14 JANUARY 2010
Minutes of a meeting of the DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE held in the Council
Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 9.30 am when there were present:
Councillors
H C Cordeaux (Chairman for Minutes (1) to (4) and (7))
Mrs C M Wilkins (Chairman for Minutes (5), (6) and (8) to (25))
S J Partridge (Vice-Chairman (East))
J A Wyatt (Vice-Chairman (West))
Mrs S A Arnold
B Cabbell Manners
Miss P E Ford
Mrs A R Green
P W High
J H Perry-Warnes
J D Savory
Mrs M Seward
Miss C P Sheridan
B Smith
Mrs A C Sweeney
Mrs L Walker
Mrs G M D Lisher - substitute for S C Mears
Mrs A M Tillett - substitute for P J Willcox
Mrs H T Nelson - Sheringham South Ward
Officers
Mr S Oxenham - Head of Planning and Building Control
Mr G Lyon - Acting Development Control Manager (West)
Mr J Williams - Development Control Manager (East)
Mr R Howe - Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager
Mr G Linder - Senior Planning Officer (West)
Miss J Medler - Senior Planning Officer (West)
Mrs K Steventon - Enforcement Officer (West)
Mr S Case - Landscape Officer
Mr D Mortimer - Development Control Officer (NCC Highways)
(1)
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND DETAILS OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors M J M Baker, S C Mears, Mrs
B McGoun and P J Willcox. There were two substitute Members in attendance as
shown above.
(2)
MINUTES
The Minutes of a meeting of the Development Control Committee (West) held on 10
December 2009 and of a meeting of the Development Control Committee (East) held
on 23 December 2009 were approved as a correct record and signed by the
Chairman.
(3)
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
The Chairman stated that there was one item of urgent business which he wished to
bring before the Committee under private business, relating to an enforcement matter
at Mundesley, reference 01/071/DEV6/07/005. The reason for urgency was to seek
the Committee’s views on future legal action.
Development Control Committee
1
14 January 2010
(4)
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors B Cabbell Manners, H C Cordeaux, J H Perry-Warnes, Mrs A M Tillett
and Mrs L Walker declared interests, the details of which are given under the minute
of the item concerned.
(5)
Amendments To Planning Permissions
The Committee considered item 1 of the officers’ reports outlining changes to dealing
with amendments to planning permissions.
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins asked if amendments to applications which had been
through the Committee process would be dealt with under this scheme.
The Head of Planning and Building Control explained that if an issue had been
identified by the Committee as being significant, amendments would not be treated
as non-material.
It was proposed by Councillor S J Partridge, seconded by Councillor J A Wyatt and
RESOLVED unanimously
That the revised practice note on pre- and post-decision amendments to
planning applications be endorsed.
(6)
SHERINGHAM – PF/09/0861 – Erection of single-storey dwelling: 18 Hadley
Road for Mr Welch
The Committee considered item 2 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mrs Welch (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer read to the Committee the comments of Councillor Mrs J
P Moss, a local Member, in support of this application. Councillor Mrs Moss
considered that the plot was sufficiently large to accommodate a second dwelling.
She had stated that here was an alternative exit onto The Rise which was quiet with
little traffic and urged the Committee to take a proportionate view of the traffic impact.
She considered that the trees on the site were unremarkable and that a condition
should be imposed to require the planting of quality trees and shrubs to provide
screening.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson, a local Member, stated that this application was
supported by all Sheringham Members and the neighbour. She stated that vehicles
could exit onto The Rise and the visibility onto Common Lane would be helped if the
hedge was cut back. She requested approval of this application.
The Development Control Officer (Highways) explained his objection to this
application on highway safety grounds. He emphasised the strength of that
objection.
Development Control Committee
2
14 January 2010
Councillor H C Cordeaux referred to the highway safety issues. He considered that
whilst most people would exit via The Rise there would always be some who would
attempt to exit via Common Lane which was very dangerous. He considered that
cutting back the hedge at the junction with Common Lane would make little
difference to visibility at the junction.
Councillor B Cabbell Manners referred to the number of times this application had
been debated and supported. He proposed approval in accordance with the
recommendation of the Development Control Committee (West). This was seconded
by Councillor S J Partridge.
Councillor Miss C P Sheridan asked if this Authority could be held liable in the event
of an accident given the strength of the Highway Authority’s objection.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager advised the Committee that in his
opinion it was unlikely that the Common Lane junction would be used. Common
Lane did not have a bad accident record. Whilst accidents could have various
causes he could not guarantee that an accident would not be attributed to this
development.
Councillor Miss Sheridan stated that she supported this application based on the
views of local Members and as it was for one dwelling only.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson suggested that a one-way system could be introduced on
Hadley Road or speed limits reduced to 20 mph. She stated that there were similar
problems throughout Sheringham and if refused there would be difficulty building
anything in the town.
The Acting Development Control Manager stated that the question of a one-way
system had been considered previously. Whilst it might be possible to introduce a
one-way system it was not a matter for the planning process, Hadley Road is a
private road and there could be issues regarding its enforcement. The current
application related to a lesser number of dwellings than the previous application and
there was a need for the Committee to weigh up the issues for and against.
Councillor Miss P E Ford suggested that residents could erect ‘no exit’ signs as
Hadley Road was unadopted.
The Chairman suggested that Councillor Mrs Nelson raise the issue of a one-way
system with the County Council.
Councillor Cabbell Manners considered that an arboricultural assessment would not
be necessary.
RESOLVED by 12 votes to 0 with 3 abstentions
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions, including landscaping and installation of the car
turntable prior to the first occupation of the dwelling.
Development Control Committee
3
14 January 2010
(7)
NORTH WALSHAM (EAST WARD) - NNDC (North Walsham) 2009 No. 8
The Committee considered item 3 of the officers’ reports in respect of a Tree
Preservation Order to protect two Beech trees at the above site.
Public Speaker
Wendy Thorpe (objecting)
In answer to Members’ questions, the Landscape Officer explained that the existing
cast iron drains would have cracked prior to root invasion, therefore any damage
would be secondary. The tree roots would not cause damage to modern drainage
pipes. Appropriate tree management would minimise the impact on the dwelling. He
explained that because of previous management of the trees in question their
branches were small and the trees were not likely to fall.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs M Seward, seconded by Councillor Mrs C M
Wilkins and
RESOLVED by 13 votes to 0 with 3 abstentions
That Tree Preservation Order (North Walsham) 2009 No. 8 100 Cromer
Road be confirmed.
(8)
BODHAM - ENF/06/0020 - Change of Use of Agricultural Land for the Siting of
Caravans for Residential Purposes; Land off Hart Lane, Bodham
Councillors H C Cordeaux and J H Perry-Warnes declared a personal interest in this
matter as they had visited Franklin’s Farmhouse the previous day.
During the course of discussion, Councillor B Cabbell Manners became aware that
he had a prejudicial interest in this matter as he was the landowner of the temporary
stopping place at Cromer to which reference was made during consideration of this
matter. He vacated the Council Chamber during consideration of this matter.
The Committee considered item 4 of the officers’ reports in respect of an existing
enforcement case.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager drew attention to the Inspector’s
report and, in particular, the comments regarding Mr Drake’s gypsy status. He stated
that the conclusion of paragraph 4 of the Inspector’s report had been challenged by
an objector’s Solicitor. He outlined the main issues raised in the report.
Photographs were displayed which had been taken by the Enforcement Officer and
an objector. The Enforcement Officer explained which items shown on the objector’s
photographs were owned by Mr Drake.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager reported that he had had a meeting
with an objector and his Solicitor, who were unhappy with the approach taken in this
case and the recommendation in the report. He reported the contents of a letter that
had been received from the objector’s Solicitor which challenged the structure and
context of the report and its recommendation, in particular the caveats attached to
the recommendation which could delay any action. The letter also stated that Mr
Drake’s gypsy status had not been challenged by the District Council during the
appeal process. The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager explained that the
Development Control Committee
4
14 January 2010
County Council’s Gypsy Liaison Officer had been present and had been aware of Mr
Drake’s status. The letter also referred to Mr Drake’s ownership of the land and
established business and had challenged whether someone with such a settled way
of life had a right to claim the planning benefits afforded by gypsy status. The
Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager stated that in his opinion there was no
reason to challenge Mr Drake’s gypsy status but acknowledged that the objector held
an alternative view. The letter also raised issues regarding highway matters,
character of the area and lack of consideration given by the Inspector to the impact
on private landowners.
With regard to the suggested use of the Council’s temporary stopping places for
gypsies and travellers at Cromer and Fakenham, the Planning Legal and
Enforcement Manager explained that these sites were not designed to offer
permanent accommodation and did not meet the criteria for permanent sites. The
Cromer site was subject to a covenant which prevented its use for permanent
accommodation. Mr Drake would be allowed to occupy the site for a maximum of
three months, would be required to contribute towards costs and would not be
allowed to run his business from the site. The Planning Legal and Enforcement
Manager considered that there was no available option to relocate Mr Drake to one
of the temporary sites.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, the local Member, considered that enforcement should
be carried out immediately. He considered that the Council had been too lenient in
the past and had allowed the site to become established. He stated that the area
had high landscape value and was within close proximity to the source of the River
Glaven. He considered that the hedge should not be removed as it would negate the
Inspector’s reasons for refusal. He referred to a recent meeting at which it was made
clear that local residents found the situation unacceptable. He proposed that criminal
proceedings be commenced and that Mr Drake be moved to the short-stay stopping
place at Cromer.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager reiterated the temporary nature of the
short-stay site and the inability to run a business from the site which could raise
issues for Mr Drake. He stated that when he was required to leave Mr Drake may
return to Bodham or live on the roadside.
Councillor Miss C P Sheridan stated that she did not dispute that Mr Drake was in
breach of planning control and considered that the report was balanced and fair. She
considered that there was an issue as to where Mr Drake could be relocated. She
considered that criminalisation of a member of the travelling community would not
secure compliance. She supported the officer’s recommendation provided that a
very strong invitation was issued to Mr Drake to apply for planning permission with
the assistance of the Planning Inspectorate’s mediation service for travellers.
At this point, Councillor B Cabbell Manners sought the advice of the Planning Legal
and Enforcement Manager with regard to his interest as the landowner of the
temporary stopping place at Cromer. On receiving advice he declared a prejudicial
interest and withdrew from the meeting.
It was proposed by Councillor S J Partridge, seconded by Councillor J A Wyatt
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to commence
criminal proceedings pursuant to Section 179 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990 as amended for non-compliance with the Enforcement
Notice and also to apply for an injunction under Section 187 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.
Development Control Committee
5
14 January 2010
As an amendment, it was proposed by Councillor Miss C P Sheridan, seconded by
Councillor Miss P E Ford
1. That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
commence criminal proceedings pursuant to Section 179 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990 as amended for non-compliance with the
Enforcement Notice and also to apply for an injunction under Section 187
of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended, in the event
that:
1) A planning application for the retention of the mobile home is not
received within 28 days from the owner being notified of the resolution
of this Committee.
2) In the event that any such application is refused the mobile home is not
removed within three months of the date of refusal or the date of
dismissal of any subsequent appeal.
2. That the Planning Inspectorate be contacted in respect of its mediation
service for travellers to assist Mr Drake with the submission of a planning
application.
Councillor Mrs S A Arnold expressed concern that the use of the mediation service
would give Mr Drake the expectation that a planning application would be approved.
On being put to the vote the amendment was declared lost with 6 Members voting in
favour and 9 against with 1 abstention.
The original proposition was put to the vote and
RESOLVED by 9 votes to 4 with 3 abstentions
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
commence criminal proceedings pursuant to Section 179 of the Town
and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended for non-compliance with the
Enforcement Notice and also to apply for an injunction under Section
187 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.
(9)
BODHAM - ENF/05/0036 - Stationing of caravans, a boat and depositing other
materials on agricultural land; Windrush Farm, Hart Lane, Bodham
The Committee considered item 5 of the officers’ reports in respect of an existing
enforcement case.
It was proposed by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, seconded by Councillor H C
Cordeaux and
RESOLVED
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
commence criminal proceedings pursuant to Section 179 of the Town
and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended for non-compliance with the
Enforcement Notices and also to apply for an injunction under Section
187 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended in the
event that:
Development Control Committee
6
14 January 2010
1) The site is not cleared of all materials and vehicles not necessary for
the agricultural use of the land by 31 January 2010.
2) The mobile home and chicken shed continue to be stored on the
land when no longer required for the agricultural use of the land.
One Member abstained from voting on this matter.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Where appropriate the Planning Officers expanded on the planning applications;
updated the meeting on outstanding consultations, letters/petitions received objecting
to, or supporting the proposals; referred to any views of local Members and answered
Members’ questions.
Background papers, including correspondence, petitions, consultation documents,
letters of objection and those in support of planning applications were available for
inspection at the meeting.
Having regard to the above information and the report of the Head of Planning and
Building Control, the Committee reached the decisions as set out below.
Applications approved include a standard time limit condition as condition number 1
unless otherwise stated.
(10)
BEESTON REGIS - PF/09/1022 - Erection of Single-Storey Dwelling with Cellar
Beneath; Land adjacent Heath Barn, Britons Lane, Beeston Regis for Mr T Field
The Committee considered item 6 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Mr Beckley (Beeston Regis Parish Council)
Mr Richardson (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported the contents of a letter that had been received
from the applicant’s new agent, which had also been sent to Development Control
Committee (West) Members. The agent had requested deferral of this matter to
allow discussions to take place in respect of a new application to include the
basement as an addition to the approved bungalow. The Senior Planning Officer
recommended refusal of this application as stated in the report.
Councillor Mrs A C Sweeney, the local Member, considered that this proposal would
result in a massive building. She considered that this application should be refused
or a pitched roof be erected on the structure as built.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes stated that the applicant was known to him. He referred
to the environmental benefits of the materials that had been used but considered that
they were garish. He considered that screening should be included in any further
application.
Members expressed concern that this structure had not been erected in accordance
with planning permission.
Development Control Committee
7
14 January 2010
It was proposed by Councillor S J Partridge, seconded by Councillor J A Wyatt and
RESOLVED by 15 votes to 0 with 2 abstentions
That this application be refused in accordance with the recommendation
of the Head of Planning and Building Control.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager recommended that the Head of
Planning and Building Control be authorised to commence enforcement action in
respect of the unauthorised structure on grounds to accord with the decision notice.
RESOLVED by 15 votes to 0 with 2 abstentions
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
commence enforcement proceedings relating to the unauthorised
structure for the same reasons as the refusal of the planning application
with the period for compliance to be six months from the effective date
of the Enforcement Notice.
(11)
BLAKENEY - PM/09/1180 - Erection of three dwellings; Land at 59 New Road
Blakeney for Novus Homes (Norfolk) Ltd
The Committee considered item 7 of the officers’ reports.
The Senior Planning Officer reported that plot 3 had been removed from the
application following concerns by the occupier of Byways regarding the relationship
with that property. A landscaping scheme had been submitted.
The Senior Planning Officer reported that Blakeney Parish Council had no objection
to this application, but had expressed a preference for flint. A further letter of
objection had been received from the neighbour to the north reiterating concerns
regarding overlooking. Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, the local Member, supported the
amended application.
The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval of this application as amended
to include plots 1, 2 and 4 only and subject to the Landscape Officer being satisfied
with the landscaping scheme.
It was proposed by Councillor H C Cordeaux, seconded by Councillor Miss C P
Sheridan and
RESOLVED unanimously
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application as amended to include plots 1, 2 and 4 only and
subject to the Landscape Officer being satisfied with the landscaping
scheme.
Development Control Committee
8
14 January 2010
(12)
EDGEFIELD - PF/09/0926 - Continued Use of Former Agricultural Buildings for
Storage of Vehicles and Vehicle Parts; Street Farm, Ramsgate Street, Edgefield
for Mr T Travers
Councillor Mrs L Walker declared a personal interest in this application as she was
acquainted with the applicant.
Councillor Mrs A M Tillett declared a personal interest in this application as she knew
the applicant slightly.
The Committee considered item 8 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Travers (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer requested an amendment to the recommendation to
clarify that the intention was to prevent collection of vehicles by customers.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, the local Member, stated that he supported this
application subject to no outside parking of vehicles.
It was proposed by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, seconded by Councillor Miss C P
Sheridan and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions, including those preventing repair or
maintenance of vehicles and collection by customers of vehicles for
hire direct from the site and no outside storage of vehicles.
(13)
HEMPSTEAD - PF/09/1021 - Erection of Single-Storey Rear Extension and
Detached Garage with Accommodation in Roof Space; 5 Marlpit Cottages,
Marlpit Lane, Hempstead for Mr B Hannah
The Head of Planning and Building Control declared that he knew the applicant but
had not discussed the application with him.
The Chairman stated that the applicant was the son of Councillor B J Hannah.
The Committee considered item 9 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mrs Hannah (supporting)
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, the local Member, supported this application.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs L Walker, seconded by Councillor Miss C P
Sheridan and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
Development Control Committee
9
14 January 2010
(14)
SHERINGHAM - PF/09/1105 - Erection of Single-storey Dwelling with
Accommodation in Roofspace; Land at 7 Norfolk Road Sheringham for F W
Smith (Builders) Ltd
The Committee considered item 10 of the officers’ reports.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson, a local Member, reported the comments of Councillor Mrs
J P Moss, also a local Member. Councillor Mrs Moss had stated that this was one of
the few remaining green areas in the town. She considered that the proposal would
spoil the character of the area and could lead to further requests to build on similar
plots. Councillor Mrs Nelson concurred with her views and requested a site
inspection.
Councillor H C Cordeaux proposed a site inspection which was seconded by
Councillor J A Wyatt.
As an amendment, Councillor S J Partridge proposed approval of this application in
accordance with the officer’s recommendation, which was seconded by Councillor B
Cabbell Manners.
On being put to the vote, the amendment was declared lost with 4 Members voting in
favour and 8 against.
RESOLVED by 11 votes to 1
That consideration of this application be deferred to allow an inspection
of the site by the Committee and that the local Members and Town
Mayor be invited to attend.
(15)
SHERINGHAM - PF/09/1140 - Conversion of A1 (Retail Shop) to Two-Storey
Dwelling; 22, Station Road, Sheringham for Museum Cottages
The Committee considered item 11 of the officers’ reports.
The Senior Planning Officer read to the Committee the comments of Councillor Mrs P
Bevan Jones, a local Member, who had raised concerns in respect of overlooking,
loss of light to a neighbouring garden, bin storage and damage to a tree. She had
requested a site inspection.
The Acting Development Control Manager stated that the tree was protected
because of its location within the Conservation Area and did not have a Tree
Preservation Order.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson, Member for Sheringham South Ward, supported the
Town Council’s objection and expressed concerns regarding overdevelopment,
impact on the tree and bin storage. She supported the request for a site inspection.
Councillor H C Cordeaux requested that an allegation regarding the removal of a tree
branch be investigated. He considered that the design was unacceptable in a
Conservation Area.
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins requested that a Tree Preservation Order be served on
the Tree of Heaven.
Councillor H C Cordeaux proposed a site inspection.
Development Control Committee
10
14 January 2010
It was proposed by Councillor B Cabbell Manners, duly seconded and
RESOLVED by 12 votes to 1
That this application be refused on grounds that the proposal would
have an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring dwellings by
reason of overlooking.
(16)
SUSTEAD - PF/09/0974 - Erection of Agricultural Storage Building; Farm
Buildings Adjacent Manor House, New Road, Bessingham for Mr I Clark
SUSTEAD - PF/09/1008 - Extension and Alteration to Agricultural Building;
Farm Buildings Adjacent Manor House, New Road, Bessingham for Mr I Clark
These applications had been withdrawn. The Senior Planning Officer informed the
Committee that following the recent site inspection the applicant had decided to
redesign the agricultural storage building. A further report would be submitted to the
Committee in respect of the unauthorised works to the existing building.
(17)
APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR A SITE INSPECTION
The Committee noted item 14 of the officers’ reports.
RESOLVED
That a site inspection be arranged in respect of the following application
and that the local Member and Chairman of the Parish Council be
invited to attend:
FIELD DALLING – PF/09/1155 – Erection of Eight Dwellings on Land off
Holt Road for Victory Housing Trust
(18)
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 15 of the officers’ reports.
(19)
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 16 of the officers’ reports.
(20)
NEW APPEALS
The Committee noted item 17 of the officers’ reports.
(21)
PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 18 of the officers’ reports.
(22)
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 19 of the officers’ reports.
(23)
APPEAL DECISIONS
The Committee noted item 20 of the officers’ reports.
Development Control Committee
11
14 January 2010
(24)
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
RESOLVED
That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press
and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of
business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of
exempt information as defined in paragraph 6 of Part I of Schedule 12A
(as amended) to the Act.
(25)
MUNDESLEY - 01/071/DEV6/07/005 – 32 High Street
The Chairman stated that she had determined that this item be considered as a
matter of urgency pursuant to the powers vested in her by Section 100B(4)(b) of the
Local Government Act 1972.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager explained the background to this
case. He stated that the previous owner was technically in breach of the
Enforcement Notice and that a prosecution had been commenced. However, he no
longer had an interest in the property and given the circumstances of the case it was
not, in his opinion, expedient to proceed with the prosecution. The unauthorised flue
had been removed by the current owners of the property.
It was proposed by Councillor B Smith, duly seconded and
RESOLVED
That prosecution proceedings be discontinued in this case as it is not
considered expedient to pursue this matter.
The meeting closed at 1.05 pm.
Development Control Committee
12
14 January 2010