of the future. The preservation of our heritage (or legacy) of buildings is not something we ignore, but we do need to be able to adapt and change our buildings in a responsible and appropriate way. We are also aware that this building is within the proposed location of the Burton Estates Area of Special Local Character.

Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I am a member of St Andrew's congregation and am writing to object to this proposal. The Church is a community of Agenda Item 11 Northey Ave (Ref# 118) people who gather to worship and whose mission is to serve the needs of the community - the wider community that PALL122 is. This is very much in line with government policy - The Big Society. In order to do this they need to be free to be flexible to adjust to the ever changing needs of society. I believe that this proposal would restrict this freedom and 503798 Mrs V Warwick would therefore be detrimental to local residents.

13 April 2011 Page 25 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 118: Miles Hall, St Andrew’s Church, Northey Ave Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as a local resident and a member of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the Northey Ave (Ref# 118) Local Listing. Whilst wishing to identify myself with the letter of objection which is coming from the Church Secretary, PALL125 on behalf of the Elders, I would like to add the following comments. Our Church is a living and changing body and we do not look inwards but to the community. Our buildings have evolved to meet the needs of the local community 507297 I Johnson over the last 90 years and to serve the community in future they must be able to continue to evolve. I therefore object to the Proposed listing of the Miles Hall as it could undermine our ability to meet these needs in future. The preservation of our heritage of buildings is not something that we ignore, we do need to be able to adapt and change our buildings, of course, whilst honouring the constraints of the Grade II listing of our main church building. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as Church Secretary on behalf of the Elders of St Andrew's United Reformed Church to object to the proposed Northey Ave (Ref# 118) addition of our Miles Hall to the Local Listing. The Miles Hall is not associated with a locally famous person or PALL126 connected to any locally significant historic, economic or social event which can reasonably be considered to be an important part of the fabric of the community. Nor is the Miles Hall important to the setting of nearby buildings and 504486 Dr P J Campbell Smith open spaces. As it is part of a Church complex (of three different architectural styles) located in a residential are it St Andrew's United Reformed cannot be important in relation to the townscape value'. Nor do we believe it can reasonably be regarded as having Page 114 Church group value' or make a significant contribution towards the character and identity of this overwhelmingly 1920s and 1930s residential area. We believe therefore that any argument for local listing can only be based on an assertion that it is of architectural interest by a locally significant architect, a good example of local construction techniques, materials or design, or that it is of local community interest. So that is the set of issues to which we now address our specific comments. The Hall was built to serve as a church; within five years it had ceased to be used in that way. It was not designated as the Miles Hall until 1967, some 40 years after it had been built and this was done simply to distinguish it from the Aitken Hall next door which had been built (and named) in 1963. Nothing that I or my church colleagues have found suggests that Messrs Matley, Brotherton and Mills, the architects, were either local or particularly special. Far from being a good example of local construction techniques, the building was poorly constructed and indeed some years ago we had to employ building engineers to overcome some fundamental structural problems. The front (north) wall continues to suffer damp problems. Each of our three main buildings has a different architectural style. The building that is nationally recognised to be of architectural significance is of course the church building itself, now listed Grade II. That is the architectural style which we have sought to honour as the dominant one in our building and garden plans. With regard to the argument that this building is or local community interest we believe that far wider issues must be taken into consideration. Sadly today there is a growing trend in this country for people to see churches as of historical interest only, and many have little interest or understanding of what current relevant they have to the community. Our whole church estate reflects the evolution of the needs of the local community over the last 90 years and they must continue to evolve if they are to remain able to serve that community in future. Your own department is directly aware that our church estate provides the facilities for a successful preschool, and our halls are used for a very wide variety of community activities ranging from the local Alzheimer's Society to a mothers and toddlers group. Yet we have known for some time that our existing buildings do not adequately serve our evolving patter of activities or work with the community. There are a number of changes that we would wish to make now if funds were available. The Council was consulted as recently as 2005 on detailed plans in relation to the construction of a proposed new entrance area across the font of our estate linking the church and the existing halls, together with a range of new facilities. Whilst those detailed plans may change further

13 April 2011 Page 26 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 118: Miles Hall, St Andrew’s Church, Northey Ave during the time that we are building our cash reserves, they do require a proper balance to be struck in planning terms between the need to provide relevant and attractive facilities to the community whilst honouring our traditions and history. I hope therefore that you will understand and uphold our wish for the Miles Hall not to be locally listed. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as a member of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the Local Listing. Northey Ave (Ref# 118) Whilst wishing to identify myself with the letter of objection which is coming from the Church Secretary, on behalf of PALL129 the Elders, I would like to add the following comments. I am aware that often Christian organisations including churches are perceived as being Historical' by those who do not wish to recognise the living contribution to the 503945 Mr Andrew J.W. community which the organisations have made and continue to make. As an example I would mention the Christian Macdonald organisation, Street Pastors, of which as a member of St Andrew's I was sponsored to join. You may know that the work that Street Pastors do in the community is sufficiently appreciated that your council sponsors the Sutton Street Pastors. Whilst Church Buildings are usually uplifting to the spirit, they are only to be used as assets in the service of the community. The fundamental risk to the council of Listing' Church Buildings is that the act of Listing makes the process of adapting and developing the buildings more difficult and expensive. Is that what the process inadvertently achieves - Preserve in Aspic'? Our church is a living and changing body, and we do not look inwards but to the community. Our buildings have evolved to meet the needs of the local community over the last 90 years and to serve Page 115 the community in the future they must be able to continue to evolve. I submit that a balance must be struck between, (a) putting an unnecessary brake on development by added financial expense, and (b) preserving the genuinely worthwhile historical relics, on of which I do not believe the St Andrew's Miles Hall could be considered. I also submit that in the current economic climate, community service can do without financial brakes. I therefore object to the proposed listing of the Miles Hall as it could undermine our ability to meet our desire to serve the community needs in future. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as a member of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the Local Listing. Whilst Northey Ave (Ref# 118) wishing to identify myself with the letter of objection which is coming from the Church Secretary, on behalf of the PALL131 Elders, I would like to add the following comments. Our church is a living and changing body, and we do not look inwards but to the community. Our buildings have evolved to meet the needs of the local community over the last 90 503938 Elspeth Macdonald years and to serve the community in the future they must be able to continue to evolve. I therefore object to the proposed listing of the Miles Hall as it could undermine our ability to meet these needs in future. The preservation of our heritage (or legacy) of buildings is not something that we ignore. Whilst we will of course honour the constraints of the Grade II listing of our main Church building, we do need to be able to adapt and change our other buildings in a way which is responsible and appropriate.

Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object As an associate and member of St Andrew's Church since the early 1930s, I write to register my objection to the Agenda Item 11 Northey Ave (Ref# 118) proposal to add the Miles Hall to the Local Listing. Whilst wishing to identify myself with the letter of objection written PALL132 by the Church Secretary on behalf of the Elders, I would wish to add the following comments. I would not think that this building is of real architectural merit to warrent such Listing. Any such Listing would severely restrict any future 503936 Mrs B.H. Mewett amendments to the hall to meet the many varied needs of the Church, its members and even more so the needs of the local community. The Hall has been used for many activities, including an A.R.P station during the War, and who can tell what uses may be required in the future involving alterations to the Hall. Although a minor point, any Listing would presumably involve the Borough Council in extra unnecessary work which is not in accord with the present 13 April 2011 Page 27 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Site 118: Miles Hall, St Andrew’s Church, Northey Ave financial situation. I do agree that the Church with its very special ceiling shoudl be Listed, but I strongly object to the proposed Listing of the Miles Hall. I trust all objections will be fully considered. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I am writing both as a Sutton resident and a member of the St Andrew's URC congregation to object to the addition Northey Ave (Ref# 118) of the Miles Hall to the Local Listing. In doing so, I wish to identify myself with the letter of objection sent by our PALL134 Church Secretary, on behalf of the Elders, which I would endorse and would add the following comments. Our church is a living and changing body which is not inward looking but seeks to serve the community. Over the past 90 503942 Mr Bernard M. Edwards years the buildings have evolved to meet those needs and currently they are continually in use both by our own Christian organisations as well as several secular groups. If we are to continue to meet these needs we must be able to evolve without the constraints that the listing would impose on the Church Fellowship. Listing constraints can often place a considerable financial burden which is grossly unfair on a charitable organisation which is wholly dependent on the financial resources of its members. The Listing Authority is unable (or unwilling) to make any financial contribution towards any proposals it makes to any plans put for approval, in other words it is unable to "put its money where its mouth is". While I do appreciate the desire to preserve our heritage, it is not something we ignore and I feel certain we will always ensure that any changes or adaptations we may wish to make to any of our Page 116 buildings will be undertaken in a responsible and sensitive manner. In the light of this and all the other objections you receive to the proposed listing I look forward to hearing that the proposal has been dropped. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object Having been a member of St Andrew's for over 75 years, I am writing to object to the proposal to add the Miles Hall Northey Ave (Ref# 118) to the Local Listing. I wish to endorse the comments in the letter of objection being sent to you by the Church PALL135 Secretary on behalf of the Elders. As a longstanding member of the church I have great affection for the Miles Hall; even so I realise that as a Church we must evolve to meet the needs of the community, and this may require us to 503795 The Owner or Occupier make some alterations from time to time. Baroness Andrew, the Chair of English Heritage has stated that she is not interested in creating museums, but instead we should have living, thriving buildings. The proposed Listing might inhibit our ability to make such changes that may become necessary. I therefore oppose the proposal. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I write as a local resident and a member of St Andrew's congregation to object to the addition of the Miles Hall to the Northey Ave (Ref# 118) Local Listing. Our church is a living and changing body, and we do not look inwards but to the community. Our PALL33 buildings have evolved to meet the needs of the local community over the last 90 years and to serve to the community in future they must be able to continue to evolve. I therefore object to the proposed listing of the Miles 298124 Mrs P.M. Macdonald Hall as it could undermine our ability to meet these needs in future. The preservation of our heritage (or legacy) of buildings is not something that we ignore. Whilst we will of course honour the constraints of the Grade II listing of our main Church building, we do need to be able to adapt and change our other buildings in a way which is responsible and appropriate. Miles Hall, St Andrew's Church, Object I am writing as a local resident and member of the congregation to object to what you propose. Our Church is a Northey Ave (Ref# 118) forever changing body with the needs of the community at our heart. I must object to the proposed listing of the Miles PALL34 Hall because our ability to meet these needs could be undermined by this proposal. Our main Church building is Grade II listed which is fine but we must be able to change our other buildings in a way which would be appropriate 503326 Miss A.H Grant to us and our community.

13 April 2011 Page 28 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Site 122: The Railway Inn, Station Way ref. 122 (The Railway Inn pub, Observation Observation: If this pub merits Local Listing, then I feel there are several other pubs in the borough that also warrant Cheam village) local listing but have not been shortlisted. For example, the Jenny Lind public house in Carshalton Road, in PALL86 particular. 499627 Mr Roland Sparkes Additional Nominations

Additional Nomination Observation Edward VII Pillar Box Having seen the exhibition in Sutton library I only became aware recently of the local listing of PALL109 buildings and structures across the borough of Sutton that merit listing. I have lived in Stanley Road south Sutton for over 30 years and have taken a keen interest in the sub-area south of Grange Road between Grange Vale and 504890 Richard Wilson Overton Road comprising the while of Camborne Road and the southern extensions of Stanley and Overton Roads. Over many years I have researched the history of this small area west of the Sutton to Belmont railway line after discovering that it was undeveloped farm land until the early 1900s. In consequence of the research, I would like to nominate the Edward the Seventh pillar box at the junction of Stanley and Camborne Roads - a central position and the only crossroads within this little sub-area. My reason for doing so it that this pillar box is emblematic of the rapid development in Edward VII's short reign of only nine years in a completely different architectural style inspired by the Page 117 Arts and Crafts' movement. North of the area but including Grange Road, the buildings were mainly large, detached mansions built in the familiar late Victorian style characterised by London stock bricks, slate roofs, sash windows and carriage drives. South of Grange Road the new houses were smaller, and several of them were semi-detached. They had clay-tiled roofs, the ground floors street-side were often in red brick, while the upper storeys were rendered. Casement windows were back in fashion replacing the earlier preference for sash windows. Many of the new windows - casement or still sash - were now divided into small panes by glazing bars. Although many of these houses have gone, their sites redeveloped as flats and small terraced houses, at least 20 remain. At intervals in all the three roads, many of the original street trees also remain, a very attractive feature of the view in all directions from the crossroads: the oldest are about 100 years old. I have found no evidence that there ever were any street trees in Grange Road or any of the other roads between Grange Road and the Sutton to Cheam railway line. With more time I could provide the evidence - from ordinance survey maps and local street directories for example - to support the above information and I would be happy to do so. I hope this nomination will be given serious consideration by the committee. Additional Nomination Observation There is a milestone halfway between Belmont and Sutton on the west side of Brighton Road which should be preserved

PALL111 Agenda Item 11 505020 Carol Page

Additional Nomination Observation There is a little passageway on Downs Road just below the entrance to the Royal Marsden - I think the numbers are PALL112 113 - 135 Downs Road. They are clearly old cottages and I was told they were originally built for workers at what is now Downview Prisonbut which was originally Banstead Asylum. The toilets were outside opposite the doors,in what 505020 Carol Page are now sheds. No doubt theyhave been changed over the years but maybe stillmerit consideration

13 April 2011 Page 29 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Additional Nominations

Additional Nominations Observation Notable buildings in the Butter Hill/Westcroft Road area Westcroft Road ; Westcroft Road was formerly known as PALL116 "the road from Carshalton to London" ; it was the continuation of the main London Road through Carshalton, Wallington and Hackbridge to Mitcham and beyond. The older buildings along its frontages bear witness to its 33857 Mr & Mrs John & Anne antiquity. The road cuts across the parish boundary of Carshalton (west) and Beddington (east). However manorial Dodwell lands straddle this boundary; thus the Westcroft Road property of the Bridges family of Wallington manor, as depicted on an estate map of 1771, crosses into Carshalton. Wallington Old Manor House, boundary wall, and the sewer vent pipe; On the southern side of the road lay the property known as Wallington Old Manor House (known in the 20th century as "Landons"), of which the north boundary wall survives. This wall (not listed), and the wall further west incorporating the Carshalton Parish boundary (listed Grade II) are all that remains from the former 18th century property which, oddly, may have been the manor house of Banstead. Originally owned by the Carews, it was sold to Rowland Frye (of the Chocolate making family, and relative of Elizabeth Frye) in 1762. It was apparently rebuilt in the late 18th or early 19th century; the early twentieth century local historian Molesworth Roberts recorded "a stone in the wall in Acre Lane bears the date 1790, probably twenty years after the mansion was erected." (1) The wall dates

from that period, but has had a number of heightening extensions and forms a wonderfully high backdrop (with the Page 118 terrace opposite) for Westcroft Road as it exits onto Butter Hill. The wall is coupled with the Grade II listed internal garden wall and Pier (with Parish Boundary marker, dated 1792) further west, and the fine Sewer Vent Pipe, manufactured in 1892 by MacFarlane & Co of Glasgow, iron founders. The pipe still has its arrow, orb and coronet; a rare survival as many of the upper parts of these pipes are now missing.(2) Terrace (opposite Wallington Old Manor House, north boundary wall); Speedex House, Londis shop, The old Schoolroom and the Rose and Crown Public House. The principal Bridges family property lay on the north side of the road and was known throughout the 19th century as Barnfield'. On his accession in 1865 Nathaniel Bridges, Lord of the Manor of Wallington, began to develop his estates for housing and improvements, beginning here with Quality Row', a terrace of cottages standing opposite the Old Manor House wall in Westcroft Road, now rebuilt as a tall terrace, Nos 1-13 Westcroft Road, up against the road. Quality Row' included two cottages thrown together as a schoolroom in 1833, so a new schoolroom was added behind the newly built Rose and Crown Public House, itself built by about 1870.(3) Although altered, the wide gable end of this building, with interesting decorative woodwork and a band of decorative saw-tooth brickwork, can still be seen to the south of the Public House; below at an angle is a blocked moulded four-centred neo- perpendicular doorway with an odd nodding head; to its right a wide segmental opening, also now blocked. Around the corner into Westcroft Road the facade of Speedex House itself has a mixture of brick, knapped flint panels with brick dressings and a fine four-centred stone doorway. Further still, a look behind the Rose and Crown, in the gap between Speedex House and No 1 Westcroft Road shows brick walling which appears to be 18th or 19th century in date, and marking the boundary first shown on a Wallington Manor estate map of 1771 Houses in Westcroft Road (north side, numbers 13-33) from Caledon Road to boundary wall of "Springbank"; Houses in Caledon Road (nos 1- 9 and 2-10) and semi-detached pair of houses in Butter Hill (nos 1 & 2). The buildings built on the Barnfield' mark the chronological end of Nathaniel Bridges' development of his Wallington Manor estate; they were built from 1879 onwards by the local building firm of Howe and White whom Bridges had employed previously in Wallington. The firm had an office in Danbury Terrace, up by the Green. Although many of the Bridges estate buildings survive intact in Wallington, including Holy Trinity Church and Windmill Public House in South Beddington, the semi-detached Westcroft Villas, Nos 15-33 Westcroft Road , are probably the best surviving examples of the brick-detailed style

13 April 2011 Page 30 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Additional Nominations employed on the estate. Although not clear, it is most likely that the designs were provided by the gothic revival architect E P Loftus Brock, who was employed by Bridges as estate architect/surveyor from the mid 1860s at least into the 1870s. Features to note are the tall pitched gables enclosing a decorative pointed arch detailed in red brick above the first floor windows. There are also pointed openings into the porch of brick and stone, with a roll-moulding. The semi-detached facades are stepped, the facade of each western house broadening with a batter. The Caledon Road Cottages (Nos 1-9 and 2-10) are terraced, but still have the pointed openings, of stone and brick, to the porch. In Butter Hill a semi-detached pair ( nos 1-2 Butter Hill ) have similar details, and are part of the same development. Conclusion; There is no doubt that these buildings have an historical interest from the point of view of their origins (local developer and local builder) and their setting in an area which already boasts a number of Grade 2 listed buildings. It has been suggested that the area described should rightly be in a new conservation area linking the existing ones of Carshalton Village to the west, and Beddington Park to the east or perhaps be joined to one or the other. This was proposed by Andrew Skelton in 2006. It is not known whether the Council accepted this suggestion. As well as highlighting the importance of the area in conservation terms, the buildings do have an interest in their own right, particularly as they are largely preserved in their original state with very few modern additions or alterations. Hence this proposal that they be considered for addition to the Local List. Footnotes: (1) Molesworth

Roberts, E V, undated article loose in BCWAS papers (at Wallington Library), "Wallington, General History", item Page 119 405. (2) I am grateful to Gordon Rookledge, formerly chairman of the Friends of Historic Street Furniture, for this information. (3) Rev J Williams (1873), Historical Notes on Wallington. 60-64; A J Crowe (1980), Inns, Taverns and Pubs of the London Borough of Sutton. 98 -100. Bibliography and further reading; Information gained from; London Borough of Sutton archives. Skelton AC, 1995, Wallington House and the Elms at Wallington Corner, in (C R Orton ed) Celebrating our Past BCWAS Occasional Paper no 5, 17-27. Skelton, AC, 2006, Wallington Corner Conservation Area; joining the Carshalton Village and Beddington Park Conservation Areas. (draft report submitted to the London Borough of Sutton). Additional Nomination Observation Bridges Lane area of Beddington. PALL127 501869 George Goodwin

Additional Nomination Support Anonymous Letter Box, Lodge Place This is an extremely rare Anonymous size B box, manufactured by Andrew PALL138 Handyside & Co of Derby, probably between 1879-83. There are 226 known survivors of this size and type of Anonymous box, but of these, just 13 have a raised ring on the top of the cap, and the Lodge Place box is one of

499598 Mr Andrew R Young these 13. The exact reason for the raised ring is not known. You will notice that the box has an extremely high Agenda Item 11 Letter Box Study Group aperture. This was standard with all Anonymous boxes during the early years of manufacture. Following complaints about letters getting caught internally inside the cap of the box the aperture was lowered to a new position in 1883 just at the top of the door. The cylindrical design was introduced in 1879 and this basic shape and style of pillar box has been followed ever since, and is still produced today. The pillar boxes made by Handyside between 1879 and 1887 bear no royal cipher, crown or wording of any kind except for the maker's name beneath the door. For this reason they are referred to as 'Anonymous' boxes. In 1887 the Post Office admitted that there had been an oversight and from then onwards all pillar boxes had the royal cipher VR cast in script letters on the door and the

13 April 2011 Page 31 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Additional Nominations words POST OFFICE on either side of the posting aperture. Additional Nominations Observation Request that the appropriateness of the following be looked into regarding adding to the local list: Bedzed Middleton PALL141 Circle Library The milestone at Rosehill which gives miles to Whitehall The drinking fountain at the entrance to Carshalton Girls School 504120 St Helier Committee St.Helier, The Wrythe and Wandle Valley Local Committee Additional Nomination Support Scawen Wall Could you please consider the Scawen Wall to be placed on the list for approval. The Scawen Wall, PALL142 named after Thomas Scawen (not sure if he was a 'Sir') who proposed in the early 18th century to build a large house in the area of what is now Carshalton Park and enclosed it by a wall which was originally 2 miles in length. 368101 Ms Carolyn Parker Very little of the wall remains, just pieces often hidden by back gardens. One piece which is available to the public is Friends of Carshalton Park on the south boundary of the car park in the Square. The Orangery and a couple or so houses in Brook Street back

onto the other side. Another part of the wall is between Wallace Crescent on one side and Beynon Road/Carshalton Page 120 Park Road on the other side. Only a few houses in Wallace Crescent actually have the Wall as part of their property, the rest have a footpath between the wall and their back gardens. The same applies to Beynon Road and Carshalton Park Road. The Wall can be seen from the road in Wallace Crescent from the footpath soon after you enter the top of the Crescent on the right hand side. Part of this wall collapsed several years ago due to the weight of growth of Ivy but although it was asked to be repaired northing transpired. Additional Nomination Observation The Grotto in Carshalton Park. PALL143 368101 Ms Carolyn Parker Friends of Carshalton Park Observation I think something should be done about the drinking fountain that stands near the entrance to the Wrythe Recreation PALL21 Ground near the entrance to Carshalton High School for Girls. 500433 Mr Mario Fuller

Sutton Arcade, 1b and 1c Observation Remaining Archway section of Sutton Arcade. Throwley Way, Sutton PALL27 500455 Cllr. Janet Lowne

13 April 2011 Page 32 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Additional Nominations new nomination - Westmead Support I wish to nominate the following additional premises; from 1 to 8b Westmead Corner as being of unique construction Corner Shops/ Shorts Dairy in terms of a local shopping centre circa 1938 these are mock tudor in design also the building in Carshalton Road PALL32 at the corner of Shorts Road - sorry don't know the number as it is boarded up This building was the site of Shorts Diary and still has a yard at the rear. the Short family were tenant farmers of Westmead Farm from the mid 19th 503144 Mrs Alexandra Faircloth Centurty and supplied dairy produce to Carshalton House - check with local historians for more facts.

Additional Nomination Observation I would like to propose the area of Kings Lane between the two railway bridges. I feel that this area meets the PALL37 criteria in a number of ways. 1. Architectural Significance The houses in this area provide a good example of the development of suburban housing between the early Edwardian period to the late thirties. The houses numbered 1-7 503327 Mr Brian Brockwell were built in 1907 by the Windybank Company who developed a large area of South Sutton. The houses show part of the evolution from the late Victorian house to the 30s semi. The houses still retain the storey height of the Victorian house and sliding sash windows to the rear but casement windows with dormer roofing above has been introduced. The red bricks to the front of the houses were manufactured by the Epsom Brick Company. The remaining houses are all very much in keeping with the better mid thirties housing and due to the lack of depth of the front gardens have all retained the garden rather than conversion to car parking. 2. Contribution to the setting of Buildings/Open Spaces/Group Value and Landscape I am enclosing photographs of the area as can be seen the Page 121 housing forms a plesant backdrop to the local park, Warren Park, together with the small allotment site all which are enclosed by a part Hawthorn and part Privet Hedging. I hope this may receive favourable consideration for a listing as this area I feel provides a very good example of early 20th century development which led to the Sutton as we know it today. Tennis Pavilion, junction of Observation It is an Edwardian tennis pavilion, built in 1908 by the local architect Percy Vere Windebank, on the triangle of land at Mayfield Road and The Ridgeway, the junction of Mayfield Road and The Ridgway, in South Sutton Ward. It is a relatively unaltered example of a small, South Sutton Edwardian tennis club pavilion, though the windows have been altered in an unsympathetic manner. The history of PALL38 the building is interesting. Up to 1906 this area was lavender fields. Between 1906 and 1914 Windebank laid out the Highfields Estate, building what is now The Ridgway, Mayfield Road , Chalgrove Road and Hillcroome Road . The 501912 Councillor Richard Clifton concept was an estate of large, expensive houses with large gardens, grouped around or close to a triangle of land on which there would be a lawn tennis and croquet club, for the benefit of the residents. In 2008 the Highfields Residents' Association published a history of the estate, "Highfields 100³, to mark the centenary. A copy of this history is obtainable from Mr Keith Percy at 63 The Ridgway, SM2 5JX. The houses are of some architectural merit, as indicated in the history. We believe the pavilion was built by 1908, as the Highfield Lawns tennis club was in existence by that year. On 22 August 1908 an advertisement for the first of the newly-built houses on the estate was published in the Surrey County Herald newspapers, and mentioned the private tennis club on the estate. Highfield Agenda Item 11 Lawns Ltd. was established as a company by 1913 with the sole objective of owning the land in order to allow the tennis and croquet club to operate. Those who bought one of Windebanks' houses could buy shares in Highfield Lawns. The Articles of Association of the company provide, to this day, that if you own a share in the company you can only vote on its affairs if you also own property in the Highfields Estate. Over the years the large gardens have been sold off for infill housing, mostly of a good quality. The area is designated an Area of Special Local Character (ASLC) and the Edwardian tennis pavilion is central to the character of the area. Were it to be proposed to demolish

13 April 2011 Page 33 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Additional Nominations and re-build the pavilion any replacement would need to be a building of a similar character (not a modern building or a concrete slab) due to the ASLC designation. Having it on the Local List will, then, probably not add further protection, but if the Local List is a list of buildings of some local significance, the pavilion should be on the list. This is based on criteria 3, a building of significant local interest. The Prince Regent Pub, 346 High Observation Possible addition for the Local List - I don't know much about it but I spotted it the other day. It looks quite a hotch Street, Sutton potch of styles and extensions, but that is part of the interest. There looks to be a shiplapped building at its core. PALL39 34136 Mr Peter Mattey Belmont and South Cheam Residents' Association 1930s Sainsbury's shop entrances Observation Addition to the Local List - One of the old 1930s Sainsbury's shop entrances. These were standardised as part of

PALL41 the then Sainsbury's brand image comprising brown granite surrounds and a white ceramic tile mosaic floor (which Page 122 had the emblem J Sainsbury). The remians of shopfronts can still be seen at 485 London Road, North Cheam, or 23 34136 Mr Peter Mattey The Broadway, Cheam. Belmont and South Cheam Residents' Association St Christopher's Roman Catholic Observation Addition to the Local List - This has been extended around the outside, but the core chapel building is what remains Church, Dallas Road, Cheam of the old Cheam School complex (Duke of Edinburgh educated there). The school building was demolished in the PALL42 1930s leaving just the chapel. 34136 Mr Peter Mattey Belmont and South Cheam Residents' Association Additional Nominations Observation Perhaps some may be added to the proposed additions list? (1) Manor Cottage, London Road, whilst not PALL44 nationally listed' itself, it is included in the Department of the Environment's Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest (1988) as forming a "group", in a designated Conservation area, with three properties that are 156234 Tracey Reeves nationally listed' namely Wallington Bridge, 282 London Road and 284 London Road (Wandle Bank; former home/studio of Arthur Hughes Pre-Raphaelite painter). The owners of Manor Cottage are currently requesting planning permission to demolish it and replace with a two-storey, three bedroom house and garage (though it looks as if demolition has already started). What is the listing status of properties like this that form a "group" with others that are 'listed'? (2) Carshalton Fire Station building (currently occupied by public library) (3) Grotto in Carshalton Park (4) Gateway and wall at end of Wandle Side, London Road (entrance to allotments) (5) Hackbridge Station platform 1 and adjoining buildings (6) 282 London Road, 284 London Road and Wallington Bridge (7) Wallington Magistrates Courts, Shotfield (8) Wallington Library (the Library building has been rejected from local listing due to the additions but the architecture remains the same and matches the Town Hall (now nationally listed) and the Magistrates Court - so they form a group I would think) (9) John King Flower Shop, 118

13 April 2011 Page 34 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Additional Nominations Manor Road (10) Shop fronts in Carshalton Village High Street i.e. Cancer Research (11) The Grove, North Street (12) The Lodge, Honeywood Walk (13) Ecology Centre land (14) Stonecourt, North Street (15) The Old School House, Mill Lane - is this currently owned by LBS? (16) Honeywood Lodge (17) War Memorial Hospital Magistrates Court, Wallington Observation Nomination of the Magistrates Court in Wallington for consideration for inclusion on the Local List. PALL45 33861 Cllr Jayne McCoy London Borough of Sutton Victorian Pillar Box, near 60 Observation Additional nomination - Victorian Pillar Box near 60 Beeches Ave. Beeches Ave PALL49 502928 Carshalton and Clockhouse

Local Committee Page 123 Carshalton Beeches Railway Observation Additional nomination - Carshalton Beeches Railway Station. Station PALL50 502928 Carshalton and Clockhouse Local Committee Queen Mary's Hospital Observation Additional nomination - the administrative block and Victorian kitchens behind at Queen Mary's Hospital. administration block and Victorian kitchens behind PALL51 502928 Carshalton and Clockhouse Local Committee outhouse behind no 2 Station Support In the alley adjacent to no 2 The Crescent and behind the former dairy in Station Road is the cowbyre used when the Agenda Item 11 Road, Belmont dairy supplied its own milk, in the early 20th century. PALL53 504254 Mr Dennis Baldry

13 April 2011 Page 35 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text

Comment ID Agenda Item 11 Respondent No and Name Additional Nominations 83 - 87 High Street, Sutton Support The old 'Burton's the Tailors' Buidling corner of Sutton High Street & St. Nicholas Road. I don't know whether PALL6 Burton's commissioned their buildings but there is/was a Burton's in Manchester Piccadilly Area and one near Bristol Templemeads Station which were of the same architectural style. 267420 Councillor Pam Picknett London Borough of Sutton Sutton Arcade, 1b and 1c Observation Remaining Archway section of Sutton Arcade. Throwley Way, Sutton PALL7 267420 Councillor Pam Picknett London Borough of Sutton 89 - 97 High Street, Sutton Observation Shop upper storey frontages above Satander down to Warren James Jewellers in the High Street.

PALL8 Page 124 267420 Councillor Pam Picknett London Borough of Sutton 67 High Street, Sutton Observation Shop upper storey of what used to be the Pepper Lounge in Sutton High Street. PALL9 267420 Councillor Pam Picknett London Borough of Sutton The Bakehouse, Oaks Park Observation The Bakehouse is a historically significant structure as it is the last surviving section of The Oaks Mansion house PALL97 which belonged to the 12 earl of Derby. The famous Oaks and Derby horse races were devised in the house and first run in 1779 and 1780. The outline of the house was marked out in chalk in the grass in 2009 and can be seen 33473 Mr Carl Brown extending eastwards from the Bakehouse, giving a context to the building. From 1936 to 1939, the Bakehouse block was used to accommodate a group of refugee children who had escaped from the Spanish Civil War. This was explored in a recent project supported by the Heritage Lottery Fund. The Bakehouse waw built for Harry Berkeley James, who acquired The Oaks in 1888 until his death in 1892. James, a successful mining entrepreneur and a respected explorer of the Amazon highlands, was a significant figure in the development of the site, and the Bakehouse was one of several improvements and additions he made to the house and grounds. The 1912 sales particulars for The Oaks describe the building as a: ' large wash house with copper, baking oven and sink with cold supply; wood and store places and WC'. Most of this has survived. The building has walls of red brick which are partly cement-rendered and a roof of grey slate with red clay ridge tiles. Inside, the roof is divided by a timber truss with a ceiling at collar level. It is divided into three rooms. The Bakehouse itself contains an oven in the south-west corner, a large hearth in the centre of the west wall and a long Reigate stone sink against the north wall. These date from 19th century and are likely to be part of the original build. There is a narrow corridor to the south of this room which once continued eastwards towards the main part of the house. The third room to the east contains three toilets and a sink set in four cubicles. The latter are of similar design and appear to be an original part of the 13 April 2011 Page 36 of 37 Site Name / Number Nature of Response Representation Text Comment ID Respondent No and Name Additional Nominations building. The doors are numbered 44 to 47 with small enamel plates. It seems likely that these are the 'wood and store places and WC' described in the 1912 sales particulars and that they were converted into toilets by Carshalton Urban District Council in the 20th century. Additional Nominations Observation Administrative House, Garth House, Mayfield House and Oak House on the Orchard Hill / Queen Mary's Hospital PALL98 Site, Carshalton. All four buildings were closely associated with the former Queen Mary's Hospital for Children and therefore are significant to the local history and heritage of that site. The buildings are also of architectural interest. 33473 Mr Carl Brown The Administrative Block was built in 1902. Its architectural interest lies mainly in its original design and in the decorative facade with details in Portland stone such as the dentils, sculpted portico, detail of St Luke, which survive and should be retained. Mayfield House and Oak House were also built around the same time between 1902 and 1903. They are in good condition externally and are a fine example of the Arts and Crafts style in a health context. The architectural features should be retained for re-use. Additional Nomination Observation Stanley Park High School, Carshalton Stanley Park High School moved to the present site in 1966. Previously, the PALL99 site was occupied by Wallington High School for girls from the 1930s until it moved to its current location in Woodcote Road, Wallington. The two-storey main building containing classrooms and the administrative block in the 33473 Mr Carl Brown north-western part of the site is of significant local and architectural interest. A particular feature is an imposing neo- Page 125 Georgian facade on the southern side which appears to be in good structural repair. There is also an attractive, large window forming part of the school hall facing onto the front garden. It is important that these features are retained in use and are not lost to the area. Agenda Item 11

13 April 2011 Page 37 of 37 Page 126

This page is intentionally left blank Page 127 Agenda Item 11

22 Ashworth Crescent Mapperley Nottingham NG3 6BX

Tel. 0115 822 1441

16 February 2011 Attention: Strategic Planning Dept, London Borough of Sutton

SUBMISSION RE : LOCAL LIST CONSULTATION EXERCISE (J AN /F EB 2011)

LETTER # 2

This is my second letter of today containing submissions for the local list consultation. I am emailing it also as today is the deadline.

Please note that I have already made separate submissions about specific buildings, nominations and short listings. These were set out in: (i) my first letter sent by email, and (ii) in my 44 individual submissions on the online consultation system.

In addition, I have also emailed separately earlier today nominating three further features for addition to the Local List for consideration. Full details are given in that email.

The purpose of this second letter is to set out the various general issues and concerns I have.

I have carefully studied the council’s consultation document (‘Appendix 2’), which includes a list of nominations, cursory assessment summary data, and summary list of short-listed buildings and other structures and features for addition to the local List.

I submit the following general observations and concerns regarding the recent Local List nominations, short-listings and assessment processes.

I feel that:

a) The review of the borough’s Local List in 2009-2011 was been long overdue.

b) It is unfortunate that the council does not have a dedicated Conservation Officer in its Planning dept. I understand from English Heritage that the LB Sutton is unusual amongst Greater London local authorities in this respect.

c) Although a good number of nominations were received, and the number of buildings or groups or buildings and other structure and features likely to be added to the List will be a good arithmetic result, there are probably hundreds more buildings in the borough that warrant Local Listing which have not yet been identified as part of this review process. I acknowledge that the amount of new additions should result in a significant numerical improvement compared with the current List of only approximately 35 buildings, structures and features. There is much more work to do though. Compare the size of the new LB Sutton with that of the LB Croydon, for example. Or is this apparent inequity actually a fair reflection of the LB Sutton’s built heritage assets?

Page 1 of 4 Agenda Item 11 Page 128

d) The LB Sutton may not be achieving what is obliged to do, in regard to heritage protection.

e) The approach of the nominations process was an ad hoc one. The process cannot have identified all the strongest and worthy candidates for Local Listing. The review relied only on which limited number of persons and groups submitted nominations. The aspiration should be a comprehensive review, and the LB Sutton Heritage Service should play a key part in identifying candidates.

f) The number of nominations made by the LB Sutton Heritage Service was relatively low and the nominations were almost entirely restricted to Sutton high street. This indicates they can not have adopted a comprehensive approach, or even have attempted to.

g) The role of the ‘Historic Buildings Officer’ in the LB Sutton Heritage Service should, if it doesn’t already, include identifying potential additions to the Local List.

h) The number of nominations received from the Sutton & Cheam Society - the local civic society - seems very low. It makes one wonder what their purpose is. In light of this, why do they merit a place on the council’s Conservation Advisory Group?

i) Successful additions to the shortlist should be reviewed by the council to see if statutory ‘grade’ listing should be investigated or sought for any building.

j) Nominations should be reviewed by the council to see if any large groups or numbers of buildings nominated might, instead or in addition, be worthy of being established as an Area of Special Local Character or a Conservation Area.

k) In 2009 the LB Sutton failed to contact me to advise me that nominations were being sought for additions to the Local List, despite them knowing of my interest. Fortunately I found out via a third party. All relevant local interest groups, including local historians, local civic societies and local history societies should all be contacted when future such reviews take place. A database should be maintained.

l) The LB Sutton Heritage Service had agreed to accept my offer to consult with me in their assessment process of the local list nominations, in respect of specialist advice. This did not occur however. So much for the ‘big society’. An opportunity missed and, I suspect, time spent by staff unnecessarily, and presumably at a time of local authority staffing and/or budget cuts.

m) The LB Sutton Strategic Planning Dept had agreed to provide me with a copy of all the nominations for the Belmont area once all nominations had been collated in a spreadsheet. This did not occur however. I was advised this information was legitimately publicly available once collated.

Cont.

Page 2 of 4 Page 129 Agenda Item 11

Cont. n) Many geographical parts of the borough are under represented or unrepresented in the nominations and, thus, in the short listings. o) The short list has a bias towards buildings which are short-listed due to their aesthetics, appearance or architecture, as opposed to historical significance and interest. A more equitable balance in this respect should be aspired to. p) Some of the short listed buildings etc do not adequately satisfy any of the six prescribed criterion. The short list includes some poor or dubious candidates. This risks the Local List being ‘de-valued’. q) There are insistences where a building has been short listed on the ground of meeting criterion (ii), when this criterion has not been applied in the assessment as it is written in the policy. Just because an old building is in good unaltered exterior condition with good integrity of original features, that in itself does not mean that the building warrants Local Listing or meets criterion (ii). This risks the Local List being ‘de-valued’. r) There are insistences where a building has been short listed on the grounds of meeting criterion (i), when this criterion been applied in the assessment too loosely. Criterion (i) requires a building to be of historical importance or significance locally – not minor historical interest. This risks the Local List being ‘de-valued’. s) I can only identify 1 (one) instance on the short list of a ‘working class’ residential building dating from the late Victorian era. This is despite this period being one where the general Sutton area grew rapidly with residential expansion. t) I can only identify 6 (six) instances on the shortlist of a ‘working class’ residential building, dating from any period. u) I can only identify 2 (two) instances in the shortlist of a residential terrace. In comparison, I can identify 69 (sixty-nine) buildings in the shortlist that are detached or semi-detached residential buildings. (This is probably largely due to the way in which the assessment process transpires to be tougher on terraces or properties in a row - see point ‘w’ below.) v) The shortlist shows an imbalance towards ‘middle class’ residential properties, in comparison with ‘working class’ residential properties. In terms of ratio of short listings, I calculate that it works out as 42:18 in favour of ‘middle class’ residential buildings, which is greater than twice as many. (This may in part be due to the way in which the assessment process transpires to be tougher on working class residential properties – see point ‘w’ below.)

Cont.

Page 3 of 4 Agenda Item 11 Page 130

Cont.

w) The consideration that has to be given in the Local List assessment process to how altered the exterior of a building is, has had an unfair impact on the listing prospects of both ‘working-class’ and terraced properties , which are often the same type of building, especially if it is, say, pre-1900. Why do I say this? Well, there are three reasons basically: Firstly, an old working-class property is more likely to have alterations made to it, due to it being of poorer build quality and in order to meet modern housing standards and modern housing needs (e.g. extensions and porches added). Secondly, if a large middle-house house it split into apartments, this tends not to affect the external appearance of the property; it often only really affects the internal layout. Thirdly, and most significantly though, a terrace is far more likely to have alterations made to part of it than a detached or semi-detached building. It is a statistical probability! A terrace comprises several units; where as a detached and semi-detached property only comprise, respectively, one and two units. The terrace is a larger composition of units. Therefore, the chance of alterations occurring to part of a terrace is much higher. And in the Sutton area, a terrace tends to be a working class property: we are not talking about high-class London Georgian town houses; no, in Sutton we are invariably talking about late Victorian two-up-two-down terraced cottages. Older detached and semi-detached houses will be ‘middle class’ properties. Thus, the application and interpretation of the “alteration consideration” (to coin a phrase) in the assessment process, makes it much tougher for a working class and/or terraced property to get added to the Local List. This is one of my key concerns . The above has the result of having an unfair and disproportional effect on the types of buildings comprising the Local List - and consequently the SECTORS OF SOCIETY which are represented in the Local List . Therefore, I feel that more discretion and flexibility is needed in the case of 18 th - and 19 th -century working-class properties and/or terraced properties, when the “alteration consideration” is being applied, especially if they strongly meet the historical significance (i) and/or local interest (iii) criterions.

Yours,

Roland Sparkes local historian

Page 4 of 4 APPENDIX 3 Buildings and Structures to be Added to the Local List and included in the Sites DPD Schedule of Responses to the Proposed Additions to the Local List (landowners responding to the proposed Local Listing of their properties are identified with an asterix)

Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N

1 Nos 1-5 & 2-12 Cornwall The Sutton and Cheam Society The justification for Y Road, Cheam Mr A Wallace* adding these properties to the Local Prof. and Mrs Millard* List is based on Page 131 Mr and Mrs Darroch* Group Value. There

Mr & Mrs Ayres* are no inherent differences between S Holwells the properties which T & M Grant* would justify not

Mr E Ridgewell* including all on the Local List. Mr J Pomeroy Mr D Sarosh*

Dr and Mr Wood* Mr Sparkes

2 St. John’s Church, Belmont Mr Sparkes (include in the ASLC) Y Agenda Item11 7 Nos. 75, 77 & 90 The Gallop, The Sutton and Cheam Society Ensure No 77 Y 81 Chiltern Road and Church included. This has Chiltern Church* with adjacent buildings, the support of the Mr A Stanton* South Sutton owner. Agenda Item11

Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N Add criteria (iv) The church plays an important part of the group value and should therefore be included. Local Listing is not an embargo on future development, however Page 132 significance of the asset must be considered in any architectural proposal. For example, Holy Trinity Church, Wallington (Nationally Listed and in a Conservation Area) has had an excellent modern extension built. Add criteria (iii) for Church

8 Bowmont House, Clifton Mr Sparkes Just meets criteria Y Avenue, Sutton (i) not (ii)

9 16-26 Cotswold Road, Sutton Mr Sparkes Y Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N

12 241-243 Brighton Road, Mr Sparkes Y Sutton.

13 Sutton Hospital Site, Mr Sparkes (but wants all the former Following Mr Y Cotswold Road, Belmont. buildings included) Sparkes’s representation and a site visit to the Hospital with English Heritage it is suggested that the Foundation Stone and the building Page 133 formerly known as ‘Central Hall’ be added.

14 Victorian Pillar Box Cotswold Mr Sparkes Just meets criteria Y Road, Belmont. (i) 15 No 35 Chiltern Road, Sutton. Mr Sparkes (comment only) Y 16a. Nos. 84 & 86 (Millets & Game) Y High Street, Sutton (upper floors only) 17 The building currently Y occupied by Coral

Bookmakers Agenda Item11 18 The building known as Citation to make Y ‘Lavender Corner’, North clear the properties Cheam Crossroads to be covered by Local Listing Agenda Item11

Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N 19 Nos. 30,32,34,36,40 and 42 Y Carshalton Park Road, Carshalton

20 Nos. 16-22 Park Hill, Mr J Loughrey* Just meets criteria Y Carshalton Ms S Evans* (ii), delete reference to Criteria (i) Mr Sparkes (comment only) 21 Nos 24-42 Park Hill, Mr P Knapp* Just meets criteria Y Page 134 Carshalton Mr Smith* (ii) and (vi)

24 11 and 13 Cotswold Rd Mr Lepetit* Also meets Criterion Y (i) Mr R Walker* Mr Sparkes

32 99-101 Downs Rd Mr M Mills & Ms K Ganley* Y Mr Sparkes

34 Caldbeck Parade, 98-112 and Flats to Let Ltd* Y 114-120 Central Road, Ms V Manning* Worcester Park

36 Iron railings alongside Mr Sparkes In light of Mr Y Belmont Park and Shanklin Sparkes objection Estate, Brighton Road review citation and criteria 45 Stable Block, Cheam Park Also meets Criterion Y (iv) Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N

47 The Coach House, at rear of Mr Sparkes Additional historic Y 78 Bute Rd, Wallington evidence identified and citation to be amended.

48 31-43 Clifton Road, Mr A Ross* The justification for Y Wallington adding these Mr B Russell* properties to the Mr A Martin* Local List is based Mr Sparkes on Group Value.

There are no inherent differences Page 135 between the properties which would justify not including all on the Local List. 49 Seymour House, Chanter The Sutton and Cheam Society Y Include forth house House and Bridge House, Mr De Souza* Mulgrave Road / Bridge Road (Cyrillian) which Mr Sparkes makes up the quadrant. Update assessment in light of additional research. Add Criteria (i), (ii) and (v) Agenda Item11 51 Ouvry Goodman shopfront, Y Cheam Road Agenda Item11

Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N

53 Carshalton War Memorial The Sutton & Merton Primary Care Also meets Criterion Y Hospital Trust* (i)

Ms J Knight

Mr P Perry

57 Methodist Church, Ruskin Rd Carshalton Methodist Church* Also meets Criterion Y and Ruskin Hall (iii) Review citation in

light of Page 136 representaiton Local Listing is not an embargo on future development, however significance of the asset must be considered in any architectural proposal. For example, Holy Trinity Church, Wallington (Nationally Listed and in a Conservation Area) has had an excellent modern extension built.

59 The Masonic Lodge, Grove Mr Sparkes Y Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N Road 64 Plough Public House, Y Croydon Rd, Beddington

72 1-5 the Green Mr B Steel Y NHP Group * Mr Sparkes

79 The Grapes Public House, Mr Sparkes (comment only) Y High Street Page 137 80 161 High Street (currently Y Foot Locker)

82 Manor Park Lodge and Store Ms A Burke* Add text to citation Y in Manor Park Road Mr Sparkes (comment about re history. Criterion v) Delete ref to Criterion (v) 86 Grand Parade, 152-164 High Also meets Criterion Y Street (ii) 87 Iron railings outside old water Make clear that Y treatment works, Carshalton citation includes Rd and Victorian Post Box reference to the gate pillars Agenda Item11 88 Original shopfront, 120 Add text to citation Y Carshalton Rd re history. 90 2-8 High Street, Sutton Y Agenda Item11

Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N 92 Hillview, 20 Aultone Way Y

94 1-26 Highland Cottages, Bute Mr N Parks* Add text to citation Y Road, Wallington Mr J Gibbons* re history.

Mr Sparkes (comment only)

95 The Red Lion PH Mr Sparkes Note – now The Y 265 High Street Winning Post

96 The Lodge, Sandhills Y Page 138

97 Sutton Court Estate Wall, rear Mr Sparkes Y of 2-16 High Street

98 2-8 Bourne Way Mr Sparkes Add text to citation Y re history. 99 Thornleigh, Brockridge, Y Needwood and Barton, Ewell Road

100 Nonsuch Place, Ewell Road Mr N Ford* Y Mr Sparkes

101 78 Stafford Road, Wallington Finerty Brice* Y

102 12-20 Malden Road, Mr N Tiramani (tenant 16 Malden Also meets Criterion Y Wallington Road) (ii) Mr Sparkes (comment only)

104 440 – 444 Gander Green Lane Mr Sparkes Add text to citation Y re history. Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N

105 57-59 St James Rd Mrs Morris* (owner of both properties) Y

109 The Cock Sign, High Street Mr Sparkes Y

111 Poplar Place, 119-121 Cheam Mr Sparkes Add text to citation Y Common Road re history. 115 435 London Road Y 116 20-28 Warren Avenue Y 117 Stables, R/O The Creamery, S Holwells In light of the N Page 139 16 Station Road Mr Sparkes responses received this nomination needs more research. It is therefore proposed to add the property to the Potential List of Additions for further research.

118 Miles Hall, St Andrews Mrs P Macdonald Amend citation to Y Church, Northey Ave Miss Grant reflect representations GR Angrex about history. Mrs V Warwick Local Listing is not Mrs J Crichton an embargo on Agenda Item11 Rev P Barker future development, however Mrs Mewett significance of the Mr & Mrs Macdonald asset must be Agenda Item11

Long-list Site Respondents Support Objection Changes to Criteria Include Nomination Met/Other on Ref. Comments Local List? Y/N Mr B Edwards considered in any Mr P Campbell Smith architectural proposal. For St Andrew’s Reform Church* example, Holy Ms J Smith Trinity Church,

Mr J Brown Wallington (Nationally Listed Mr & Mrs Macdonald and in a P A Beattie Conservation Area) I Johnson has had an Page 140 excellent modern

extension built.

120 The Walled Garden, Cheam Y Park 121 The Old Forge, Cheam Y 122 The Railway Inn, Cheam Mr Sparkes (comment only) Y

Further to consideration of additional nominations submitted through the consultation process and receipt of confirmation of support from the landowners, add to following to the Local List: The Highfields Estate Tennis Pavilion APPENDIX 4 Additional Properties and Structures Nominated During the Consultation Period

Additional Nominations Arising out of Local Committee Meetings Beddington and Wallington • Wallington Magistrates Court Sutton • Add the original arch at the back of what was Sutton Arcade

St Helier, the Wrythe & Wandle Valley • BedZED • Middleton Circle Library • Milestone at Rosehill • The drinking fountain, Wrythe Rec Ground

Carshalton & Clockhouse • Victorian Pillar Box, outside of 60 Beeches Ave Page 141 • Carshalton Beeches Railway Station • The administrative block and Victorian Kitchens, Queen Mary’s Hospital Councillors Cllr P Picknett • The Old Burton’s the Tailors building, Sutton High Street • The remaining arch of Sutton Arcade, Throwley Way • Santanders to Warren James Jewelers, the High Street, Sutton • The Peppers Lounge, High Street (No 67) 1

Cllr R Clifton • The Highfields Estate Tennis Pavilion 2 Agenda Item11

1 This property has been assessed as part of the Proposed Sutton Crossroads Conservation Area.

2 The provenance of this building ahs been researched and the owner’s support for Local Listing has been submitted. On this basis it is proposed that this building be added to the Local List (see Appendix 3) Agenda Item11

Cllr JK Jerome • 29, 36 & 38 Washington Road, Worcester Park Cllr J McCoy • Wallington Magistrates Court

Nominations by Individuals Mr C Brown • The Bakehouse, Oaks Park 3 • The Administrative Block, Garth House, Mayfield House and Oak House, Former Orchard Hill Hospital Site, Carshalton • Stanley Park High School 4 Mr & Mrs Dodwell (supported by Mr • Boundary Wall of the Wallington Old Manor House and the Sewer Vent Pipe Skelton) • Speedex House, Londis Shop, The Old Schoolroom and the Rose and Crown PH Page 142 • Houses in Westcroft Road (north side Nos. 13-33); houses in Caledon Road (Nos. 1- 9 & 2-10); and, semi detached houses in Butter Hill (nos.1-2) Ms T Reeves • Carshalton Fire station (currently Carshalton library) • The Grotto in Carshalton Park • The Gateway & Wall at the end of Wandle Side, London Road • Hackbridge Station • 282, 284 London Road and Wallington Bridge • Wallington Magistrates Court, Shotfield • Wallington Library*

3 There is a citation in the National List for the former Stables, Billiard Room and Coach House on South and East Sides of the Stable Yard at the Oaks. The citation does not refer specifically to the Bakehouse and this issue therefore needs to be discussed with English Heritage to see if it can/should be included as part of this listing.

4 The heritage value and retention of this building has been considered through the preparation of a Planning Brief and it was decided by the Council that the building should not be retained through any redevelopment • John King Flower Shop, 118 Manor Road • Shop fronts in Carshalton Village High Street, i.e. Cancer Research • The Grove, North Street • The Lodge, Honeywood Walk (the Gate House) • The Ecology Centre grounds • Stonecourt, North Street • The Old School House, Mill Lane • Honeywood Lodge • War Memorial Hospital* Note * denotes properties reviewed as part of the current Local List review process Mr M Fuller • The drinking fountain, Wrythe Rec Ground

Mrs A Faircloth • 1 to 8b Westmead Corner Page 143 • The former Shorts Diary, Shorts Road/Carshalton Road Mr B Brockwell • 1-7, 9-19 & 21-29 Kings Lane, Sutton • Edwardian Pillar Box, Fairview Road Mr R Wilson • Edwardian Pillar Box, Stanley Road, Sutton Ms C Page • Milestone, Brighton Road (between Belmont and Sutton) • 113-135 Downs Road (already reviewed and officers recommended that it did not meet any criteria for Local Listing) Mr M Goodlad • Cromer Mansions, Cheam Road Mr Sparkes • Bell tower of Banstead Road School Agenda Item11 • SMDS Rain Hopper • Parish Boundary Stone Near Belmont Station • Council District marker, Downs Road Agenda Item11

• Turnpike Obelisk, Brighton Road Nominations by Local Groups Belmont and South Cheam Residents’ • The Prince Regent PH, High Street, Sutton Association • 485 London Road, North Cheam – original Sainsbury’s shop entrance • 23 The Broadway, Cheam - original Sainsbury’s shop entrance • St Christopher’s Roman Catholic Church, Dallas Road, Cheam • Peaches Court, Peaches Close (Coldblow), Cheam • 2 Oakleigh, Peaches Close, Cheam Friends of Carshalton Park • The Scawen Wall, various locations

Nominations Arising from Consultation on the Sutton High Street Crossroads Proposed Conservation Area Page 144 Mr R Sparkes and Mr R Wilson • 36 Grove Road, Sutton NOTE: Those highlighted are already Nationally or Locally Listed Following consideration of representations by Mr Sparkes in response to a number of the earlier nominations be added to the Potential List of Additions for further research. This would allow for consultation with owners: Nomination No 5: 12-18 Station Road, Belmont Nomination No.23: The Former SMD School Cottage, Cotswold Road Nomination No 25: Milestone, 20 The Crescent, Belmont Nomination No. 31: 2-12 Downs Road Nomination No. 117: Stables, R/O The Creamery, 16 Station Road It is not recommended that any of the other previous longlist nominations be added back to this list.