14 APRIL 2011
Minutes of a meeting of the DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE held in the Council
Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 9.30 am when there were present:
Councillors
J A Wyatt (Vice-Chairman) in the Chair
H C Cordeaux
Mrs A R Green
P W High
S C Mears
J H Perry-Warnes
J D Savory
Mrs M Seward
B Smith
Mrs J Trett
P J Willcox
Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett - substitute for Mrs A C Sweeney
Mrs P Bevan Jones - Sheringham North Ward
B J Hannah - Sheringham North Ward
Mrs H T Nelson - Sheringham South Ward
Ms V R Gay - observer
Officers
Mr S Oxenham - Head of Planning and Building Control
Mr A Mitchell - Development Manager
Mr R Howe - Planning Legal Manager
Mr G Lyon - Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases)
Mr J Williams - Team Leader (Major Developments)
Mr G Linder - Senior Planning Officer
Miss J Medler - Senior Planning Officer
Mr C Young - Senior Conservation and Design Officer
Mrs N Turner - Enabling Team Leader
Mr B Dye - Norfolk County Council (Highways)
(243) APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND DETAILS OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors S J Partridge and Mrs A C
Sweeney. There was one substitute Member in attendance as shown above.
(244) MINUTES
The Minutes of a meeting of the Committee held on 17 March 2011 were approved
as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
(245) ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
The Chairman stated that there was one item of urgent business which he wished to
bring before the Committee, relating to a planning application at Neatishead,
reference PF/10/1353. The reason for urgency was to expedite processing of the
application by undertaking a site inspection.
Development Control Committee
1
14 April 2011
(246) DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors H C Cordeaux and J D Savory declared interests, the details of which are
given under the minute of the item concerned.
(247) HEMPTON – PF/10/0329 – The erection of 5 two storey dwellings and 2 flats:
Site adjacent to 21 Dereham Road for Flagship Housing Group
The Committee considered item 1 of the Officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Mrs Woods (objecting)
Mr Burghall (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that the Environmental Protection Officer was
now satisfied with the drainage proposals.
The Conservation, Design and
Landscape Manager had raised concerns in respect of potential pollutants entering
the County Wildlife Site and disturbance and damage to parts of the site. He had
recommended that a petrochemical interceptor be installed, mitigation in respect of
turf and topsoil, ground protection and other conditions. The Norfolk Wildlife Trust
had no objection. Norfolk Landscape Archaeology had commented that the
proposed pipe would affect the remains of the former priory. Norfolk County
Council’s Historic Environment Service considered that the proposed route was
inappropriate and that an alternative route should be sought which did not affect the
archaeological remains.
A meeting had now taken place between Keith Simpson MP and the Highway
Authority. The Highway Authority considered that the proposal was acceptable in
highway terms. The Highway Authority considered that neither an alternative site nor
alternative access arrangements that had been proposed were acceptable.
Amendments had been proposed which reduced the carriageway width to provide a
wider area to allow parking for existing residents.
An email had been received from former Councillor, Miss D Wakefield, on behalf of
Hempton Parish Council expressing concerns in respect of drainage, loss of parking,
highway issues, damage to the ancient wall and questioning the applicant’s
statement regarding costs. The Parish Council had requested that the whole
application be reconsidered in detail.
The Senior Planning Officer requested delegated authority to approve this application
subject to satisfactory resolution of drainage and archaeological issues, no objection
being received from outstanding consultees and subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
In answer to a question by Councillor P J Willcox, the Head of Planning and Building
Control explained that the proposed drainage solution was acceptable in technical
terms. However, an archaeological objection had been received which may require
an alternative to the proposed pipe to overcome the concerns. All other issues had
been dealt with previously.
It was proposed by Councillor P J Willcox, seconded by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes
and
Development Control Committee
2
14 April 2011
RESOLVED unanimously
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to satisfactory resolution of drainage
and archaeological issues, no objection being received from
outstanding consultees and subject to the imposition of appropriate
conditions.
(248) SHERINGHAM 05/110 - Land to the rear of 20 Hooks Hill Road
The Committee considered item 2 of the Officers’ reports concerning alterations to
the ground level on land to the rear of 20 Hooks Hill Road, Sheringham and the
works that have subsequently been carried out, following the serving of an
enforcement notice.
The Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases) reported the contents of a letter
received from the complainants’ solicitor. The complainants were dissatisfied with
the remedial works and had threatened to take the matter to the Ombudsman on
grounds of maladministration. However, Officers considered that the Council had
already made significant progress in remedying the injury to amenity raised by the
objector. This had substantially remedied the situation. As a correction to the report,
he stated that whilst the profile of the bank was less than 45o in places, in others it
was over 45o. In his opinion, sufficient work had been carried out and he requested
that no further action be taken.
Councillor Mrs P Bevan Jones read to the Committee the comments of Councillor
Mrs H T Nelson, a local Member, who supported the Officer’s recommendation.
Councillor P W High considered that the developer had done insufficient work. He
considered that the rendered wall was unattractive.
The Development Manager stated that the developer had complied with the
Enforcement Notice in respect of the wall. The question remained as to whether the
planting and scraping back of the soil were acceptable.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett expressed concern that rain would wash the bank
away.
The Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases) stated that the Council was
potentially being drawn into a neighbour dispute and going beyond what was
expected of an enforcement authority. He considered that it would be inappropriate
to continue to use the Council’s limited resources to resolve such disputes,
particularly when the injury to amenity had been substantially remedied.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs J Trett, seconded by Councillor P J Willcox and
RESOLVED by 7 votes to 2 with 1 abstention
That although certain elements of the Enforcement Notice have not
been fully complied with, the works as carried out are nevertheless
considered to be sufficient to restore neighbouring amenities to a
reasonable extent and that no further action therefore be taken.
Development Control Committee
3
14 April 2011
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Where appropriate the Planning Officers expanded on the planning applications;
updated the meeting on outstanding consultations, letters/petitions received objecting
to, or supporting the proposals; referred to any views of local Members and
answered Members’ questions.
Background papers, including correspondence, petitions, consultation documents,
letters of objection and those in support of planning applications were available for
inspection at the meeting.
Having regard to the above information and the report of the Head of Planning and
Building Control, the Committee reached the decisions as set out below.
Applications approved include a standard time limit condition as condition number 1
unless otherwise stated.
(249) BINHAM - PF/11/0108 - Erection of single-storey extension to annexe; Old Barn
Farm Bungalow, Binham Road, Wighton for Mr D Cooke
Councillor J D Savory declared a prejudicial interest in this application as he owned
the adjacent barns. He vacated the Council Chamber during consideration of this
matter.
The Committee considered item 3 of the Officers’ reports.
In response to concerns raised by Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett, the Development
Manager stated that, in his opinion, the proposal was a modest extension to the
original building and would not set a precedent.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs J Trett, seconded by Councillor P W High and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions including the removal of permitted development
rights for the insertion of any window or rooflight in the western
elevation and roofslopes of the extension.
(250) BODHAM - PF/11/0260 - Conversion of barns to 6 units of holiday
accommodation and erection of swimming pool/wood chip boiler building;
Manor Farm, Lower Bodham for Mr & Mrs P Cubitt
Councillor H C Cordeaux declared a personal interest in this application as he knew
the objector at Pine Farm.
The Committee considered item 4 of the Officers’ reports.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, the local Member, considered that the applicants
should advise their visitors to turn right when exiting the site. However, he supported
this application. Councillor H C Cordeaux supported this view.
The Senior Planning Officer stated that a covering letter could be sent with the
decision notice advising the applicants of this suggestion.
Councillor P W High expressed concern at the suggested routing as it would involve
a longer journey if visitors wanted to go to Cromer.
Development Control Committee
4
14 April 2011
Councillor P J Willcox asked if Officers would have been minded to recommend
approval of six units if the proposed use had been residential.
The Senior Planning Officer stated that such a proposal would have been considered
subject to additional car parking and amenity space, whereas the holiday use as
proposed would enable the area to be kept open. However, the site was in the HO9
policy area which was permissive towards residential use.
It was proposed by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, duly seconded and
RESOLVED
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to no objections from outstanding
consultees and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
(251) FAKENHAM - PO/10/1468 - Erection of detached single-storey dwelling; Land at
Rudham Stile Lane for Fakenham Town Council
The Committee considered item 5 of the Officers’ reports.
The Senior Planning Officer reported that the Highway Authority had no objection
subject to the imposition of conditions. She requested delegated authority to approve
this application subject to no objection from the Community Safety Manager in
respect of crime and disorder and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Councillor S C Mears stated that he had spoken to one of the objectors. He
expressed concern regarding highway safety as the road was used by children
attending the High School and drivers did not adhere to the 20mph speed limit. He
requested a site inspection in order that the Committee could assess the highway
situation.
It was proposed by Councillor S C Mears, seconded by Councillor H C Cordeaux and
RESOLVED unanimously
That consideration of this application be deferred to allow an inspection
of the site by the Committee and that the local Members, Town Mayor
and a representative of the Highway Authority be invited to attend.
(252) LUDHAM - PF/11/0113 - Variation of Condition 3 of planning ref: 97/0999 to
permit full residential occupancy; Quince Cottage, 5 The Barns, Fritton Road
for Mr A Ehren
The Committee considered item 6 of the Officers’ reports.
The Senior Planning Officer reported that Environmental Health had raised the need
for further evaluation of potential contamination issues. Officers considered that this
could be dealt with by way of an advisory note.
It was proposed by Councillor H C Cordeaux, seconded by Councillor P J Willcox
and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved.
Development Control Committee
5
14 April 2011
(253) LUDHAM - PF/11/0138 - Variation of Condition 3 of planning ref: 97/0999 to
permit permanent residential occupancy; Plum Cottage, 6 Fritton Road for Ms
L Barnard
The Committee considered item 7 of the Officers’ reports.
The Senior Planning Officer reported that Environmental Health had raised the need
for further evaluation of potential contamination issues. Officers considered that this
could be dealt with by way of an advisory note.
It was proposed by Councillor H C Cordeaux, seconded by Councillor P J Willcox
and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved.
(254) NORTH WALSHAM - PF/11/0085 - Change of use of existing butchers shop (A1)
to a day centre (D1); 3 St Nicholas Court, Vicarage Street for Elizabeth Fitzroy
Support
The Committee considered item 8 of the Officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mrs Easter (supporting)
Councillor Mrs M Seward considered that the proposal would increase the footfall in
the precinct.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs M Seward, seconded by Councillor H C Cordeaux
and
RESOLVED
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to no objections from outstanding
consultees and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions, to
include further details in respect of ventilation/extraction and waste
disposal.
(255) NORTH WALSHAM - PF/11/0144 - Erection of attached two-storey dwelling with
habitable accommodation in roofspace; 24 Happisburgh Road for Gaviant
Developments Limited
The Committee considered item 9 of the Officers’ reports.
The Senior Planning Officer reported that an amended plan had been received in
respect of car parking. He recommended approval of this application subject to the
imposition of appropriate conditions.
It was proposed by Councillor H C Cordeaux, duly seconded and
Development Control Committee
6
14 April 2011
RESOLVED
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
(256) NORTHREPPS - PF/10/1453 - Erection of 50 dwellings; The Railway Triangle
Site, Norwich Road, Cromer for Hopkins Homes
The Committee considered item 10 of the Officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Mrs Warner (Northrepps Parish Council)
Mrs Callaghan, Mr Jones, Mr Foden and Mr Sanders (objecting)
Mr Houghton and Mr Smith (supporting)
The Team Leader (Major Developments) reported that Northrepps Parish Council
had reiterated its objections in respect of the amended plans. He summarised the
issues raised in three further letters of objection that had been received.
In respect of viability issues, the Team Leader (Major Developments) reported that
the applicants had stated that development costs would increase if the development
were to comply with the requirements of Policy EN6, which would reduce the number
of affordable units that could be provided. Officers were of the opinion that the
requirement for 10% renewable energy could be relaxed, although the development
should meet level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Development as this applied to all
new development. If the Committee agreed to this suggestion the developer would
be required to provide an amended viability report in respect of any reduced
provision.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager had commented that the
developer had made only minor changes and he remained concerned in respect of
layout, design and landscaping issues.
The Team Leader (Major Developments) requested delegated authority to approve
this application subject to successfully negotiating minor revisions requested by the
Highway Authority; improvements to house types and elevational treatment along the
Norwich Road frontage; reduction in the height of units 3 and 4 or relocation of those
units further away from properties on The Avenue; improvement in the mix of
materials; a revised viability report which takes into account the requirement for all
dwellings to meet Code level 3; a Section 106 Obligation to include securing
affordable housing, contributions towards library provision, improvements to
recreational facilities at Suffield Park and signage for the extension of the speed limit;
and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett, the local Member, stated that local residents were
extremely concerned with some aspects of the proposed development, although
none of the objectors opposed the principle of development on the site. She stated
that this was an important gateway site to Cromer and must be right for the town.
She supported the views of the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager and
suggested that more flint be incorporated into the design. She was concerned in
respect of possible rat-running along The Avenue, which was a narrow lane. She
considered that the development should comply with the requirements of Policy EN6.
She stated that the dwellings on The Avenue were at least one metre lower than the
site and considered that the three-storey building would be overbearing. She
proposed deferral of this application for further negotiations. This was seconded by
Councillor H C Cordeaux.
Development Control Committee
7
14 April 2011
The Senior Conservation and Design Officer explained his concerns regarding the
design issues. He stated that for some, this development would be the first or last
impression of Cromer. Whilst there were some aspects of the layout which would
work, there was a need for good quality architecture which linked with the
environment. There was an opportunity to design a development which belonged to
the town and he considered that the proposed development did not do so.
Councillor S C Mears considered that there were too many outstanding issues to
defer the application. He considered that compliance with Policy EN6 was too
important to dismiss, changes to the road layout had not been made, and the threestorey building was overbearing in relation to the existing dwellings on The Avenue.
He proposed refusal of this application.
With the agreement of her seconder, Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett withdrew her
proposal to defer consideration of this application. She seconded Councillor Mears’
proposal.
Councillor B Smith was surprised that the Officers had recommended the relaxation
of Policy EN6. He considered that the landscaping and design of the site was
uninviting and regimented. He stated that it had been suggested that single-storey
dwellings be located at the entrance, with the larger dwellings sited further into the
site.
The Head of Planning and Building Control reminded the Committee that the
grounds of refusal had to be sound and defensible and should not choke off the
development completely. He stated that Policy HO2 required 45% affordable
housing where it was viable to do so, and referred to the applicant’s comments.
The Enabling Team Leader referred to the viability assessment provided by the
applicant’s agent. She stated that it was necessary to balance Code level 3 and
affordable housing, and she would need to reconsider this if Code level 3 were
applied across the development. She stated that there was a great need for
affordable housing in the Cromer area, with 1000 people currently on the housing
register. She stated that the amount of affordable housing being proposed was
acceptable, but it was necessary to come to an agreement on sustainability and
viability issues.
Councillor Mrs J Trett expressed concern that if this application were refused, it could
be approved as submitted on appeal. She considered that deferral would allow some
of the issues of concern to be resolved. As an amendment, she proposed deferral of
this application for further negotiations, which was seconded by Councillor P W High.
Councillors J H Perry-Warnes, Mrs M Seward and H C Cordeaux spoke in favour of
deferral.
With the agreement of his seconder, Councillor S C Mears withdrew his proposal for
refusal.
Several Members spoke to emphasise the importance of compliance with Policy
EN6, even if it resulted in the loss of some of the affordable housing units.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett requested that vehicles be prevented from continuing
in a south-easterly direction along The Avenue beyond the Kart Track site.
Development Control Committee
8
14 April 2011
The Highway Officer explained that if a road were to be stopped part way along its
length it would be necessary to provide a place for vehicles to turn round. No
provision had been made as part of this application. However, he did not consider
that rat-running would be a significant issue.
RESOLVED unanimously
That consideration of this application be deferred to allow negotiations
in respect of relocation of the three-storey dwellings, design and layout
issues, and compliance with Policy EN6.
(257) OVERSTRAND - PF/11/0196 - Removal of part of boundary wall to create
vehicular access; 24 The Londs for Mrs S Berry
The Committee considered item 11 of the Officers’ reports.
Public Speakers (also speaking in respect of LE/11/0119 below)
Mr Vickers (Overstrand Parish Council)
Mrs Hastings (objecting)
Mrs Berry (supporting)
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett, the local Member, stated that The Londs was an
iconic part of Overstrand because of its flint walls. She referred to a condition
attached to the planning permission for the dwelling (application 20001127) which
removed permitted development rights for the creation of an access in order to
preserve the front boundary wall to protect the character and appearance of the
Conservation Area. She stated that the electric gates proposed were neither iconic
nor desirable. She stated that flint patching had historically been of poorer quality
than the original, however she considered that attempting to repair flint work was
better than destroying it. She also referred to the preamble to Policy CT5 and
considered that The Londs had no capacity to carry additional traffic. She referred to
an appeal against refusal of application 20061115 for a vehicular access further
along The Londs which was dismissed on grounds related to highway safety. She
proposed refusal of this application, which was seconded by Councillor H C
Cordeaux.
The Development Manager explained that application 20001127 related to a
replacement dwelling and the condition was imposed to retain control over the
appearance of the area. The appeal decision in respect of 20061115 related to an
additional dwelling, therefore the circumstances were different. He stated that the
Highway Authority had no objection to the current application which could cause
difficulty in the event of an appeal. With regard to Policy EN8, Officers had made a
balanced judgement. He advised that if the Committee were minded to refuse this
application it should do so for reasons of detriment to visual amenity rather than on
highway safety grounds.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett, seconded by Councillor H C
Cordeaux and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be refused on grounds that the proposal in
contrary to adopted Core Strategy policy EN8 as the removal of the
section of wall would lead to a loss of continuity and sense of enclosure
in the street scene and be detrimental to the character and appearance
of the Overstrand Conservation Area.
Development Control Committee
9
14 April 2011
(259) OVERSTRAND - LE/11/0119 - Removal of part of boundary wall to create
vehicular access; 24 The Londs for Mrs S Berry
The Committee considered item 12 of the Officers’ reports.
See PF/11/0196 above.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett, seconded by Councillor J H
Perry-Warnes and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be refused on grounds that the proposal in
contrary to adopted Core Strategy policy EN8 as the removal of the
section of wall would lead to a loss of continuity and sense of enclosure
in the street scene and be detrimental to the character and appearance
of the Overstrand Conservation Area.
(260) SHERINGHAM - PF/10/1478 - Demolition of church and erection of seven
residential units; Baptist Church, Holway Road for Sheringham Baptist Church
The Committee considered item 13 of the Officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Williams (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that the Highway Authority had no objection to
the proposed visibility improvements. She recommended approval of this application
subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson, a local Member, expressed concern in respect of traffic
on Holway Road. However, given the significance of this application, she considered
that a site inspection would be appropriate.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes proposed a site inspection, which he withdrew as there
was no seconder.
It was proposed by Councillor J D Savory, duly seconded and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
(261) SHERINGHAM - PM/11/0061 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; 1A Havelock
Road for Mr R Carter
The Committee considered item 14 of the Officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mrs Carter (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that the Town Council had no objection to the
amended plans.
Development Control Committee
10
14 April 2011
The Planning Legal Manager reported that a letter of objection had been received
from the neighbour to the east of the site who had been unable to attend the meeting
to speak. The letter reiterated the objections listed in the report.
Councillor B J Hannah, a local Member, stated that he had met the applicant and the
objector. He stated that the applicant wished to build a home for his young family.
He considered that the applicant had addressed many of the concerns that had been
raised and that the proposed dwelling was in keeping with the surroundings. He
supported this application.
Councillor Mrs P Bevan Jones, a local Member, stated that she had requested a site
inspection in view of the concerns of the neighbour and possible overdevelopment of
the site. However, she now supported the application.
It was proposed by Councillor H C Cordeaux, duly seconded and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions including materials, car parking, ground levels,
obscured glazing and removal of permitted development rights.
(262) THORPE MARKET - PF/10/1439 - Erection of two detached one and a half
storey dwellings; Land to the rear Green Farm Cromer Road for Mr & Mrs Perry
The Committee considered item 15 of the Officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Mr Wright (Thorpe Market Parish Council)
Mr Lord (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported the comments of Councillor Mrs S A Arnold, the
local Member, who had been unable to attend the meeting. She considered that two
cottage style dwellings would be preferable to the previously approved design.
Whilst not single-storey, they were only 18 inches higher than the adjacent building.
She had commented that as the application site was in separate ownership the issue
relating to car parking for the other dwellings was not relevant. She considered that
the fencing which appeared to have been erected without consent could be covered
by a condition.
Councillor H C Cordeaux referred to the history of the site and expressed concern
regarding car parking. Whilst he considered that the proposal was not ideal, he
supported the views of the local Member.
Councillor P J Willcox considered that the proposed dwellings were a vast
improvement on the approved dwellings. He considered that additional flint on the
northern and eastern elevations would further improve the design. However, he
proposed approval of this application. There was no seconder.
The Development Manager referred to the previous application and agreed that, in
hindsight, the design was not ideal. However, he shared the concerns of the
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager in respect of the current proposal.
He was also concerned in respect of car parking.
Development Control Committee
11
14 April 2011
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs M Seward, seconded by Councillor Mrs A M FitchTillett and
RESOLVED by 5 votes to 2 with 4 abstentions
That this application be refused in accordance with
recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control.
the
(263) WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/10/0484 - Formation of public vehicle park with
associated pedestrian and vehicular accesses and landscaping; Land to North
of Freeman Street for Holkham Estate
Councillor J D Savory declared a prejudicial interest in this application as a close
relative was employed by the applicant. He vacated the Council Chamber during
consideration of this matter.
The Committee considered item 16 of the Officers’ reports.
Councillor Mrs J Trett, a local Member, supported the views of the Town Council.
She stated that the proposal would have an impact on residents of Mainsail Yard.
However, those residents were also concerned that they could not access their
properties because of traffic. She stated that the applicants were sensitive to
keeping the area as it is. She considered that the proposed car park would be an
improvement.
Councillor H C Cordeaux referred to the comments of the Norfolk Coast Partnership.
He suggested conditions in respect of closing of the car park and lighting. He
questioned the need for coach parking on the site and requested that cycle facilities
be located closest to the town.
The Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases) stated that no lighting was
proposed. He considered that if coaches were not allowed to park on the site it could
be counter-productive to improving the economic success of the town. He
considered that it may be preferable for cycling facilities to be provided at The Quay.
It was necessary to consider how to get cyclists into the town in the long term, but in
his opinion the current proposals were acceptable.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett expressed concern at the impact of the proposal,
particularly with regard to surfacing materials. She considered that Grasscrete would
be more acceptable than bitumen and gravel as proposed.
The Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases) explained that it was only
proposed to surface the most frequently used area with bitumen and gravel, with the
remainder being constructed with reinforced mesh and grass. However, materials
could be agreed.
Councillor B Smith emphasised the need to consider security of the site with regard
to crime and disorder issues.
Councillor P J Willcox considered that bunding and additional landscaping should be
incorporated to screen the coach parking area.
Development Control Committee
12
14 April 2011
The Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases) considered that further
additional tree planting would be out of keeping with the landscape character. He
stated that there was already a bunded area on the corner near the coach park. He
suggested that a landscaping condition be imposed to require agreement on the
landscaping scheme.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs J Trett, seconded by Councillor H C Cordeaux and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions to include landscaping.
(264) WICKMERE - PF/11/0227 - Erection of replacement garage; Meadow Cottage,
Goose Green for Mr & Mrs A Harmer
The Committee considered item 17 of the Officers’ reports.
RESOLVED
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
(265) APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 18 of the Officers’ reports.
(266) APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 19 of the Officers’ reports.
(267) NEW APPEALS
The Committee noted item 20 of the Officers’ reports.
(268) PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 21 of the Officers’ reports.
(269) WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 20 of the Officers’ reports.
(270) APPEAL DECISIONS
The Committee noted item 21 of the Officers’ reports.
(271) NEATISHEAD - PF/10/1353 - Construction of 5 mw solar generating facility;
RAF Neatishead, Irstead Street for PV Farms 04 Ltd
The Chairman stated that he had determined that this item be considered as a matter
of urgency pursuant to the powers vested in him by Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local
Government Act 1972.
The Development Manager recommended that the Committee visit the site to
expedite processing of this application.
Development Control Committee
13
14 April 2011
RESOLVED
That consideration of this application be deferred to allow an inspection
of the site by the Committee and that the local Member and Chairman of
the Parish Council be invited to attend.
The meeting adjourned for lunch at 1.20 pm, resumed at 1.45 pm and closed at 2.20
pm.
Development Control Committee
14
14 April 2011