OFFICERS’ REPORTS TO
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE – 14 FEBRUARY 2013
Each report for decision on this Agenda shows the Officer responsible, the recommendation
of the Head of Development Management and in the case of private business the
paragraph(s) of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 under which it is
considered exempt. None of the reports have financial, legal or policy implications save
where indicated.
PUBLIC BUSINESS – ITEMS FOR DECISION
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Note :- Recommendations for approval include a standard time limit condition as Condition
No.1, unless otherwise stated.
1.
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/13/0018 - Change of use from B1 (offices) to D1 (dropin/advice centre); 1A St Nicholas Court, Vicarage Street for Norfolk and Suffolk
NHS Foundation Trust
- Target Date: 04 March 2013
Case Officer: Miss T Lincoln
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Primary Shopping Area
Conservation Area
Archaeological Site
Town Centre
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
PLA/19960627 PF - Change of use of shop (Class A1) to careers office (Class A2)
Approved 08/07/1996
PLA/19882214 PF - Change of use from office & storage to offices (part 1st floor)
Approved 16/11/1988
PF/11/1134 PF - Change of use from A2 (careers office) to B1 (general office),
insertion of new windows in first floor on north, west and south elevations and air
conditioning units
Approved 23/12/2011
PF/12/1046 PF
Change of use from B1 (business) to D1 (place of worship/church hall)
Approved 14/01/2013
THE APPLICATION
Is for the change of use of the building from a B1 (general office) use to a D1 (dropin/advice centre) use.
The drop-in/advice centre would be for the use of Norfolk Recovery Partnership
which is a treatment and recovery service offering help for people with drug and
alcohol problems in Norfolk. This includes some group work and one to one
sessions as well as a cafe area for service users, volunteers and befrienders to meet.
The application indicates that the building would be an office base for approximately
9 staff and would be open to the public Monday to Friday from 8am to 6pm.
Development Committee
1
14 February 2013
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Development Management in view of the planning history of
the site and the recent consideration by the Committee of application PF/12/1046.
TOWN COUNCIL
Comments awaited
REPRESENTATIONS
7 letters of objection on the following grounds:
1. The owner of a charity shop on the High Street and Cafe Kitale in the precinct has
applied to the lease holder to take on the unit for a retail furniture store. This would
bring in much needed footfall.
2. The unit should have a retail use to help North Walsham thrive.
3. A drop in centre will make the precinct area a 'no-go' area for a lot of local people
and will adversely affect the existing retailers in the precinct, affecting the vitality and
viability of the area.
4. Want to see the town revived and the middle of a shopping centre is not a suitable
place for a drop-in centre for drug and alcohol abuse and ex-prisoners.
5. Unit 1a is one of the largest units in North Walsham and should be used for retail
to help the vitality of the town.
6. A retail use would be the best benefit to the town as a whole, not a drop-in centre.
7. People would feel vulnerable entering the precinct if the drug and alcohol drop-in
centre were to be located there.
CONSULTATIONS
County Highway Authority Given the town centre location I have no objection to this proposed change of use.
Environmental Health - There are no adverse Environmental Health concerns in
relation to this proposal.
Coast and Community Partnership Manager - No comments.
Police Architectural Liaison Officer - Comments awaited
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8: The Right to respect for private and family life.
Article 1 of the First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
Further consideration to this issue will be given at the meeting.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 5: Economy (strategic approach to economic issues).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
Development Committee
2
14 February 2013
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of the proposed use.
2. Impact on the vitality and viability of the Town Centre
3. Parking and Highway impact
4. Impact on the Conservation Area.
APPRAISAL
The site lies within the St Nicholas Court precinct where in recent years the
occupancy of the units by retailers has declined and there is a relatively high number
of unoccupied buildings or non-retail uses. The building in question (no.1a) lies in the
south-west corner of St Nicholas Court and sits to the rear of units fronting Market
Place/Market Street. It is currently unoccupied. Members may recall that a recent
application for the change of use of the building to a place of worship/church hall was
approved by Committee.
The site is located within an area designated as Town Centre, and Primary Shopping
Area as well as the Conservation Area.
Policy SS5 supports a broad range of uses such as shopping, commercial and
cultural as well as others to support the role of the Town Centre. The site lies in the
designated Town Centre and Primary Shopping Area, where the proposed dropin/advice centre use is considered to be acceptable.
Specific areas of the Town Centre are designated as Primary Retail Frontages which
are defined in order to concentrate retail development in central areas of the towns
and do not permit more than 30% of the defined frontage being used for non-A1
(retail). St Nicholas Court is not a designated Primary Retail Frontage and this
criterion does not therefore apply to this area. The proposed drop-in/advice centre
use is considered acceptable in the designated Primary Shopping Area.
Concern has been raised with regard to the loss of this available unit which could
attract a retailer into the town and improve the vitality and viability of North Walsham
Town Centre. However, the application for consideration is policy compliant and
would result in a use of the currently vacant building which would attract more footfall
by users of the drop-in/advice centre than an empty building.
The NPPF indicates that Local Planning Authorities should promote competitive town
centres and should recognise town centres as the heart of their communities and
pursue policies to support their viability and vitality. This is therefore a material
consideration in the determination of this application.
With regard to car parking there is no space on the site to provide car parking. The
last office use of the building also had no car parking provision. It is not therefore
considered that this proposal would significantly alter the current parking situation
and the Highway Authority has raised no objection in relation to this matter. The site
is located within the town centre and close to numerous public car parks. It is not
considered that the lack of on site parking would be detrimental to highway safety.
The site lies within the designated Conservation Area where proposals should
preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. No
changes to the exterior of the building are proposed and the proposal would have a
neutral impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
In respect of crime and disorder, comments are awaited from the Police Architectural
Liaison Officer.
Development Committee
3
14 February 2013
It is considered that the proposal is in accordance with Development Plan policies
and subject to no objection from the Police Architectural Liaison Officer in respect of
crime and disorder, approval is recommended.
RECOMMENDATION:
Delegated authority to approve subject to no objections being raised by the
Police Architectural Liaison Officer and to the imposition of appropriate
conditions.
(2)
POTTER HEIGHAM - PF/12/1141 - Continued use of building for B2 (general
industrial) and B8 (storage) use; Rose Farm, Green Lane for Mr S Hill
Minor Development
- Target Date: 30 November 2012
Case Officer: Miss S Tudhope
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
PF/11/0178 PF
Continued use of former agricultural buildings for B8 (storage) use
Approved 09/01/2012
THE APPLICATION
The application is a retrospective proposal for a change of use of two units (units 3 &
4) within an agricultural building to B2 (general industrial) and B8 (storage).
An amended plan has been submitted reducing the area of unit 3 subject to the
proposed change of use and thereby retaining the existing agricultural use for part of
the building.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Supports the proposal subject to consideration being given to the following
conditions: hours of opening to be changed to all day Sunday closing and Saturday
opening from 9am to 1pm and included in contract to tenants; garden equipment
repair only; all activities to be carried out inside of the units only.
REPRESENTATIONS
49 letters of objection have been received, citing the following grounds:
Agricultural buildings are just that and a little own use machinery maintenance
can and is already taking place there.
No need to create an industrial/factory unit.
Increased traffic
Noise/disturbance for close neighbours
The application and any future modifications of the application should be
rejected.
Development Committee
4
14 February 2013
Would make life for the immediate neighbour completely intolerable.
Here we have a quiet retired couple only 15m away and their retirement is
blighted
Traffic from site has already caused damage to the highway verge
Site is on a very narrow unlit lane frequented by walkers
Lane already struggles to cope with the current flow of farm and general village
traffic to add to this will increase the risk of accidents
There are units available to rent in Catfield and elsewhere on proper purpose
built sites with proper safe access
Surrounding area like most boat and industrial workshops will become a
complete and utter eyesore
Quiet family village should remain this way
Concern units being used late into the night
Concern regarding smoke pollution from burning plastic
Unsuitable narrow roads
Applicant has not complied with conditions on planning permission 20110178 in
relation to drainage
Possible release of noise and odours from ventilation systems
Adverse effect on wildlife and environment
Children will no longer be able to safely walk to the park and playing fields with
increase in traffic
Object to 7 day a week usage
Reduce house prices
1 letter of support has been received citing the following grounds:
This seems like a good use for buildings no longer required for agricultural use,
so long as noise levels are kept within bounds
The changes made so far at Rose Farm have had a very low-key effect; it is
seldom that anyone is to be seen on the site
preferable to see buildings used in this way than demolished to make way for
housing or similar which would increase traffic on the narrow lane.
I am surprised to see that oppositions registered on this site are, with one
exception, by people who do not live near enough to be affected by any change.
CONSULTATIONS
Environmental Health: No objection subject to conditions in respect of no extractor or
ventilation system shall to be installed unless a scheme has first been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
County Council (Highways): No objection
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8: The Right to respect for private and family life.
Article 1 of the First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
Development Committee
5
14 February 2013
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy SS 5: Economy (strategic approach to economic issues).
Policy CT 5: The transport impact on new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
Policy EC 1: Farm diversification (specifies criteria for farm diversification).
Policy EC 2: The re-use of buildings in the Countryside (specifies criteria for
converting buildings for non-residential purposes).
Policy EN 2: Protection and enhancement of landscape and settlement character
(specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including the Landscape
Character Assessment).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of proposed uses.
2. Impact on residential amenities of neighbouring properties.
3. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
Members will recall visiting the site on 3 January 2013.
The site is located on the western side of Green Lane at the southern end of an area
of residential and agricultural development. Agricultural land lies to the west, south
and east (and to the west and east of the lane). There is an existing hedgerow and
some trees along Green Lane south of the site with some recent hedging planted
immediately south of the access to the site. The buildings on the site comprise
workshops/stores and two covered yards which were formerly used for the rearing of
livestock and general agricultural storage. The two covered yards were granted
temporary permission (5 years) for B8 (storage) under planning permission
20110178 on 9 January 2012.
The two units subject to this application have a floor area of approx. 53sqm.
The site lies within the designated Countryside policy area where the reuse and
adaptation of buildings for appropriate purposes is considered acceptable in principle
subject to compliance with other relevant Core Strategy policies.
Policy EC2 for the reuse of buildings in the countryside allows for 'economic uses'
provided that they are appropriate in scale and nature to the location. The building
must also be soundly built and suitable for the proposed use without substantial
rebuilding or extension and the proposal must be in accordance with other policies
that seek to protect biodiversity, amenity and character of the area. Policy EC1,
allows proposals for farm diversification to be permitted provided it can be
demonstrated that the proposal would make an ongoing contribution to sustaining the
agricultural enterprise as a whole and does not involve new build development
unless certain criteria are met.
The applicant has indicated that there is no immediate agricultural need for using all
of the buildings within the context of the existing farm business and alternative uses
for the buildings which could generate additional income to supplement the returns
Development Committee
6
14 February 2013
from the agricultural enterprise have been investigated. The units subject to this
application have been occupied and in use for over 3 years. Unit 3 is being used by a
tenant to store agricultural and garden equipment relating to his employment with
industrial activity limited to general maintenance of that equipment. Unit 4 is in use by
another tenant for storage of his boat and marine items with industrial use extending
to repair and refurbishment of purchased craft for re-sale (elsewhere) on a part-time
basis. No alterations either internally or externally are required to the buildings. It is
considered that the proposal complies with the criteria of Policies EC1 and EC2,
being small in scale and the uses contained within the existing buildings.
Concern has been raised relating to hours of use of the buildings, particularly late
into the night. The application proposes hours of use between 08.00-18.00 Mondays
to Fridays; 08.00-16.00 on Saturdays and 10.00-16.00 on Sundays and Bank
Holidays. The Parish Council had suggested that hours of use should be restricted to
weekdays with half day only on Saturdays and no use on Sundays or Bank Holidays.
The applicant considers that this would be too restrictive given that the units are
being used by self-employed people who need to be able to work seven days a week
if necessary. The Council's Environmental Health Officer has advised that given the
small size of the building the proposed hours of use are considered reasonable
without further restriction. Conditioning of the proposed hours is recommended as is
a condition restricting the installation/use of any ventilation/extractor system.
The Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposal but noted that a
condition of a previous permission relating to the site has not been satisfactorily
complied with and that this should be resolved prior to permitting the current
application. Action is being undertaken to resolve this issue outside the current
application but if necessary a similar condition relating to the provision of the laying
out of the vehicular access could be imposed.
A further concern was raised relating to the ability to change use from B8 to B1
without additional permission; although this concern could be addressed by imposing
a condition that would restrict the use to that applied for there is not considered to be
sufficient justification for doing so.
Overall it is considered that the proposal accords with Development Plan policies and
approval is recommended subject to conditions covering ventilation/extractor
systems and hours of use.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to the imposition of conditions in respect of
ventilation/extraction systems and hours of use as sought in the application.
(3)
SHERINGHAM - PF/12/0568 - Erection of two detached two-storey dwellings
with garages; Land adjacent 25 Cremers Drift for Mr S Pigott
Minor Development
- Target Date: 11 July 2012
Case Officer: Miss J Medler
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Residential Area
Development Committee
7
14 February 2013
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
PF/10/1445 PO - Erection of two-storey dwelling
Approved 07/02/2011
THE APPLICATION
Is seeking permission for two detached two storey dwellings with garages.
Amended plans have been received regarding the design of the dwellings including a
reduction in the height and scale. Both dwellings have been amended as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Now shown to have 3 bedrooms rather than 4.
Width reduced from 8.3m to 6.9m
Height reduced from 7.4m to 7m
Gable depth reduced from 8.3m to 6.9m
Front gable projection of 3m
Dwellings 2m apart rather than 1.6m
Dwellings 1.8m from nearest boundary rather than 1m
Partial dormer windows in first floor
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
TOWN COUNCIL
Comments on amended plans: No objection
REPRESENTATIONS
Original plans:
Seven letters of objection received, two from the same objector and two further
letters from the same household, raising the following points:
1. Overdevelopment
2. Not an area of high density housing
3. Close proximity of dwellings
4. Two dwellings excessive
5. Not in keeping with the nature of the area
6. Concerns raised over access via shared access
7. Inadequate parking
8. Insufficient turning for vehicles
9. Highway safety concerns in relation to poor visibility
10. Loss of trees
11. Impact upon wildlife
12. Increase in flooding
13. Loss of view
Amended plans:
Six letters of objection received, four of which are from two separate households,
raising the same concerns as above and an additional point of concern regarding bin
collections.
CONSULTATIONS
Comments on amended plans:
County Council (Highways) - No objection. This current proposal seeks the
construction of an additional dwelling above that consented under PO/10/1445, which
would increase traffic movements onto the unadopted section of Cremers Drift. Given
the existing number already served by this private road and that its intersection with
the adopted public highway has acceptable levels of visibility I feel that any objection
Development Committee
8
14 February 2013
would be unsustainable. The current amended proposal is now for 2no. 3 bedroom
dwellings and would require the provision of 2no. parking spaces per unit. Whilst the
garages are of a size that they could only be considered to be one parking space,
there is sufficient frontage area to accommodate the second spaces required to meet
the adopted standards. Car parking condition required.
In respect of 25 Cremers Drift retaining a vehicular access, this access is not onto
the adopted highway. The Highway Authority is satisfied that the point at which
Cremers Drift intersects with the adopted highway is acceptable to serve the new
dwelling and number 25 Cremers Drift.
Sustainability Co-ordinator - The proposal complies with Policy EN6. A condition is
therefore required regarding the dwellings achieving a Code Level 3 rating or above.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8: The Right to respect for private and family life.
Article 1 of the First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
Policy HO 7: Making the most efficient use of land (Housing density) (Proposals
should optimise housing density in a manner which protects or enhances the
character of the area).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 6: Sustainable construction and energy efficiency (specifies sustainability
and energy efficiency requirements for new developments).
Policy CT 5: The transport impact on new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Acceptability of principle of development
2. Overdevelopment?
3. Impact on neighbouring dwellings
4. Highway safety
5. Trees
6. Wildlife
APPRAISAL
This application was deferred at the meeting on 17 January for a site visit.
Development Committee
9
14 February 2013
The site is located within an area designated as Residential in the adopted North
Norfolk Core Strategy. In such locations new residential development is considered
to be acceptable in principle providing it accords with other relevant Core Strategy
policies.
In 2011 outline planning permission was granted for a two storey dwelling to be
erected on the site (10/1445). All matters apart from access were reserved. No
objections were received to that application. However, no reserved matters
application has been submitted.
The current proposal is a full application for the erection of 2 no. two storey detached
dwellings with detached garages. The site area proposed is larger than that
considered under the previous outline planning application (10/1445). The vehicular
access point would be the same.
Following receipt of objections from local residents the agent has submitted amended
plans reducing the overall scale of the proposed dwellings, and creating a greater
separation distance between the two proposed dwellings and the boundaries of the
site. The site is overgrown but has been surveyed to determine the levels across the
site. The plans indicate that the dwelling on Plot 1 would be constructed at the same
ground level as 23 Cremers Drift to the north, and that the dwelling on Plot 2, to the
south, would be approximately 200mm higher. This is considered to be a minor
difference in levels and one which would not result in significant detrimental impact
on the dwellings surrounding the site, given the mix of scale and type of properties in
the immediate area.
Sheringham is designated as a Principal Settlement, within which Policy HO7
requires that there should be not less than 40 dwellings per hectare, providing that
this requirement would not detract from the character of the area. In this case in view
of the site area 40 dwellings per hectare would result in 3.8 dwellings being provided
on the site. However, it is considered that this would result in a development which
would not be in keeping with the character of the area. There is a mix of density of
development in the immediate area with some 11 dwellings per hectare directly to the
south, 21 dwellings per hectare to the south east off Knowle Crescent, 17 dwellings
per hectare to the north and 14 dwellings per hectare to the north west. The density
of the proposed development itself for 2 dwellings would be some 21 dwellings per
hectare. Whilst this is on the higher end of the density scale, given the mix in the
area it is not considered that the addition of two more dwellings on this site would be
such as to be out of keeping with the density or prevailing character of the area, nor
would it constitute overdevelopment of the site. It is considered that the proposal
complies with Policy HO7 of the Core Strategy.
Following discussions with Officers the dwellings have been significantly re-designed.
These amendments have been re-advertised and re-consultations have taken place.
The design of the dwellings is now considered to be acceptable. The materials
proposed are flint, red brick and red clay pantiles. In the immediate area there is a
variety in terms of design of dwellings and materials used.
In terms of the relationship of the proposed dwellings to the closest neighbouring
property to the north, No.23 Cremers Drift is located to the north/north east of the
site. There are two first floor windows that directly face the site, as well as ground
floor windows and doors. The proposed dwellings are shown to be sited in the
western half of the site and would not therefore be directly in front of the southern
elevation of No.23. The proposed dwelling on Plot 1 is shown to have a first floor
window facing north but this would serve a bathroom and could be conditioned to be
Development Committee
10
14 February 2013
obscure glazed. In view of the position of the proposed dwellings on the site in
relation to No.23 and since the dwelling on Plot 1 would be constructed on the same
ground level as No.23 it is not considered that the proposed dwelling would have a
significant detrimental impact on the privacy or amenities of the occupiers of that
dwelling.
No.23a Cremers Drift is located to the east of 23 Cremers Drift and accessed from a
driveway that runs along the northern boundary of the application site. Given the
position of 23a Cremers Drift in relation to the site it is not considered that there
would be a significant detrimental impact on the privacy or amenities of the occupiers
of that dwelling.
Whilst no objection has been received from Rainbows End, Knowle Crescent this
single storey property is located to the east of the application site and behind what
would be the rear gardens of the proposed dwellings. That property has windows
facing the application site, but these are some 22m from the rear conservatories of
the proposed dwellings. This distance complies with the amenity criteria in the
Design Guide. A 1.8m high fence is proposed on this eastern boundary. In view of
this it is not considered that the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact
on the privacy or amenities of the occupiers of that dwelling.
No objections have been received from 25 Cremers Drift, the former garden of which
includes the site. This property is at a higher ground level than the application site
and has a first floor window facing the site as well as a conservatory and ground floor
windows. It is not considered that this relationship is any worse than others in the
immediate area and that this would not have a significant detrimental impact on the
privacy or amenities of its occupiers.
No.27 Cremers Drift to the south of the site, whilst single storey, is on land
significantly higher than the application site. There are no windows in the northern
elevation of that dwelling facing the site, and there are existing mature trees on the
boundary with the access drive to No.25 Cremers Drift. It is not therefore considered
that the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact upon the privacy or
amenities of the occupiers of this dwelling.
The occupiers of nos. 19 and 21 Cremers Drift have also objected to the application
but those properties do not adjoin the site and it is not therefore considered that their
privacy or amenities would be affected by this proposal.
A number of objectors have raised concerns regarding traffic generation and the
access to this site. A question of ownership and rights of access has also arisen,
although this was not raised when the previous outline planning permission was
granted under 10/1445 using the same access. The concerns over ownership and
rights of access are a civil matter, not a planning matter. The applicant has been
advised that the driveway between the metalled surface of Cremers Drift and the
access gate to the plot forms part of Cremers Drift and is not within the ownership of
any neighbour or individual. Officers have sought legal advice on this matter and
Members will be updated orally.
The car parking standards in the Core Strategy require 2 car parking spaces for each
dwelling. This can be provided. The Committee will note that the Highway Authority is
not raising an objection to this application. It is therefore considered that the proposal
is acceptable in terms of access and parking.
Development Committee
11
14 February 2013
Objectors have raised concerns in relation to loss of trees on the site which they
state have now been removed. Whilst there are no Tree Preservation Orders on the
site and it is not in a Conservation Area the first 6m in from the western boundary is
within the Tree Preservation Order Consultation Area as there are trees protected by
an Order on the opposite side of the road. However, any previous tree removal did
not require consent. There are no significant trees on the site at this time. It is not
therefore considered that the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact on
trees. Whilst the site is overgrown it is not considered that the proposal would have a
significant detrimental impact on wildlife.
In conclusion, it is not considered that the proposal would constitute
overdevelopment or be out of character with the area, the access and parking is in
accordance with policy. The proposal is considered to be in accordance with
Development Plan policies for the reasons explained in the report.
RECOMMENDATION:
Delegated authority to approve, subject to confirmation from the Planning
Legal Manager that correct notices have been served in relation to the
proposed access arrangements, the imposition of appropriate conditions
including removal of permitted development rights for extensions and
alterations, obscure glazing in first floor bathroom windows, materials, car
parking, fencing, landscaping and ground levels.
(4)
STALHAM - PF/12/1427 - Mixed use development comprising 150 dwellings, B1
(a - c) employment buildings (3150sqm), public open space, landscaping and
associated highways and drainage infrastructure; Land off Yarmouth Road for
Hopkins Homes
Major Development
- Target Date: 21 March 2013
Case Officer: Mr J Williams
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Mixed Use Allocation
Archaeological Site
Public Rights of Way - Footpath
THE APPLICATION
The proposal is for a mixed development comprising 150 dwellings, Class B1
employment buildings (3,150 sq m floorspace), and a neighbourhood park together
with other smaller areas of open space.
The site is currently an open, flat agricultural field which adjoins the south-eastern
boundary of Stalham. It has two road frontages, Ingham Road to the north-west and
Yarmouth Road to the south. The total site area measures 8.6 ha. The residential
area together with a landscaped area adjacent to its eastern boundary would occupy
approximately 5.1 ha, the employment area 1.5 ha and the neighbourhood park 2.0
ha.
The proposed housing development would comprise a mix of 1 & 2 bedroom
apartments and 2,3 & 4 bedroom houses/bungalows, in a combination of short
terraces, semi-detached and detached properties. Two storey (the majority) and
Development Committee
12
14 February 2013
single storey properties are proposed. 45% of the dwellings (68 units) are proposed
to be 'affordable'. Of this figure 75% (51 units) are to be affordable rented properties
and 25% (17 units) to be what is described as 'shared equity dwellings sold by the
developer at 75% open market value'.
The employment buildings are proposed to occupy an area to the south-east of the
site. These would comprise 6 individual buildings of varying sizes (all two storey)
divided into a total of 24 units ranging in size from 111 sqm to 167 sqm floorspace.
Each unit is shown to occupy two floors although the plans indicate that they could
each be further sub-divided into separate smaller ground floor and first floor units.
The proposed neighbourhood park would occupy the western part of the site
extending across from the boundary with Ingham Road to that with Yarmouth Road.
The new housing development would front onto the park. Cycle / footpaths would
link through connecting Ingham Road with Yarmouth Road. The park would
incorporate an equipped play area as well as accommodating a permeable area to
accommodate surface water run-off from the remainder of the development site. A
smaller area of open space is proposed along the eastern boundary of the site.
Vehicular access to the residential area is proposed from a single point
approximately midway along the Ingham Road frontage. Separate vehicular access
to the employment area is proposed from Yarmouth Road. Apart from a 'bollarded'
emergency vehicle link there would be no vehicular connection between the
residential and employment areas.
Pedestrian routes within the development are designed to connect with an existing
public right of way which passes along the eastern boundary of the site.
2.0 m wide footways are proposed along the lengths of the two road frontages
bordering the site together with a new zebra crossing on Ingham Road (close to the
entrance with Stalham High School). In addition off-site highway works involve realignment of the junction of Ingham Road with Brumstead Road and 'where
appropriate minor road widening along Yarmouth Road between the site entrance
and the nearby mini-roundabout junction.
The application is accompanied by proposed 'Heads of Terms' for a S.106 Planning
Obligation. The issues covered relate to affordable housing, open space, a financial
contribution towards libraries and a financial contribution towards mitigating
increased visitor impacts upon nearby Special Areas of Conservation (Broads SAC).
The application is supported by the following documents:
Planning Statement
Design & Access Statement
Statement of Community Involvement
Transport Statement
Safe Route to Schools Report.
Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Statement
Habitat Report
Tree Survey
Landscape Assessment
Archaeology Report
Utilities Report
Sustainability Statement
Renewable Energy Statement
Section 106 Heads of Terms
Development Committee
13
14 February 2013
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application was deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
TOWN COUNCIL
Objects, making the following observations:
The industrial units should be sited at the top (eastern) end of the site near the
public footpath.
The pavement along Ingham Road could be widened to include a separate cycle
path.
Concerned regarding who will be responsible for the upkeep of the triangular
piece of land near the existing footpath. A diversion of the path would allow the
land to be used by the present owner.
Allotments could be incorporated at the site (i.e. on the above mentioned
triangular piece of land).
Restriction in height of the proposed buildings.
Water and sewage. Concern regarding the existing town drains and frequent
flooding at Chapel Corner. The development will only exacerbate the problems.
Industrial traffic using Old Yarmouth Road through Sutton as a rat run. Yarmouth
Road and Chapel Corner especially busy during school times.
REPRESENTATIONS
One letter received from local resident, not objecting to the principle of housing
development, but concerned that both Ingham Road and Yarmouth Road together
with the interconnecting pair of mini-roundabouts are not suitable to accommodate
safely the additional traffic arising from the development. This additional traffic will
pose a danger to school children who frequent these routes. In addition, concerns
are expressed regarding the strain upon local schools and doctors' surgeries, loss of
'green' land, impact upon wildlife and drainage.
CONSULTATIONS
Sutton Parish Council - Has great concerns regarding the existing infrastructure
which will be affected by the proposed development, there are already ongoing
drainage, sewage and flooding problems in both Stalham and Sutton and such a
development could exacerbate these problems.
The pumping station at Sutton is already working to maximum capacity and we have
been told by a senior engineer at Anglian Water that it is up to its limit.
Another major concern is that of the traffic this development will bring to the area.
There would be large industrial lorries using Yarmouth Road, they would probably
access Stalham via Sutton and the road network is already fragile. There are no
footpaths in The Street in Sutton and the road is not wide enough.
Added to this the traffic may have to pass all three schools in Stalham, there have
been accidents in the past involving school children and vehicles. The footpaths are
narrow on Yarmouth Road and would need great improvement and widening.
Queries what the designated HGV route would be to the site. The junction off the
A149 near to Tesco is not of a high enough standard to take excessive traffic and in
fact during summer months there are queues back to The Swan Public House at
Ingham.
If the development is permitted the Parish Council would like to see a green build
with consideration given rainwater harvesting and solar panels on south facing
buildings.
Development Committee
14
14 February 2013
Ingham Parish Council - Thought should be given towards creating a cycle path
using the existing public right of way that crosses Church Farm running from
Campingfield Lane to Grove Road, Ingham. This would give access from the
proposed development to the wider countryside and coast away from the sensitive
Broads area. Norfolk County Council drew up a feasibility study for this route in 2008
and any funds as specified in the submitted Planning Statement could be used in this
way. Encouragement of cycling may help to counteract the inevitable increase in car
journeys from the development.
Oil heating to serve the dwellings will require a substantial number of HGV
movements leading to safety fears and environmental concerns. Questions whether
the possibility of accessing gas from a nearby pipeline should be investigated to
serve the proposed development and the wider community.
Otherwise generally complimentary towards the scheme as a whole.
Broads Authority - Has no objections to the proposal. The principal concern
regarding the potential for a proposal of this size at this site to impact on the Broads
was the impact of the development on the water quality and ecology of the area.
Having considered the detail regarding treatment of foul sewerage and surface water
arising from the site contained within the submitted Flood Risk Assessment and
having regards to Anglia Water’s pre-development report, the Authority is satisfied
that due regard has been given to these issues.
County Council (Planning Obligations Co-Ordinator) - Awaiting comments.
County Council (Highways) - Initial comments received cite 26 issues relating to
the submitted layout plan, many of these requiring amendments to be made. The
majority of these relate to the proposed residential area. These include on a more
fundamental level, the type/number of access roads serving the residential area, as
well as the extent to which the Highway Authority would adopt roads and footways
within the site, and details such as car parking provision.
County Council (Historic Environment Service) - The proposed development site
affects a number of heritage assets including Iron Age activity and areas of medieval
occupation. The details of these assets are contained in the archaeological field
evaluation reports accompanying the application. If planning permission is granted
conditions should be imposed in accordance with paragraph 141 of the NPPF (to
require a written scheme of investigation to be approved and thereafter undertaken).
County Council (Public Rights of Way) - A public right of way (Stalham Footpath
No.4) is located along the north-eastern boundary of the site. The submitted plans
indicate it would be surfaced with paving slabs. This is not acceptable and any
surfacing treatment needs to be discussed with NCC public rights of way officer
beforehand. It is assumed that a commuted sum will be made available for future
maintenance. Any planting in the vicinity of the footpath will need to be agreed in
order to ensure the public right of way is not affected.
Environment Agency - Raises a holding objection on grounds that the submitted
flood risk assessment (FRA) does not comply with the requirements set out in
paragraph 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The submitted FRA does
not provide a suitable basis for assessment to be made of the flood risks arising from
the proposed development. In particular, the FRA has not provided sufficient
information to demonstrate that the surface water drainage scheme will be viable or
that it will not increase flood risk either on site or elsewhere.
Development Committee
15
14 February 2013
Anglian Water - Advises that the foul drainage from this development is in the
catchment of Stalham sewage treatment works that at present has available capacity
for these flows. The sewerage system at present has available capacity for these
flows.
Internal Drainage Board - The proposed development lies just outside the Broads
Internal Drainage Board district, but part of the area discharges surface water
through the district by gravity to outfall in the tidal upper River Ant. It is uncertain
whether the existing surface water drainage system is capable of accepting any
further discharge, either from this proposed development or any future development
on the nearby Tesco site. The proposed development will need to address the
disposal of any additional surface water by either attenuation on site, or by
engineering improvements to the existing system.
Natural England - Awaiting comments.
Norfolk Police (Crime Prevention Design) - Content with the overall layout as
proposed which it is considered has been put together with some thought and care
with regard to crime prevention, particularly when looking at the amount of natural
surveillance afforded to the open spaces.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation & Design) Provides comprehensive comments on issues relating to the impact upon the nearby
'heritage assets', the site layout, building design and materials.
Heritage Assets:
The adjoining Church Farm complex (which the site borders along its western
boundary) forms the eastern boundary of the Stalham Conservation Area and
contains two listed buildings. Whilst the development would have some impact on
these heritage assets, because the neighbourhood park would provide a buffer and
distance between the existing and proposed buildings, this impact would be less than
harmful.
Layout:
The neighbourhood park has the potential to be an attractive introduction to the
scheme when approaching the site from the south and south west. More than this,
however, it also offers important links through to the town centre and to the local
schools. It would be nice to think that its paths through the park could be kept
relatively informal, and that their surfacing will be consistent with the other paths and
rights of way across the site.
In the proposed employment area the individual units are relatively modest in size
and sit together in a relatively additive way. As a result, they more resemble a smallscale business park rather than an industrial estate and are considered more
appropriate for the context. Providing suitable planting is used to soften the parking
courts and the main access road, this element of the scheme should not be unduly
incompatible with its surroundings.
The proposed housing development is the principal part of the scheme, not only in
terms of site area but also in respect of visual impact. Particularly when approaching
from the Ingham direction.
The housing layout is driven heavily by the main estate road which loops around the
properties to serve the interior of the site. Although benefitting from several sinuous
changes of alignment, the road would undoubtedly be the dominant feature
Development Committee
16
14 February 2013
throughout the development. Whilst there are several private drives for relief, these
are distributed around the fringes of the scheme and currently have only a limited
impact in terms of breaking up the standard suburban feel. It would be welcomed if
the private drive component could be substantially increased. Not only would this
help in reducing the apparent dominance of the car, but it would also create
individual character areas which would overcome the existing pre-determined and
rather regimented rhythm of buildings. The resultant variety and depth could only be
to the overall benefit of the layout.
Other improvements to the scheme could include alternative treatment to certain
small landscaped areas within the layout and alterations to the surface details of the
private drives. Furthermore it is unfortunate that the parking courts associated with
the affordable units are not proposed to have the same surface finish as their market
equivalents.
Design
The employment buildings have a decidedly residential appearance by virtue of their
gables, dormers and chimneys. In pure design terms, the buildings are compatible
with their predominantly residential surroundings. It is suggested that two detailed
aspects are re-considered; deletion of the flat roof dormers and changes to the high
level roof hips.
In terms of the proposed house types, whilst the individual buildings are politely
detailed and well proportioned, there is precious little which is considered original and
which might set this scheme apart from other developments by this housebuilder.
Whilst the properties are less Georgian than at Holt (and to a lesser extent Cromer),
they are now becoming quite familiar across the District. Indeed some are direct
takes from other sites. Whilst the company is clearly comfortable with this approach
on the basis that the properties will sell, it does nothing in terms of making a positive
contribution to the built environment of North Norfolk. Although it is noted that the
Design & Access Statement refers to local distinctiveness, it is difficult to identify
which particular elements are considered distinct to this locality. In practice, the
proposals involve generic house types which could be built anywhere but which
ultimately belong nowhere.
In terms of specific comments relating to the designs put forward the following points
are made:
The appearance of the block of six apartments which face directly onto the
proposed neighbourhood park is particularly weak. This building would create an
inelegant and unattractive built form on a very prominent part of the site.
Perhaps one of the most disappointing aspects of this scheme is that there no
real highlight buildings across the site. All the units tend to merge into a
consistent mass of predominantly two storey houses. It is suggested that the
dwellings on a number of prominent plots are replaced by more stand out
designs. Whilst accepting that standard house types are a reality on most plots, it
is surely not too much to ask that more thought goes into the more important
locations. Only in this way will we ever create proper street scenes rather than
just rows of individual properties.
It is similarly disappointing that so little use has been made of single-storey built
forms. Only on the northern edge of the site do they appear.
As with the layout, there is a clear differential between the designs of the
affordable and market housing. Gone are the chimneys, doorcases, etc which at
least help to lift the market houses, to be replaced with comparatively bland
roofscapes, plain canopies and generally inferior materials.
Development Committee
17
14 February 2013
It would also be nice to see greater use made of grouping. Particularly within the
private drive areas, attaching building together via garages or walls helps to
create visual interest. More generally across the site, greater use should be made
of walls as these can provide important enclosure to help define spaces. Instead,
the submitted scheme seems to depend entirely on willow, oak and timber
fencing.
Materials
Much like the building designs, the materials palette is also now becoming familiar.
Whilst certain of the brick types are acceptable others it is suggested should be
replaced.
The roof finishes are entirely artificial and would create a rather lifeless, less than
traditional end result. Whilst this cannot be an issue within the body of the site, the
most visible plots, and those facing the conservation area, would really benefit from a
natural clay pantile covering.
Closing comments
With the site having already been allocated for development, and with no substantive
impact upon heritage assets, there is no reason to object to the principle of this
application. With the scheme also containing potentially attractive areas of open
space, and having good connectivity through its network of paths, there are positive
aspects to the proposals. This said, any scheme ultimately stands or falls on the
strength of its buildings. In this respect it is seen as falling short. Whilst the buildings
will no doubt be well built, and will be uncontroversial appearance-wise in the eyes of
many, it is considered that the well-rehearsed, neo-traditional designs do not accord
with the aims and objectives of our Design Guide.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Comments that
the submitted Landscape & Visual Appraisal has been carried out in accordance with
accepted practice and recognised guidelines. The proposed Landscape Masterplan
builds on these principles together with advice contained within the North Norfolk
Landscape Character Assessment, retaining existing trees and hedges along the site
boundary, provision of a structural landscape buffer to the north-east boundary and
the creation of a new neighbourhood park. Within the site substantial tree planting is
proposed, both within the neighbourhood park and amongst the housing, which will in
time give some verticality to the scheme.
Whilst 11 trees are required to be removed to facilitate site access it is considered
that the landscape proposals provide more than sufficient replacement planting to
compensate for this loss of vegetation.
The location of the neighbourhood park in the western section of the site is
appropriate, close to the edge of the existing settlement and providing pedestrian and
cycle routes from Ingham Road to Yarmouth Road. The soft landscape proposals are
suitable, including significant tree planting framing the main path, native planting and
species rich wildflower grassland areas to break up the amenity grass spaces. The
play area is well positioned. In addition the proposed infiltration basin and swales
forming part of the SUDs strategy for the scheme have the potential to be attractive
landscape features.
Landscape proposals within the housing layout are well thought through and provide
variety in the street scene.
Development Committee
18
14 February 2013
In terms of ecology the submitted details demonstrate that there will be no detriment
to protected species (bats and reptiles) as a result of the development.
Concludes that there are no overriding issues of concern relating to the landscape
strategy and masterplan as submitted.
Recommends conditions requiring submission of a full landscaping scheme, 10 year
management & maintenance plan, tree protection measures and to safeguard local
ecology.
Countryside and Parks Manager - Advises that if the District Council were to adopt
the open space on the site (two areas), plus the footpaths/cyclepaths, a commuted
sum would be required, based on the standard 15 year maintenance period taking
account of year on year inflation. This assumes that the developer would provide
play equipment on the site.
Strategic Housing - Awaiting comments.
Environmental Health - Satisfied with the contents of the submitted Flood Risk
Assessment subject to a condition requiring more detail regarding surface water
drainage. Also requests conditions relating to the proposed employment buildings in
respect of noise control and lighting.
Economic and Tourism Development Manager - Supports the allocation of land
for development as specified within Policy ST01 which is in accord with the major
policy initiatives contained within the Council’s Corporate Plan. Recognises the
increasing concerns felt by the town’s inhabitants about Stalham’s ability to thrive as
a rural service centre. It is generally agreed that the town is in need of revitalisation
and has a high level of out-commuting (only 35% of people who live in Stalham also
work there) into the Norwich area, owing to the limited employment opportunities
available locally. As a result local communities fear that it may be difficult to grow the
vitality of the town and the commercial viability of its retail centre. This application
presents the district with a quality mixed development scheme which has the
potential to elevate the social and commercial environment of the settlement through
the quality and scale of the development.
The impact of the proposed development on the commercial prospects of the town
and its businesses is difficult to judge. Stalham is one of the district’s smaller centres
and it functions primarily as a convenience and service destination for its local
catchment population (3,800). The size of the population is unlikely to be of a
sufficient force to attract new sustainable commodities into the town. Also the
changing pattern of consumer spending presents significant challenges, and it is
likely that internet trading will continue to unsettle towns of this size into the
foreseeable future.
However, the proposed development does throw light on an otherwise suppressed
commercial outlook for the town and its community by providing the following
opportunities;
3,150 sqm of employment space (equivalent to 15 small offices for general
commercial activity).
150 dwellings leveraging up to 400 additional consumers (attracting new
innovative businesses to the high street).
Development Committee
19
14 February 2013
Potential to increase visitor spend and promote Stalham’s attractive
environment and close proximity to the Broads.
Potential to increase the range of outlets in the food and drink sector thereby
underpinning the growing demand for quality dining experience.
The Economic Development Unit supports this planning application for the reasons
outlined. However, in recommending the application for approval, the unit is aware
that the proposed provision of low key employment space has been designed to
accommodate both residential and employment uses.
Sustainability Co-Ordinator - The application confirms that all the dwellings are to
comply with Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes in accordance with Policy
EN6 and satisfactory measures are proposed to minimise energy and resource
consumption in the case of the proposed employment buildings. In addition
measures are proposed to achieve at least 20% renewable forms of energy as part of
the development in compliance with Policy EN6. Recommends conditions to ensure
compliance with the above.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8: The Right to respect for private and family life.
Article 1 of the First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Further consideration of this issue will be given at the meeting.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.(See comments of
Norfolk Police above).
POLICIES
North Norfolk Site Allocations Development Plan Document (Adopted February 2011)
Policy ST01 (Land Adjacent to Church Farm, Ingham Road, Stalham):
Land amounting to approximately 9 hectares is allocated for a mixed use
development of not more than 160 dwellings, 2 hectares of public open space,
community facilities and low-key employment uses. Development will be subject to
compliance with adopted Core Strategy policies including on-site provision of the
required proportion of affordable housing and contributions towards infrastructure,
services and other community needs as required and:
a. Comprehensive mixed development in accordance with a development brief that
must incorporate:
- not more than 160 dwellings at a net density of not less than thirty dwellings per
hectare;
- provide not less than 2 hectares of land suitable for community and low key
employment generating uses;
- provision of a neighbourhood park (incorporating suitable public open space and
recreational facilities) of not less than two hectares on a suitable part of the site; and,
- a footpath and cycle link joining the Ingham Road and Yarmouth Road and suitable
footways linking the development to the town centre;
b. provision of at least two separate vehicular access points (one each to Ingham
Road and Yarmouth Road).
c. the layout, design and landscaping of the site, respecting the setting of the edge of
the town and the adjacent Listed Buildings and Conservation Area;
Development Committee
20
14 February 2013
d. a suitable landscaping scheme including retention of mature trees along the
Yarmouth Road frontage and planting of new trees within the site;
e. prior approval of a scheme of mitigation to minimise potential impacts on the
Broads SAC/Broadland SPA and Ramsar site arising as a result of increased visitor
pressure, and on-going monitoring of such measures; and,
f. demonstration that there is adequate capacity in sewage treatment works and the
foul sewerage network, and that proposals have regard to water quality standards,
and that there is no adverse effect from water quality impacts on European Wildlife
Sites.
Retail development, other than that serving the needs of the proposed development,
will not be permitted.
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
Policy SS 6: Access and Infrastructure (strategic approach to access and
infrastructure issues).
Policy SS 13: Stalham (identifies strategic development requirements).
Policy HO 1: Dwelling mix and type (specifies type and mix of dwellings for new
housing developments).
Policy HO 2: Provision of affordable housing (specifies the requirements for provision
of affordable housing and/or contributions towards provision).
Policy EN 2: Protection and enhancement of landscape and settlement character
(specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including the Landscape
Character Assessment).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 6: Sustainable construction and energy efficiency (specifies sustainability
and energy efficiency requirements for new developments).
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
Policy EN 9: Biodiversity and geology (requires no adverse impact on designated
nature conservation sites).
Policy EN 10: Flood risk (prevents inappropriate development in flood risk areas).
Policy CT 2: Development contributions (specifies criteria for requiring developer
contributions).
Policy CT 5: The transport impact on new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
THE DEVELOPMENT BRIEF
Policy ST01 of the Site Allocations DPD requires a development brief to be prepared
for the allocation at Church Farm Stalham. A development brief was approved by the
Council's Cabinet in September 2012 and formally published in November 2012.
The brief includes the following main details / requirements:
A masterplan which indicates the locational distribution of land uses on the site
(e.g. the residential area, the employment area, community use area, the location
of the neighbourhood park and other areas of open space / landscaping)
Vehicle access to be served both from Ingham Road and Yarmouth Road.
Access to the employment land to be from Yarmouth Road.
Access to serve the employment land to be part of a phasing agreement to be
secured as part of developing the residential land.
Development Committee
21
14 February 2013
The development to incorporate elements of local distinctiveness (architectural
detail and materials).
Principally two storey with some variances to provide visual interest.
Employment uses to be 'low-key' (Class B1 uses only).
Enhancements to footpaths links from the site to the town centre and good
pedestrian / cycle links within the site.
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Housing layout, mix and design
2. Affordable housing
3. Employment layout and design
4. Open space / landscaping
5. Highway capacity and safety
6. Drainage
7. S.106 requirements
APPRAISAL
The application site forms most, but not all of the land allocated for mixed use
development under Policy ST01 of the Site Allocations DPD. That part of the
allocation site which is not included comprises 0.5 ha of land fronting on to Yarmouth
Road, (the development brief shows this area of land to be reserved for community
purposes, in accordance with the mix of land uses required by Policy ST01). The
application site is to be divided into three distinct areas; the housing area (5.0 ha
approx), the employment area (1.5 ha.) and the neighbourhood park (2.0 ha.). The
location of each of these separate areas complies with that shown in the
development brief. Accordingly, the types of development proposed and their
distribution on the site is considered to be acceptable.
Housing Layout, Mix and Design
The proposed housing development follows a fairly standard pattern in terms of
current residential estate layouts. It is proposed to be served by a single access road
off Ingham Road which separates within the site, terminating at three principal points.
There is no circulatory route through the site. Vehicles exiting the development would
follow the same route as entering it. (The Highway Authority has raised an objection
to this arrangement, as discussed in more detail below.) A large proportion of the
dwellings would front and have direct access onto the main estate roads, although
also proposed are a number of private drives serving smaller clusters of dwellings. It
should be noted that the Conservation, Design & Landscape Manager considers the
quality of the development could be much improved if more private drives were
introduced into the layout.
The proposal comprises a mix of detached and semi-detached houses, short
terraces and a small block of flats. The majority of buildings are to be two storey with
a small proportion of single storey (10 in total). Detached and semi-detached
properties are located almost entirely in the northern , central and eastern parts of
the site. The flats and terraces are concentrated to the southern side bordering with
the proposed employment area. This latter area contains all the proposed affordable
housing. The few single storey properties would be close to the eastern boundary of
the development facing open countryside.
Core Strategy Policy HO1 requires that new housing developments should comprise
at least 40% of dwellings with no more than one or two bedrooms. The proposal is
for 37% of the dwellings to meet this requirement, which is not considered such a
significant shortfall to raise objection, particularly in the context of the amount of
affordable housing being proposed (see below).
Development Committee
22
14 February 2013
The Committee will note the detailed comments of the Conservation, Design &
Landscape Manager regarding the proposed house designs. In summary, whilst for
the most part the buildings are not considered individually to be objectionable in
design terms, as a whole there is concern that they present a very familiar
impression, lacking distinctive character in relation to the immediate area. This apart
there are also a number of more specific detailed design issues referred to which
have now been the subject of discussions with the applicants.
Affordable Housing
Core Strategy Policy HO2 requires residential developments of this size to comprise
45% affordable housing (subject to viability). The application complies within this
policy in that a total of 68 dwellings (45%) are proposed as being 'affordable'. Of this
total 75% (51 dwellings) are proposed as affordable rented dwellings and 25% (17
dwellings) as 'shared equity' dwellings which are to be sold by the developer at 75%
of their open market value. At the time of preparing this report it is understood that
the precise mix of affordable house types is to be changed. Discussions are also
underway regarding the detail of the shared equity properties as well as the specific
terms of the S.106 Obligation which will secure their delivery. For these reasons the
formal comments of the Council's Strategic Housing Officer are still awaited.
Members will be updated on this at the meeting.
Policy HO2 also states the affordable housing should be mixed within the
development in groups of not more than eight units within each group. The proposal
does not accord with this requirement. All 68 units are located on the southern part of
the site with only one group of flats separated from the remainder by some market
dwellings. This lack of integration will be further emphasised by the differences of
design quality referred to in the Conservation, Design & Landscape Manager's
comments.
Employment Provision, Layout and Design
The employment element of the proposal would be served by an access onto
Yarmouth Road in compliance with the approved Development Brief. The layout of
the buildings within the site is considered acceptable as is their relationship with
nearby residential properties (both existing and proposed). In accordance with the
Development Brief these would be Class B1 employment units and by implication
appropriate within a residential neighbourhood.
The quality of the building designs would be very high incorporating pitched pantile
roofs (even chimneys) and brick / timber clad walls. The proposals resemble a small
high quality business park rather than a more rudimentary light industrial estate.
The Development Brief states that the access to serve the employment land should
be provided as part of a phasing agreement to be secured as part of the grant of
planning permission for housing development of the site. The applicants have
suggested that a section of the access road would be constructed prior to the
occupation of the twentieth dwelling and conditioned as such. The precise amount of
the access proposed to be constructed at this stage is to be clarified. The applicants
state that progression of the employment units will depend on demand. They
suggest a condition requiring submission and approval of a marketing strategy on a
similar timescale.
Open Space and Landscaping
The neighbourhood park which forms an integral part of this proposal represents a
very positive local amenity both for the new housing development and the wider local
Development Committee
23
14 February 2013
community. It would provide a number of beneficial roles. Visually it should be an
attractive area of open space providing an appropriate buffer between the
Conservation Area and the new development. It would provide for recreation
(including an area of children's play equipment). It would also allow safe passage for
pedestrians and cyclists between Ingham Road and Yarmouth Road. In addition it is
proposed to provide an area for surface water drainage (SUDs).
A smaller area of open space is proposed on the eastern perimeter of the site. This
would allow associated landscaping to soften the impact of the development upon
the adjoining open countryside.
A landscape masterplan accompanies the application. The Committee will note that
the Council's Conservation, Design & Landscape Manager is content with the
landscaping approach indicated on the masterplan, subject to full details being a
condition of planning permission.
Linked with these areas of open space is a network of footpaths, including an existing
public right of way along the eastern site boundary. These are all to the benefit of the
overall scheme, but the issue of who will adopt them and at what cost needs to be
resolved.
Highway Capacity and Safety
One of the main local concerns which became apparent both at the consultation
stage of the development brief and from the applicant's own pre-application
consultation related to traffic safety and the capacity of the local road network to
accommodate additional traffic from the development.
The submitted Transport Statement concludes that the development site is well
located to provide good accessibility to local transport facilities and local amenities
and that it will not adversely impact on the existing traffic and transport network.
Proposed off-site highway improvements are limited to nearby the site (as described
in the 'Application' section above).
Although a formal response from the Highway Authority is awaited, there is no
indication that the Authority's view differs from the conclusions of the Transport
Statement.
In terms of details however (particularly in respect of the residential development) the
Highway Authority has raised a considerable number of issues which need to be
addressed. These have been the subject of discussions with the applicants and
amended plans are anticipated.
Drainage
The adequacy of local drainage systems to cope with the additional demands of the
development is another local concern which became apparent during the earlier
public consultation process.
The application proposes to retain and drain all surface water within the site itself.
The submitted flood risk assessment (FRA) indicates that roof run-off would drain to
soakaways (in the case of the dwellings, individually within gardens); parking areas
and private driveways would have a permeable surface (subject to infiltration
testing); run-off from all adopted roads would drain to into a series of swales linked to
an infiltration basin, all within the large area of open space. In other words a
sustainable drainage system (SUDs).
Development Committee
24
14 February 2013
Such a means of drainage relies on the land being suitably permeable to cope with
all rainfall events. The Committee will note that the Environment Agency has raised a
holding objection to the application. The reason for the objection is that the FRA
indicates varied ground infiltration rates across the site. In particular it appears that
the proposed infiltration basin is located on a clay band which has poor porosity. The
suggestion is that the basin would either need to be re-located elsewhere or it would
need to incorporate a positive outfall to a watercourse or surface water sewer.
For this reason (along with certain other technical issues) the Environment Agency
does not consider that the FRA currently adequately addresses the issue of surface
water drainage. This has been brought to the attention of the applicants who it is
understood are in discussions with the Environment Agency.
A requirement of Policy ST01 is that it needs to be demonstrated that there is
adequate capacity to accommodate sewage from the development. There are
connecting sewers in both Ingham Road and Yarmouth Road. These sewers drain to
the local waste water treatment works via a pumping station at Mill Road (close to
Stalham Staithe). Anglian Water has confirmed that both the sewer network and the
treatment works currently have capacity to accommodate the increased flows
resulting from the proposed development.
S.106 Requirements
If planning permission is to be granted for this development, it will need to be subject
to a S.106 Obligation to secure the following:
The provision of the affordable housing (including its phasing and other detailed
requirements)
County Council contributions (to be confirmed, but anticipated to be a payment
just towards libraries and no payment towards education).
A commuted sum to the District Council for adoption of the areas of open space.
A contribution towards minimising increased visitor pressure impacts on the
nearby Broads area, to meet the site allocation policy requirement.
The applicants' solicitors are understood to be progressing a draft version of the
S.106.
Conclusions
The proposed development would have the benefit of bringing forward this significant
mixed use allocation in accordance with the planned growth of the District up to
2021, as specified in the Council' adopted Core Strategy. In addition the proposal
satisfactorily accords with the principles for developing the site as referred to in
Policy ST01 of the Site Allocations DPD as well as the approved Development Brief
for the site. Notable benefits of the scheme include the policy compliant provision of
45% affordable housing and a substantial area of public open space.
Notwithstanding this, there remain a number of issues which still require resolution.
These principally relate to on-site highway issues, design matters, surface water
drainage, precise details relating to the affordable housing, and agreement regarding
the details of a S.106 Obligation. Discussions are continuing regarding these matters
and it is anticipated that amended plans will have been submitted before the
Committee meeting.
Development Committee
25
14 February 2013
RECOMMENDATION:
Members will be updated at the meeting.
5.
APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR A SITE INSPECTION
A site inspection by the Committee is recommended by Officers prior to the
consideration of a full report at a future meeting in respect of the following
applications. The applications will not be debated at this meeting.
Please note that additional site inspections may be recommended by Officers at the
meeting or agreed during consideration of report items on this agenda.
BEESTON REGIS – PF/12/1157 – Retention of partially constructed dwelling
with amendments to design to provide two storey dwelling; Heath Barn,
Britons Lane for Mr T Field.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of the Head of Development Management given the planning history
on the site and in order to expedite the processing of the application.
BLAKENEY – PF/12/1224 – Erection of replacement workshops and change of
use of area of land to domestic garden; Land at Stratton Long Marine,
Westgate Street for Mr P Long.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of the Head of Development Management in order to expedite the
processing of the application.
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA – PF/13/0007 – Erection of 123 dwellings with public
park and open space and associated landscaping, drainage and highway
infrastructure; land off Two Furlong Hill and Market Lane for Hopkins Homes
Ltd and Holkham Estate
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Development Management in order to expedite the
processing of the application and to enable Members to appreciate fully this major
development proposal.
RECOMMENDATION:The Committee is recommended to undertake the above site visits.
6.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
AYLMERTON - PF/12/1091 - Installation of gable-end window and rooflight to
facilitate loft conversion; Durian House, 12A Beechwood Avenue for Mr J
Pitcher
(Householder application)
BACONSTHORPE - PF/12/1263 - Change of use of land from agriculture to 53
units tent-only campsite and formation of vehicular access; Land at Pitt Farm,
The Street for Mr R Youngs
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Committee
26
14 February 2013
BACONSTHORPE - PF/12/1351 - Erection of first floor rear extension; Street
Farm Cottage, The Street for Mr & Mrs M Jackson
(Householder application)
BACTON - PF/12/1230 - Variation of Condition 2 of planning permission
reference; 11/1457 to permit change of roof covering to thatch and revised door
and window arrangements to south gable; Grange Farm, off Pollard Street for
Mr L Bayfield
(Full Planning Permission)
BACTON - LA/12/1298 - Stabilising part collapsed barn by covering of existing
thatch with temporary dark coloured tarpaulin and provision of supports to the
existing structure; Barn at, Church Farm House, Church Road for Norfolk
County Council
(Listed Building Alterations)
BACTON - PF/12/0641 - Change of use of annexe to holiday
accommodation/annexe (retrospective); Annexe to rear of Bacton Hall, Church
Road for Mr D Mace & Ms J Reeves
(Full Planning Permission)
BEESTON REGIS - PF/12/1323 - Removal of bay window and erection of singlestorey front extension; Hollyhock House, Church Close, West Runton for Ms P
Stevens
(Householder application)
BINHAM - PF/12/1248 - Erection of one and a half storey rear extension
including balcony and construction of pitched roof onto existing garage;
Westgate Old Farmhouse, Warham Road for Mr & Mrs R Van Ree
(Householder application)
BLAKENEY - PF/12/1162 - Erection of replacement dwelling; Bliss Blakeney
(formerly Agar House), Morston Road for Bliss
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - LA/12/1284 - Internal alterations and installation of window; 93
High Street for Mr D Burlison
(Listed Building Alterations)
BLAKENEY - PF/12/1391 - Erection of one and a half storey dwelling and
detached garage; Pinewood, Saxlingham Road for Mr & Mrs Cucksey
(Full Planning Permission)
BRISTON - PF/12/0784 - Erection of four flats; Land at Fakenham Road for
Victory Housing Trust
(Full Planning Permission)
BRISTON - PF/12/1324 - Erection of single-storey front extension; Stoney Lodge,
Stone Road for Mr J Morrissey
(Householder application)
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/12/1328 - Alterations to outbuilding including raising
part of roof and introduction of door and steps to gable end; Cley Old Rectory,
Holt Road for Mr & Mrs Blount
(Householder application)
Development Committee
27
14 February 2013
COLBY - NMA1/12/0362 - Non material amendment request to re-position 6
parking spaces and vehicle access; The Crown Inn, Colby Road, Banningham
for Jeanette & Mark Feneron
(Non-Material Amendment Request)
CORPUSTY AND SAXTHORPE - PF/12/1187 - Erection of two-storey extension to
annexe; Meada View, Heydon Road for Mr J C Middleton
(Householder application)
CORPUSTY AND SAXTHORPE - PF/12/1348 - Erection of car port; The Old
Bakehouse, Post Office Lane, Saxthorpe for Mr Welch
(Householder application)
CROMER - PF/12/1320 - Change of use of ground floor from A1 (retail) to
ancillary residential accommodation; 11 Bond Street for Mr & Mrs J Howard
(Full Planning Permission)
CROMER - PF/12/1292 - Erection of first floor side extension; 13 High View Park
for Mr & Mrs J Amies
(Householder application)
CROMER - PF/12/1345 - Change of use from B8 (warehouse) to B2 (general
industrial); Beer Seller, Stonehill Way, Holt Road for Jonas Seafoods Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
EDGEFIELD - PF/12/1237 - Erection of two-storey side/front extension;
Stonebanks, The Green for Mr R Keighley
(Householder application)
ERPINGHAM - PF/12/1282 - Erection of replacement reception/shower block and
formation of five additional touring caravan/camping pitches; Little Haven
Caravan Park, The Street for M & JE Attew and Son
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - NMA2/12/0543 - Non material amendment request alterations to
fenestration to front elevation of plot 1 and insertion of photovoltaic panels to
rear roof slopes of plots 1 and 3; 204 Norwich Road, for GCMD Developments
Ltd
(Non-Material Amendment Request)
FAKENHAM - PF/12/1267 - Erection of two-storey rear extension and
conservatory; 46 Queens Road for Mr D Wells
(Householder application)
FAKENHAM - PF/12/1302 - Erection of single-storey side extension; 32A Hayes
Lane for Mr J Edwards
(Householder application)
FAKENHAM - PF/12/1316 - Erection of two-storey dwelling (revised design); 204
Norwich Road for Mr & Mrs J Murfit
(Full Planning Permission)
HAPPISBURGH - PF/12/1354 - Change of use of land from agricultural to playing
field; Land adjacent car park, Beach Road for Happisburgh Parish Council
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Committee
28
14 February 2013
HAPPISBURGH - PF/12/1293 - Erection of two-storey side extension and front
porch; Gordon House, Whimpwell Street for Mr C Nield
(Householder application)
HEMPTON - PF/12/1079 - Erection of buildings to house anaerobic digester plant
and formation of vehicular access; Land rear of Hempton Poultry Farm,
Helhoughton Road for Raynham Farms Co (AD) Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
HICKLING - PF/12/1297 - Continued use as residential/childminding facility;
Wakeby, The Green for Ms L Lawson
(Full Planning Permission)
HICKLING - PF/12/1262 - Erection of side extension; 17 Mill Close for Mr M
Hubbard & Ms A Clarke
(Householder application)
HINDOLVESTON - PF/12/0789 - Erection of double garage with storage above;
Foxboro House, 85 The Street for Mr P Vardigans
(Householder application)
HINDRINGHAM - PF/12/1366 - Variation of Condition 4 of planning permission
reference; 02/0434 to permit permanent residential occupation; 7 Hindringham
High Barns, Blakeney Road for Mr N Tilley
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - NMA1/12/0646 - Non material amendment request to revise ground floor
windows and French doors; Site adjacent to Hunters Lodge, Grove Lane for Mrs
Willimott
(Non-Material Amendment Request)
HOLT - PF/12/1342 - Erection of 2.8m screen fence; 31A New Street for Mr & Mrs
Grinlinton
(Householder application)
HOLT - PA/12/1387 - Prior notification of intention to erect telecommunications
cabinet; Land adjacent 1 White Lion Street for Openreach
(Prior Approval (Telecommunications))
HOLT - PF/12/1207 - Continued use of former A1 (retail shop) as A2 (financial
and professional services); 18 High Street for Mr A Pointen
(Full Planning Permission)
HORNING - PF/12/1201 - Change of use of traditional agricultural buildings to
form one residential dwelling and formation of new vehicular access and
driveway.; Tithe Barn, Norwich Road for Church Commissioners for England
(Full Planning Permission)
HOVETON - PF/12/1115 - Retention of summerhouse; 135 Stalham Road for Mrs
J Dixon
(Householder application)
HOVETON - NMA2/11/1364 - Non material amendment request to increase length
of garage to the rear and revise door and window arrangements; 24 Waveney
Drive for Mr Hunt
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
Development Committee
29
14 February 2013
INGHAM - PF/12/1021 - Variation of Condition 10 of planning permission
reference: 06/0699 to permit permanent residential occupation; Holly Farm,
Calthorpe Street for Mr A Bettis
(Full Planning Permission)
INGWORTH - PF/12/1111 - Erection of two-storey/single-storey side extension;
The Cottage, The Street for Mrs R Craddock
(Householder application)
KELLING - PF/12/1198 - Construction of menage; Land at Holt Road for Kelling
Estate
(Full Planning Permission)
LANGHAM - PF/12/1073 - Erection of one and a half-storey side extension and
construction of new roof to front porch; The Forge, North Street for Mr & Mrs
Goff
(Householder application)
LESSINGHAM - NMA1/10/0241 - Non material amendment request for rendered
finish to extension; 2 Chapel Cottages, Chapel Lane for Miss Thompson
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
LITTLE SNORING - PF/12/1271 - Erection of single-storey side extension and
construction of pitched roof to garden room; 7 Thursford Road for Edward
Boustead & Co
(Householder application)
LUDHAM - PF/12/1242 - Variation of Condition 2 of planning permission
reference: 12/0792 to permit revised window and door arrangements, revisions
to car port roof, extension roof and entrance canopy and re-siting of oil tank;
High Mill Hill Cott, High Mill Hill, Yarmouth Road for Miss I Sale
(Full Planning Permission)
MATLASKE - PF/12/1343 - Installation of air source heat pump; 19 The Street for
Miss G Rodwell
(Householder application)
MUNDESLEY - PF/12/1131 - Conversion and extension of A1 (retail shop &
gallery) and flat to one residential dwelling; 38 /38a High Street for Mrs S
Wallace & Ms J M Rumens
(Full Planning Permission)
NEATISHEAD - PF/12/1336 - Erection of two-storey side extension and porch; 6
School Road for Mr J P Williams
(Householder application)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/12/1136 - Erection of single-storey rear extensions; 12
Spenser Avenue for Mr & Mrs Croft
(Householder application)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/12/1278 - Formation of vehicular access; The Cottage,
1A Grammar School Road for Mr S Marshall
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Committee
30
14 February 2013
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/12/1235 - Conversion of first and second floors to four
residential flats including installation of front and side dormer windows and
side gable windows; 7 St Nicholas Court, Vicarage Street for Mr & Mrs L
Bullimore
(Full Planning Permission)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/12/0932 - Change of Use from a mixed use of A1
(hairdressing salon)/C3 (residential) to C3 (residential); 21 Station Road for Mr &
Mrs N Dyke
(Full Planning Permission)
NORTH WALSHAM - LE/12/1300 - Demolition of front boundary wall; The
Cottage, 1A Grammar School Road for Mr S Marshall
(Conservation Area Demolition)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/12/1344 - Erection of cart shed garage; The Old Forge,
45 Manor Road, White Horse Common for Mr & Mrs Cohen
(Householder application)
OVERSTRAND - PF/12/1353 - Erection of single-storey side/rear extension; 25
High Street for Mr I Dyer
(Householder application)
OVERSTRAND - PF/12/1287 - Retention of meter housing building; 14 High
Street for Mrs C M Sewell
(Householder application)
PASTON - PF/12/1349 - Erection of 4m high jet fire protection wall;
Interconnector Compressor Site, Paston Road for Interconnector (UK) Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
PASTON - LA/12/1241 - Alterations to Coach House to facilitate conversion to
residential accommodation; The Coach House, Green Farm, The Green for T
Purdy Ltd
(Listed Building Alterations)
POTTER HEIGHAM - PF/12/1269 - Erection of single-storey side/front extension
to provide annexe; Orwell Cottage, School Road for Mr A Windscheffel
(Householder application)
ROUGHTON - AI/12/1422 - Display of illuminated advertisement; Mc Colls
Service Station, Norwich Road for Cardpoint Services Ltd
(Advertisement Illuminated)
ROUGHTON - PF/12/1421 - Installation of ATM; McColls Service Station, Norwich
Road for Cardpoint Services Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
RYBURGH - LA/12/1288 - Installation of replacement front door; Three Penny
Cottage, 25 Station Road, Great Ryburgh for Countryliving
(Listed Building Alterations)
SCULTHORPE - PF/12/0974 - Erection of two-storey rear extension with
basement below and installation of air source heat pump; Cranmer Lodge,
Creake Road, Cranmer for Miss S Mullins
(Householder application)
Development Committee
31
14 February 2013
SEA PALLING - AN/12/1041 - Continued display of non-illuminated
advertisement; Beach Rock Leisure, Ocean Parade, Beach Road for Mr G Deary
(Advertisement Non-Illuminated)
SEA PALLING - PF/12/1042 - Retention of rear extension; Beach Rock Cafe,
Beach Road for Mr G Deary
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - NMA2/12/0367 - Non material amendment request to replace
glazing to side extension roof to rooflights, pantiles and brickwork gables and
parapets; 2 Morris Street for Mr S Watts
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
SHERINGHAM - PF/12/1210 - Change of use from A4 (social club) and A1 (retail
unit) to D1 (place of worship); Sheringham Social Club, Holway Road for New
Wine Church
(Full Planning Permission)
SKEYTON - PF/12/1245 - Construction of replacement roof (increased height)
and single-storey front extension; The Bungalow, Norwich Road for Mr & Mrs
Watson
(Householder application)
STIFFKEY - LA/12/1383 - Enlargement of window, formation of internal doorway
and installation of rear gable window; 13 Bridge Street for Ms F Sparrow
(Listed Building Alterations)
SUTTON - PF/12/1104 - Variation of Condition 2 of planning permission
reference: 11/1560 to permit retention of extended garage/shed; installation of
replacement personnel door and shutters to rear windows; Broads Haven, The
Street for Mr & Mrs G Buntan
(Householder application)
SUTTON - PF/12/1325 - Erection of single-storey front extension and installation
of side gable window; 2 Elmhurst Avenue for Mr R Cator
(Householder application)
SUTTON - PF/12/1326 - Erection of single-storey front extension; 4 Elmhurst
Avenue for Mr P McGough
(Householder application)
SWAFIELD - PF/12/1327 - Erection of single-storey side/rear extension and first
floor rear dormer extension; 5 The Street for Mr & Mrs J Amies
(Householder application)
THORPE MARKET - LA/12/0654 - Installation of replacement windows,
replacement of blockwork wall with studwork wall and repairs to first floor
structure; Green House, Cromer Road for Mr A Stewart
(Listed Building Alterations)
TRIMINGHAM - PF/12/1294 - Erection of replacement double garage with flue for
biomass boiler; Cliff House, Mundesley Road for Mrs J Reeve-Webster
(Householder application)
Development Committee
32
14 February 2013
TRUNCH - PF/12/1257 - Installation of two rooflights; Rookery Farm Barn,
Mundesley Road for Mr J Machell
(Householder application)
WALSINGHAM - AI/12/1205 - Display of non-illuminated advertisement;
Windfarm Place, 1 Edgar Road for Scira Offshore Energy Limited
(Advertisement Illuminated)
WARHAM - PF/12/1295 - Erection of cart lodge with storage above; Hill House,
Wighton Road for Mrs B Corbett
(Householder application)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/12/1291 - Change of use from A1 (retail) to A2
(financial and professional services); Westwood Heath, 67 Staithe Street for
Norfolk Hideaways Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/12/1027 - Re-roofing of gantry; 12 The Granary, The
Quay for O M Property Management
(Householder application)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/12/1373 - Conversion of courtyard buildings to
bedroom accommodation; Globe Inn, The Buttlands for Holkham Estate
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - LA/12/1374 - Alterations to courtyard buildings to
facilitate conversion to bedroom accommodation; Globe Inn, The Buttlands for
Holkham Estate
(Listed Building Alterations)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - LA/12/1356 - Internal alterations to convert pantry to
shower room and form opening between kitchen and dining room; Brig Villa, 56
Freeman Street for Mr & Mrs S de Loynes
(Listed Building Alterations)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - LA/12/1357 - Installation of replacement windows; The
Barn, Church Street for Mrs L Pattrick
(Listed Building Alterations)
WIGHTON - PF/12/1409 - Erection of single storey vehicle store; Environment
Agency Egmere Depot, Bunkers Hill, Egmere for Environment Agency
(Full Planning Permission)
WORSTEAD - LA/12/1331 - Erection of extension to terrace and raising of
restaurant extension roof (retrospective); The White Lady, Front Street for Mr D
Gilligan
(Listed Building Alterations)
WORSTEAD - PF/12/1261 - Erection of car-port/garage extension to store;
Ockley House, Meeting Hill Road, Meeting Hill for Mr & Mrs Bird
(Householder application)
WORSTEAD - NMA1/12/0804 - Non material amendment request for change of
roof from double mono to duo pitch to extension; Grange Farm House,
Yarmouth Road for Mr & Mrs Stephen
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
Development Committee
33
14 February 2013
7.
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
WITTON - PF/12/1309 - Erection of detached garage with games room above;
Stonebridge Cottage, 1 Stonebridge Road for Mr R Haughton
(Householder application)
WORSTEAD - PF/12/1330 - Retention of extension to terrace, installation of
steps and raise height of restaurant extension roof; The White Lady, Front
Street for Mr D Gilligan
(Full Planning Permission)
APPEALS SECTION
8.
NEW APPEALS
BEESTON REGIS - PF/12/0387 - Variation of Condition 6 of planning permission
reference: 06/1783 to permit use of chapel of rest/office building for a mixed use
of chapel of rest/office/overnight sleeping accommodation; Abbey Pets
Remembrance Gardens And Crematoria Ltd, Britons Lane for Mr R Edwards
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS
LETHERINGSETT WITH GLANDFORD - PF/12/1018 - Erection of single-storey
rear extension; High Barn, Riverside Road for Mr S Futter
FAST TRACK - HOUSEHOLDER
9.
PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS – PROGRESS
BODHAM - PF/11/0983 - Erection of wind turbine maximum hub height 60m,
maximum tip height 86.5m, associated infrastructure, single-storey substation
building, access tracks and crane hard-standing; Land at Pond Farm for
Genatec Ltd
INFORMAL HEARING 29 January 2013
10.
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - IN HAND
BLAKENEY - PF/12/0094 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; Land off The Quay,
Mariners Hill for Mr & Mrs B Pope
BRISTON - PF/12/0449 - Erection of single-storey dwelling and detached
garage/store; The Lawsons, Stone Road for Mrs M Daniels
HORNING - BA/PF/12/0164 - Replacement dwelling with erection of new
boathouse and creation of a new lagoon with quay heading and boardwalk;
Broadmead, Ferry View Estate for Horning Pleasurecraft Ltd
ROUGHTON - PO/12/0118 - Erection of dwelling with loose boxes and tack
room; Sandyacre, Norwich Road for Mrs D Pritchard
SEA PALLING - PF/11/1398 - Continued use of land for siting mobile holiday
home and retention of septic tank; Mealuca, The Marrams for Mr R Contessa
Development Committee
34
14 February 2013
SWAFIELD - PO/12/0729 - Erection of residential dwelling or business building
(B8 (storage)/B1 (office)/D1 (art gallery)); Land adjacent Tasty Tavern Meats, The
Street for Lord Watts
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/12/0902 - Erection of two two-storey dwellings; 21
Mill Road for Alameda Ltd
WITTON - PF/12/0434 - Variation of condition 2 of planning permission reference
05/0820 to permit permanent residential occupation; The Barn, Happisburgh
Road, Ridlington for Mr R Ward
SEA PALLING - ENF/11/0084 - Installation of Septic Tank on Unoccupied Land
and installation of mobile home; Land at The Marrams
11.
APPEAL DECISIONS
No items
Development Committee
35
14 February 2013