OFFICERS’ REPORTS TO
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE – 15 SEPTEMBER 2011
Each report for decision on this Agenda shows the Officer responsible, the recommendation
of the Head of Planning and Building Control 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.
BRISTON - PF/11/0373 - Erection of agricultural contractors storage and
maintenance building; Land off Tithe Barn Lane for Mr C Nutkins
Minor Development
- Target Date: 06 July 2011
Case Officer: Miss J Medler
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
PLA/20010971 PF - Continued use of agricultural land as agricultural contractor's
storage yard
Refused 31/08/2001
Appeal Dismissed 15/04/2002
THE APPLICATION
Is seeking permission for the erection of an agricultural contractor’s storage and
maintenance building.
The proposed building would measure approximately 12m x 18m and 7m to the
ridge. The walls of the building would be constructed in concrete blockwork for the
first 2.5m above ground level, and the remaining walls and roof would be clad in box
profile sheeting in the colour of Dark Green or Vandyke Brown.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Wyatt for the following planning reasons:
Highway issues
PARISH COUNCIL
Support
REPRESENTATIONS
Eight letters of objection have been received from local residents, four of which are
from the same objector raising the following points:
1. No change since previous application refused under 01/0971
2. Highway network unsuitable for heavy traffic caused by an agricultural contracting
business.
3. Site already used for storage of large equipment without permission.
Development Committee
1
15 September 2011
4. Highway safety
5. Detrimental impact upon residential amenity
A supporting letter was submitted by the applicant with the application, explaining
that the building is to be used in connection with the applicant’s agricultural
contracting business for storage and maintenance of their machinery, and why they
need the building. A copy of this letter is contained in Appendix 1.
A further letter has been submitted by the applicant's agent regarding vehicular
movements, and that in his view there will be very little such movement. It is
explained that the reason for this is that when the machinery is contracted out it may
not come back to the yard for anything up to 3 months and is moved from farm to
farm. There may only be movement of tractors or equipment once or twice a month.
A copy of this letter is contained in full in Appendix 1 (which takes into account the
agent’s letter referred to above).
CONSULTATIONS
County Council Highways - Object. The access and junction visibility do not conform
to the standards and that the proposal would engender an intensification of use of a
narrow sinuous road network to the detriment of highway safety. The full detailed
letter is contained in Appendix 1.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - No objection.
Notwithstanding other Policy considerations the erection of an agricultural style
building in the proposed location would not affect the landscape character or be
visually intrusive. Roadside views of the site are limited by mature hedgerows and
the site itself sits within the fold of a small almost imperceptible valley with trees and
other taller structures visible in the skyline. A dark olive green colour (BS4800 - 10 C
39) for the metal cladding would be most appropriate in this location integrating well
with the existing vegetative cover.
Environmental Health - No objection. A condition regarding ventilation and extraction
systems is required.
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.
It is considered that refusal of this application as recommended may have an impact
on the individual Human Rights of the applicant. However, having considered the
likely impact and the general interest of the public, refusal of the application for the
reasons 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 SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy EN 2: Protection and enhancement of landscape and settlement character
(specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including the Landscape
Character Assessment).
Development Committee
2
15 September 2011
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 13: Pollution and hazard prevention and minimisation (minimises pollution
and provides guidance on contaminated land and Major Hazard Zones).
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).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development
2. Impact upon landscape
3. Impact upon neighbouring dwellings
4. Highway safety
APPRAISAL
The application was originally submitted as an agricultural storage building. However,
following further consideration of the applicant’s supporting information the use
actually proposed is that of an agricultural contractor’s storage and maintenance
building. The description of the application was therefore amended and re-advertised
and the appropriate re-consultations carried out.
The site is located within the Countryside Policy Area (Policy SS2) where
development is limited to that which requires a rural location. Agricultural uses are
acceptable in principle in such a location. However, the proposal is for an agricultural
contractor’s storage and maintenance building which is not an agricultural use in
itself. An agricultural contractors storage use falls under B8 (storage) of the Use
Classes Order 2010, and agricultural vehicle and machinery rental and maintenance
depot is sui generis and does not therefore fall under any specific use class. The
Countryside Policy (SS2) also refers to new build employment generating proposals
being acceptable in principle in such a location but this is subject to there being a
particular environmental or operational justification.
It is stated on the application form that no employees are anticipated to be located on
the site. Therefore, whilst this is a new build proposal there is no employment directly
related to the site. Furthermore, the applicant has also confirmed in his supporting
statement that he is currently renting a building in Holt, but that it is not secure
enough. However, it is not considered that this is sufficient environmental or
operational justification for such a building, for such a use in this Countryside Policy
Area location and the proposal is, therefore, contrary to Policy SS2.
It is therefore considered that the proposal is contrary to Policy SS2 of the adopted
North Norfolk Core Strategy.
These issues have already been explored through an appeal from 2002, which was
dismissed. That appeal was in relation to application 01/0971 for an agricultural
contractor’s storage yard on the same site by the same applicant. Whilst that
application was determined under the policies contained in the now superseded
North Norfolk Local Plan the issues remain primarily the same and that appeal
decision is therefore considered to be material to the determination of this
application. The appeal decision is therefore contained in Appendix 1.
The Committee will note that the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager has
not raised an objection to the application on design or landscape grounds. Whilst a
building required in the location for specific agricultural purposes could be acceptable
in design and landscape setting terms, Members will be aware of the fundamental
policy issue discussed previously.
Development Committee
3
15 September 2011
The Environmental Protection Officer has been consulted on the application has
raised no objections subject to a condition in relation to any ventilation or extraction
systems being installed. It is not therefore considered that the proposed building
would have a significant detrimental impact upon the privacy and residential
amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings.
In terms of highway safety if the proposed building was purely to be used as ancillary
to existing agricultural uses of the land and no commercial use whatsoever was
being carried out from the site then the Highway Authority confirmed that they would
not wish to restrict the grant of planning permission. However, given that the site is
being proposed for a commercial use the Highway Authority is objecting to the
application. The Committee will note the detailed comments of the Highway Authority
in Appendix 1. The Highway Authority has advised that whilst the applicant has
provided additional information in relation to the amount of machinery that would be
on site and the estimated traffic movements, which can be on hire for months at a
time, it is considered that the proposed development will, without question, generate
a considerable number of new vehicular movements to a site which is currently fallow
agricultural land and would not previously have generated any independent traffic
movements. The width of the carriageway is also considered to be insufficient for
anything other than single file traffic and is certainly not suitable for commercial
vehicles without causing obstruction and deterioration of the road and verges to the
detriment of highway safety. The development would engender at least 4 additional
daily movements plus an increase in agricultural and goods vehicle movements via a
substandard access and road network. Furthermore the access and junction visibility
does not conform to the appropriate standards and the proposal would engender an
intensification of use of a narrow sinuous road network to the detriment of highway
safety.
The proposal is, therefore, contrary to the provisions of Countryside Policy SS2 and
Transport Policy CT5.
RECOMMENDATION: Refuse on the following grounds:
The District Council adopted the North Norfolk Core Strategy on 24 September 2008,
and subsequently adopted Policy HO9 on 23 February 2011, for all planning
purposes. The following policy statements are considered relevant to the proposed
development:
Policy SS1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside
Policy CT5: The transport impact of new development
It is the opinion of the Local Planning Authority that the applicant has failed to
demonstrate sufficient justification for the location of the proposed commercial
building in the countryside policy area.
Furthermore, the road network serving the site is considered to be inadequate to
serve the development proposed by reason of its poor alignment, restricted width,
lack of passing provision and restricted visibility at adjacent road junctions.
Inadequate visibility splays are provided at the junction of the access with the County
highway and this would cause danger an inconvenience to users of the adjoining
public highway.
The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to the above Development Plan
policies.
Development Committee
4
15 September 2011
2.
MORSTON - PF/11/0583 - Demolition of existing outbuilding and erection of
replacement ancillary accommodation; Scaldbeck House, Stiffkey Road for Mr
J Keith
- Target Date: 04 July 2011
Case Officer: Miss S Tudhope
Householder application
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Undeveloped Coast
Flood Risk Zone 3
THE APPLICATION
Demolition of outbuilding and erection of replacement ancillary accommodation to
form walled enclosure at rear of property.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at the previous meeting for a Committee site visit.
PARISH COUNCIL
Objects on grounds that proposal does not comply with the Village Design Statement
in respect of flat roofs.
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 SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy EN 1: Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and The Broads
(prevents developments which would be significantly detrimental to the areas and
their setting).
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 3: Undeveloped Coast (prevents unnecessary development and specifies
circumstances where development replacing that threatened by coastal erosion can
be permitted).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 10: Flood risk (prevents inappropriate development in flood risk areas).
Development Committee
5
15 September 2011
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Impact on the AONB
2. Design
APPRAISAL
This application was deferred at the previous meeting in order for the Committee to
carry out a site visit.
The site lies within the designated Countryside, AONB and Undeveloped Coast
policy areas. Proposals of this type are acceptable in principle subject to compliance
with relevant Core Strategy policies and provided that they would not introduce any
adverse effect on the AONB nor be significantly detrimental to the open coastal
character of the Undeveloped Coast. The site also lies with Flood Zone 3 and a flood
risk assessment as required has been submitted detailing proposed flood proofing
measures.
The site comprises a secluded two storey detached flint and brick dwelling with semiderelict outbuilding adjoining by courtyard walls. The dwelling is set well back from
the coast road and land adjacent to the site is mainly agricultural fields. There is a
sea view to the north partially screened by boundary trees. The northern elevation of
the dwelling has an interesting multi-gabled appearance. The outbuilding and
connecting brick and flint side walls create a narrow courtyard. The outbuilding is
timber framed, clad mainly with corrugated tin sheeting with pitched clay pantile roof.
This is not considered to have any architectural merit worthy of preserving/
converting.
An objection has been received from the Parish Council on the grounds that the
design ignores the Village Design Statement 2006 by introducing a 'flat roof'. The
Morston Village Design Statement does not specifically refer to 'flat roof' proposals,
but it makes reference to the requirement to 'encourage quality design in accordance
with the North Norfolk Design Guide'. The current north Norfolk Design Guide
adopted in 2008 refers to flat roof forms at paragraph 3.6.2 where it is stated that flat
roof forms are not normally acceptable.
The proposal seeks to replace the outbuilding with a building for ancillary
accommodation. It is proposed to extend the existing courtyard walls to the rear from
7m in length to approx 16.8m. The existing outbuilding is approx. 4m deep.
Increasing the length of east and west flanking flint walls would allow for the
proposed building to sit comfortably behind the walls and be positioned approx. 9.8
from the house. This would have the effect of creating a walled garden with improved
usable space from the existing, somewhat claustrophobic, courtyard. The side walls
would be approximately 3.5m high and the proposed building is 3m high with a flat
roof. A roof terrace is proposed in the central section of the building with access via
steps from the courtyard. Brushed metal posts and toughened glass are proposed for
enclosing the roof terrace at a height of 1m; approx 0.5m of the enclosure would be
visible above the flanking walls and building. The materials proposed would minimise
the visual impact of this element, it being the only indication of a building sitting
behind the side walls.
Northern and southern elevations are proposed to be vertically clad timber boarding
which would appear quite similar to the existing corrugated sheeting. Centrally on
both the southern and northern elevations floor to ceiling glazed doors are proposed,
approx. 5.5m wide, to allow a coastal view from the main dwelling. This glazing and
two further windows to both the northern and southern elevations and the
Development Committee
6
15 September 2011
incorporation of rooflights would provide good natural lighting to the development.
From outside the site the flat roof structure would be read against the backdrop of the
main house, revealing more of the character of the interesting multi gabled north
elevation and not as a stand-alone flat roof structure. Because of this it is considered
that the flat roof design is appropriate in this instance and is an integral design
feature which would minimise the visual impact of the proposed building and provide
additional amenity space.
The north of the site looks out towards the coastal path and is partially screened by
boundary trees. It is considered that the proposed glazing may result in the proposed
building being visible from some sections of the coastal path at night, but this is
against the backdrop of the existing dwelling which has 6 large windows and 6 small
openings at first floor level in the northern elevation. It is therefore considered that
the proposal would not result in any significant detrimental impact on the AONB or
surrounding countryside.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve subject to the imposition of the following conditions:
2
This permission is granted in accordance with the amended plans (drawing
number D4.5-059-PRO) received by the Local Planning Authority on 27 June
2011.
Reason:
To ensure the satisfactory layout and appearance of the development in
accordance with Policy EN 4 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy.
3
The development to which this permission relates shall be undertaken in strict
accordance with the Flood Risk Assessment and details provided on the
amended plan hereby approved (drawing number D4.5-059-PRO) received by
the Local Planning Authority on 27 June 2011.
Reason:
To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the expressed
intentions of the applicant and to ensure the satisfactory development of the site,
in accordance with Policy EN 10 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy.
4
The accommodation hereby permitted shall be occupied solely for purposes
which are incidental to the use of the property as a dwellinghouse and shall not
be used as a separate dwellinghouse.
Reason:
The close relationship of the proposed accommodation and the existing dwelling
is such that two separate dwelling units would not be appropriate in terms of
Policy EN 4 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy and the site lies in an
area of Countryside as defined in the North Norfolk Core Strategy whereby
proposals for new independent dwellinghouses are not normally permitted.
Development Committee
7
15 September 2011
3.
ROUGHTON - PF/11/0756 - Conversion of agricultural building to residential
dwelling; Heath Farm, Norwich Road for Demogratz Ltd
Minor Development
- Target Date: 24 August 2011
Case Officer: Miss C Ketteringham
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
PLA/20021301 PF - Conversion of barn to residential annexe
Refused 15/10/2002
PLA/20021819 PF - Conversion of part of barn to residential annexe
Approved 05/03/2003
PLA/20021820 PF - Conversion of part of barn to holiday unit
Approved 05/03/2003
PF/10/0689 PF - Conversion of and extension to farm buildings to three holiday
apartments and an office
Refused 13/09/2010
THE APPLICATION
Is to convert an existing agricultural building into a single residential dwelling.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Planning and Building Control to consider issues of location
in relation to the defined area of Policy HO 9.
PARISH COUNCIL
Roughton Parish Council - No objections
REPRESENTATIONS
None
CONSULTATIONS
Highways - no objection
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation) - Not a design
objection but recommends some changes to the rooflights.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Comments awaited.
Planning Policy Manager - Comments awaited.
Sustainability Team - no objection subject to implementation of sustainable
construction checklist condition.
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology - Request condition for archaeological investigation
(photo survey).
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.
Development Committee
8
15 September 2011
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 SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy EN 1: Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and The Broads
(prevents developments which would be significantly detrimental to the areas and
their setting).
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 9: Biodiversity and geology (requires no adverse impact on designated
nature conservation sites).
Policy EN 13: Pollution and hazard prevention and minimisation (minimises pollution
and provides guidance on contaminated land and Major Hazard Zones).
Policy HO 9: Rural Residential Conversion Area (The site lies within an area where
the re-use of an existing good quality building as a dwelling may be permitted).
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
Location in relation to Policy HO 9.
APPRAISAL
The application relates to a flint and pantile barn which lies within the Countryside
policy area approximately 25 metres outside the zone around Roughton where the
recently adopted policy HO9 applies. The greater part of the access serving the site
is within the HO9 zone. As the building is outside the Policy HO9 zone the
permissible use would normally be a holiday one, not permanent residential.
However, in this particular case it is considered that there are other significant
material considerations to be taken into account in reaching a decision as to whether
permanent residential use would be acceptable here. The application site is also
within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
The building although outside the HO9 policy area is very close to it, and access to
the site is directly from the A140 so there is easy access by car, bicycle or walking to
the many facilities offered by the service village of Roughton.
The building to be converted is a traditional style barn comprising a two-storey core
with single storey outriggers. It has been fairly well maintained yet no longer has a
practical agricultural use. As a traditional countryside building it is worthy of retention
within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The proposal would also involve the
removal of an unattractive arcon building that has been built onto part of the building
exposing a traditional flint wall. The layout of the building around a central yard and
the smaller size of the single storey elements of the barn, does not lend itself to any
easy subdivision into separate units as would be more appropriate for a holiday use
conversion. With a few amendments to the rooflights this is a sympathetic
conversion that would retain and enhance agricultural character of the buildings.
Development Committee
9
15 September 2011
In conclusion, the proximity to, and access partially within, the Policy HO 9 zone, with
good access to local services and public transport, are considered to be material
considerations of sufficient weight to justify a departure from the Development Plan.
Furthermore, given that this is a building of landscape merit and worthy of retention
its conversion into a single residential unit in this instance is more likely to preserve
the agricultural integrity of the building.
RECOMMENDATION:
Delegated authority to approve subject to successful negotiation on the
rooflights and the imposition of appropriate conditions.
4.
RUNTON - PF/11/0770 - Siting of portable building for use as coastal
surveillance station; Land at Car Park, Beach Road, East Runton for National
Coastwatch Institution
Minor Development
- Target Date: 16 August 2011
Case Officer: Mrs K Brumpton
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
Undeveloped Coast
Coastal Erosion Risk Area - 20 years
THE APPLICATION
Is for the temporary siting of a portable building for use as a coastal surveillance
station for the National Coast Watch Institution. A five year permission has been
applied for. The building would be mushroom in colour and measure approximately
4.9m x 2.7m with a height of approximately 2.4m. The building would be positioned
on short legs (max 1m in height) due to the uneven nature of the site.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Helen Eales, who has concerns regarding the size of the
proposed building and the loss of parking space.
PARISH COUNCIL
Object. Loss of parking spaces and size of building.
REPRESENTATIONS
Seven letters of objection have been received on the following grounds;
1. Space in the car park is already limited and it is a popular car park
2. More suitable locations nearby - for example on the field east of the caravan
parks
3. View from the proposed site is limited due to the geography of the cliffs
4. Spoil views from the caravans in the two adjacent caravan parks
5. Inappropriate location within the car park, should be close to the toilet block
6. Potentially harm local business; reduce popularity of the caravan sites
7. Doubts the usefulness of the station - whether people watching the sea is a
productive use of manpower
8. Visually unattractive building
9. Impinge upon the privacy of some caravans
10. May attract vandalism and other unsavoury pastimes
11. Ruin the area used by some people to watch watersports
Development Committee
10
15 September 2011
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - No objection. The proposal does not reduce the parking
spaces, and would not affect the current traffic patterns.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager - Comments awaited
Head of Coastal Strategy - No objection. The building is ideally suited for this
location.
Property Services - No objection. There appears to be no restrictions within the title
in respect of the proposed use; it is intended to grant a licence to Coast Watch in
respect of this matter. Property Services have been approached by a caravan
occupier on the adjoining site to the east, with concerns regarding visual interference.
Proposal will make little difference to the overall effectiveness of the car park.
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 SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy EN 3: Undeveloped Coast (prevents unnecessary development and specifies
circumstances where development replacing that threatened by coastal erosion can
be permitted).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 11: Coastal erosion (prevents development that would increase risk to life
or significantly increase risk to property and prevents proposals that are likely to
increase coastal erosion).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of siting a portable building in this location for use as a coastal
surveillance station
2. Visual impact of building
3. Relationship with neighbouring development.
APPRAISAL
The proposed site is within the Beach Road, East Runton car park (owned by
NNDC), which is in the Countryside Policy Area (SS2), the Undeveloped Coast (EN3)
and the Coastal Erosion Risk Area (20 years, Policy EN11). The proposed site is on
a grassed area to the north of the existing gravelled parking area.
Countryside Policy SS2 limits development to that which requires a rural location and
includes community services and facilities. Policy EN3 (Undeveloped Coast) is
permissive of development which requires a coastal location and where it is not
significantly detrimental to the open coastal character.
Development Committee
11
15 September 2011
In the immediate area there is a brick built toilet block and shelter. To the east and
west of the site lie three separate caravan parks; Gap Caravan Park, Seaview
Caravan Park and Hazelbury Caravan Park. These caravan parks form much of the
immediate character of the coastline and are visible from elsewhere along the coast.
The proposed building would not be readily visible from the main part of East Runton,
but would however be clearly visible from several of the caravans at the parks and
the dwellings to the south. It would also be visible when viewing this stretch of
coastline from afar. However, given its limited size and as it would sit between two
caravan parks, with a backdrop of buildings, the impact to the wider landscape is
considered relatively minor.
The building clearly requires a coastal location and its use would comprise a
community service. It is considered that its visual impact would be limited and the
proposal is considered acceptable under policies SS2 and EN3.
With the colour of the building to be mushroom, the design of the building is
considered acceptable (under policy EN4). The neutral colour would help it to blend
into the landscape and would be similar to many of the caravans nearby, which are
generally of a light cream or brown colour.
Due to the nature of the building there would be windows on all 4 sides, with a full
width window facing north, towards the sea. The windows would engender some
degree of overlooking into the caravan site to the east. However, as is typical of
caravan parks, the caravans do not have individual plots that experience no
overlooking. The degree of overlooking the proposed building would cause is
considered to be relatively minor. The proposal is considered acceptable in privacy
terms under EN4.
In the view of Property Services, the proposal will have little effect on the functioning
of the car park. County Highways have raised no objection.
Policy EN 11 controls the development that is allowed within Coastal Erosion Areas,
recognising the inherent risk that Coastal Erosion exhibits upon land. The proposed
location falls within a 20 year Coastal Erosion Area. From the information provided
by the Development Control Guidance and the consultation response from the Head
of Coastal Strategy, the proposal is considered to comply with Policy EN 11. As a
temporary building for community use it is considered an appropriate form of
development in this location.
The development is considered to be acceptable and in accordance with
Development Plan Policies.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve, subject to no objection from the Conservation, Design and
Landscape Manager, with temporary 5 year permission. Conditions also
required regarding the type of fencing to be erected around the building and
the exact height of the supporting legs.
Development Committee
12
15 September 2011
5.
RUNTON - PF/11/0990 - Retention of two-storey front extension with revised
ridge height; 4 Golf Close, West Runton for Mr and Mrs Hyde
- Target Date: 05 October 2011
Case Officer: Mrs K Brumpton
Householder application
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
Undeveloped Coast
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
PLA/20090984 HOU - Erection of Two-Storey Front Extension and Detached Cart
Lodge
Approved 01/12/2009
NMA1/09/0984
NMH - Non-material amendment request for revised window
arrangements
Approved 27/07/2011
THE APPLICATION
Is to retain the two storey front extension approved under PF/09/0984 with a revised
ridge height (change in pitch from 30 to 35 degrees, resulting in height increase of
0.4m).
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Eales having regard to the following planning issues:
increased height of the roof ridge, effect on the area.
PARISH COUNCIL
Comments awaited
REPRESENTATIONS
None received at time of writing report
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 EN 3: Undeveloped Coast (prevents unnecessary development and specifies
circumstances where development replacing that threatened by coastal erosion can
be permitted).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy HO 8: House extensions and replacement dwellings in the Countryside
(specifies the limits for increases in size and impact on surrounding countryside).
Development Committee
13
15 September 2011
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Design
2. Impact upon neighbouring properties
APPRAISAL
The site falls within an area of Countryside and Undeveloped Coast. Extensions to
residential dwellings in such locations are acceptable in principle subject to
compliance with policies EN4 and HO8.
The "existing" and "proposed" plans submitted under application reference
PF/09/0984, both showed the main roof of the dwelling with a pitch of 30 degrees.
The roof pitch of the proposed two-storey extension was also shown at a matching
pitch of 30 degrees. However, there was a drawing error and the actual pitch of the
main roof is 35 degrees.
The proposed extension has now been partially constructed with a roof pitch of 35
degrees.
This application is therefore for the retention of the roof of the extension at 35
degrees, in contrast to the previously approved 30 degrees.
This alteration in the angle of the roof has two main consequences; the increase of
the ridge height by 0.4m, and to lower the eaves height on the eastern side elevation
by 0.4m.
The eaves on the western elevation would not change in height, they would match
the main dwelling.
The increase in ridge height would allow the extension to match the main house in
terms of roof pitch and, as a consequence, be a better design than creating two
different roof pitches. Whilst the increase in height will lead to a little more
overshadowing to the properties on either side, as the difference is only 0.4m this is
not considered to result in an additional impact significant enough to warrant a
recommendation of refusal. The reduction in height on the eastern elevation is
considered to reduce the impact of the extension upon the neighbour to the east; this
is welcomed.
The design of the extension as built is considered acceptable, as is the impact upon
the neighbours. The application is considered to comply with Policy EN 4.
Policy HO 8 is also considered to be complied with as the impact upon the
surrounding Countryside compared to the approved PF/09/0984 is relatively minor.
The proposal therefore accords with Development Plan policy.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve.
Development Committee
14
15 September 2011
6.
WITTON - PO/11/0863 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; Workshop at Ash
Tree Farm, Well Street for Mrs C Leggett
Minor Development
- Target Date: 06 September 2011
Case Officer: Mr G Linder
Outline Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
Undeveloped Coast
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
19981770 PF Continuation of use for preparation and repair of motor vehicles
Temporary approval 11/05/1999
Appeal allowed 28/10/1999
20001199 PF Variation of condition 4 of planning permission reference 981770 noise insulation scheme
Approved 01/11/2000
Appeal allowed 04/10/2001
20040763 EF - Certificate of lawfulness for existing use of property as residential
dwelling without complying with agricultural occupancy restriction
Approved 07/10/2004
20110446 PO - Erection of 2 one and a half storey dwellings
Withdrawn by Applicant 21/06/2011
THE APPLICATION
Seeks outline planning permission with all matters reserved, for the demolition of
portal frame industrial unit and the erection of a single storey, three bedroom
bungalow of a similar design and footprint to that of the existing property at Ash Tree
Farm.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the requested of the Local Member Councillor Walker, who considers that
replacing the industrial unit with a dwelling would benefit the visual and residential
amenity of the area and outweigh the policy objections.
PARISH COUNCIL
Bacton Parish Council - No objection
Witton Parish Council - No objection
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - No objection subject to
conditions.
British Pipeline Agency – Web site indicates that in respect of the National Grid
(National Transmission Systems) further information is required to confirm the exact
location and nature of the proposed works.
Environmental Health - No objection subject to conditions.
Sustainability Co-Ordinator - No objection subject to conditions.
County Council (Highways) - No response.
Norfolk County Council Historic Environment Services - No objection subject to
condition subject to a programme of archaeological works.
Development Committee
15
15 September 2011
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.
It is considered that refusal of this application as recommended may have an impact
on the individual Human Rights of the applicant. However, having considered the
likely impact and the general interest of the public, refusal of the application 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 SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
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 3: Undeveloped Coast (prevents unnecessary development and specifies
circumstances where development replacing that threatened by coastal erosion can
be permitted).
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
Principle of development
APPRAISAL
The site is situated within the Countryside Policy Area as defined by the North
Norfolk Local Development Framework Core Strategy in an area where Policies SS2,
EN2 and EN4 are applicable. Policy SS2 states that in areas designated as
Countryside development will be limited to that which requires a rural location and
includes agriculture, forest and the re-use and adaptation of buildings for appropriate
purposes. Whilst Policy EN2 requires that development proposals should
demonstrate that their location, scale, design and materials will protect, conserve
and, where possible, enhance the special qualities and local distinctiveness of the
area (including its historical, biodiversity and cultural character). Similarly Policy EN4
requires that all development preserve or enhance the character and quality of an
area through high quality design which reinforces local distinctiveness, has regard to
the North Norfolk Design Guide and is suitably designed for the context within which
it is set. In addition, the policy states that proposals should not have a significantly
detrimental effect on the residential amenity of nearby occupiers and new dwellings
should provide acceptable residential amenity.
Ash Tree Farm is located to the eastern side of Rectory Lane and consists of the
industrial unit, which is visible from the lane and also when approaching Bacton from
the west along the North Walsham Road. Whilst the dwelling associated with the
holding consists of a modern “T” shaped bungalow which is situated immediately to
the south of the industrial unit with a further 2.3 hectares of fields to the east.
Abutting the northern wall of the industrial unit are the rear gardens of a pair of
attractive semi detached cottages which are some 30 metres from the building.
Whilst further to the south along Rectory Lane is the Old Rectory which is set in
extensive grounds.
Development Committee
16
15 September 2011
The site is also in the Undeveloped Coast Policy Area EN3, which is only permissive
of development that requires a coastal location and is not detrimental to the open
coastal character.
Any residential development has to be considered important to the wellbeing of the
coastal community.
As part of the supporting documentation the applicant has indicated that the industrial
unit which has floor area of approximately 140 square metres and an overall site area
of 660 square metres was granted planning permission in 1977 as a general purpose
agricultural building. In 1999 retrospective planning permission was granted for a
general industrial building (B2) use of the building, however some of the conditions
imposed at that time in the interest of protecting residential amenity were
overturned/varied as a result of public inquires in October 1999 and September 2001.
As a result of the 2001 appeal it was agreed that the building could be used for the
preparation and repair of motor vehicles. However in making this decision the
Inspector commented that it was unusual in his experience to have an industrial unit
in the countryside so close to gardens and houses and in the 1999 decision, attention
was drawn to the possibly of future B2 general industrial uses of the site and their
impact on the residential amenity of the area.
The applicant has also indicated that; they have attempted to market the site since
2007 either in its entirety or as the bungalow and industrial unit sold separately.
Letters from three estate agents indicate that whilst there has been a high level of
interest and a number of viewings no offers have been forthcoming. This it is
considered is because the industrial unit and/or its access is not suitable for today's
market, being either too small for a serious growing business or “too large for a
garage” in association with a residential bungalow. They consider that the sale of the
bungalow has so far proven impossible because of concerns relating to the future
use of the industrial unit. Furthermore one agent stated that the “industrial unit has a
detrimental impact on the amenity and value of nearby houses and has made the
sale of the bungalow alone impossible”, even though it has been offered at a realist
price in the current market.
The applicant's submission concludes that whilst permission would not normally be
granted for residential development in this location the removal of this inappropriate
and unsightly building would in their view, constitute an enhancement of the visual
and residential amenity of the area and is a material consideration. They say that this
view is supported by one of the neighbour who supports the dismantling of the
unsightly building and considers that its removal would alleviate his concerns in
respect of the possible future uses of the premises.
In this particular case it is accepted that the existing industrial unit contributes nothing
to the overall character and appearance of the area, being fairly visible from the
North Walsham Road, and its demolition would therefore be welcomed within the
landscape. Furthermore a B2 industrial use would be better suited to a designated
industrial site within one of the District's Principal or Secondary Settlement rather
than a rural location served by a poor road network and which could adversely affect
the amenities of neighbouring properties in terms of noise and disturbance.
However the fact remains that whilst the removal of the industrial unit is considered
acceptable its replacement with a market dwelling in this Countryside location would
be contrary to Development Plan policies SS1 and SS2. There is also no requirement
for a coastal location and the development is not for the wellbeing of the coastal
community. The proposal is also therefore contrary to policy EN3. Furthermore
Development Committee
17
15 September 2011
whilst evidence would suggest that the sale of the bungalow has proven impossible
with the industrial unit is situ clearly its removal would alleviate this situation
enhancing the bungalow’s value and saleability. In addition the area currently
occupied by the industrial unit could, subject to the granting of planning permission
form part of the existing dwelling’s curtilage, further increasing its market value. As
such, whilst is accepted that there is a cost implication in the removal of the industrial
unit, this would be offset to a certain extent by the increased value and marketability
of the bungalow. Therefore whilst the enhancement of the visual and residential
amenities of the surrounding area is a material consideration it is not considered that
the applicant has provided sufficient justification to warrant a departure from
Development Plan Policy.
RECOMMENDATION:
Refuse on the grounds that the proposal would result in the erection of a new
dwelling in the Countryside and Undeveloped Coast Policy Areas contrary to
Development Plan policy and there are no material considerations which would
outweigh this decision.
7.
APPLICATION RECOMMENDED FOR A SITE INSPECTION
The following planning application is recommended by officers for a site inspection by
the Committee prior to the consideration of a full report at a future meeting.
As the application will not be debated at this meeting it is not appropriate to invite
public speaking at this stage. Members of the public will have an opportunity to
make representations at the meeting of the Committee when the application is
discussed.
Please note that additional site inspections may be recommended by Officers at the
meeting or agreed during consideration of report items on this agenda.
TRIMINGHAM – PF/11/0720 – Extension of caravan site to provide additional
touring pitches on land at Woodlands Holiday Park for Mr E Harrison
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Site visit recommended by the Head of Planning and Building Control to expedite the
processing of the application and to enable the Committee to visit the site in view of
its location within the Area of outstanding Natural Beauty and Undeveloped Coast.
RECOMMENDATION:The Committee is recommended to undertake the above site visit.
8.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
ALDBOROUGH - NMA1/10/0214 - Non-material amendment request for revised
window and door materials, revisions to car park layout and re-location of
cycle shelter; The Surgery, Chapel Road, Thurgarton for Dr P Wood
(Non-Material Amendment Request)
BACTON - PF/11/0594 - Erection of two-storey side extension; 1 Bacton Wood
Cottages, Plantation Road, Witton for Mr K Hart
(Householder application)
Development Committee
18
15 September 2011
BACTON - PF/11/0805 - Installation of rear dormer window; Stepping Stone
Cottage, Walcott Road for Mr & Mrs Crowe
(Householder application)
BINHAM - NP/11/0945 - Prior notification of intention to erect agricultural
storage building; Manor Farm, The Street, Cockthorpe for Mr M Case
(Prior Notification (Agricultural))
BLAKENEY - PF/11/0343 - Erection of two-storey side extension and singlestorey rear extension to 48 Langham Road and application of render to 46 and
48 Langham Road; 46 & 48 Langham Road for Mr S Blakeley
(Householder application)
BRISTON - PF/11/0672 - Installation of roof mounted solar photo-voltaic
system; Matthews Turkey Farm, Norwich Road for Azur Solar Systems
(Full Planning Permission)
CLEY NEXT THE SEA - LA/10/0944 - Installation
advertisement; Cley Windmill, The Quay for Dr J Godlee
(Listed Building Alterations)
of
non-illuminated
CLEY NEXT THE SEA - PF/11/0571 - Erection of porch; Emmaus, Holt Road for
Mr and Mrs R Heale
(Householder application)
CLEY NEXT THE SEA - PF/11/0735 - Construction of rear balcony with parapet
wall; Samphire Cottage, High Street for Mr Gostling
(Householder application)
CLEY NEXT THE SEA - NMA1/11/0223 - Non-material amendment request for
revised window sizes, reduction in size of balcony and changes to gallows
bracket, revised gable detail, changes to flat roof, revised position of roof light
and changes to entrance hallway.; 1 Beau Rivage for Mr A Livsey
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
CORPUSTY AND SAXTHORPE - PF/11/0764 - Erection of single-storey rear
extension; The Brambles, Town Close, Corpusty for Mr & Mrs A Summers
(Householder application)
CORPUSTY AND SAXTHORPE - PF/11/0811 - Erection of first floor side
extension; Ivy Farm, Irmingland Road, Corpusty for Dr A Barnett
(Householder application)
CROMER - PF/11/0166 - Conversion of first and second floor offices to 4 selfcontained flats; 1-3 Hamilton Road for David Philip Investments Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
CROMER - PF/11/0181 - Erection of single-storey side extension, insertion of
first floor side window and insertion of side roof windows; 17 Cliff Avenue for
Mr Phillips
(Householder application)
CROMER - PF/11/0627 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 10 Hillside for
Mr & Mrs Madgett
(Householder application)
Development Committee
19
15 September 2011
CROMER - PF/11/0711 - Re-roofing of conservatory; 3 The Warren for Mr & Mrs
Lawrie
(Householder application)
CROMER - PF/11/0794 - Erection of rear extension and change of flat roof to
pitched roof; 38 Clifton Park for Mr Leeder
(Householder application)
DUNTON - PF/11/0264 - Conversion of barn to single unit of holiday
accommodation (including revised door and window arrangements following
partial implementation of permission ref: 06/1808); Brazenhall Barn, Tatterford
Road for Mr P Allingham
(Full Planning Permission)
EAST RUSTON - PF/11/0540 - Alterations to barn to facilitate conversion to one
unit of holiday accommodation and installation of solar panels; Land rear of
Poplar Farm, Chequers Street for Ms D Hopton
(Full Planning Permission)
EDGEFIELD - PF/11/0798 - Erection of storage building; Land at Ramsgate
Street for Mr S & Miss R Fowler
(Full Planning Permission)
EDGEFIELD - PF/11/0799 - Erection of extension to provide additional stables;
Land at Ramsgate Street for Mr S & Miss R Fowler
(Full Planning Permission)
ERPINGHAM - PF/11/0339 - Installation of air source heat pump; 8 Aldborough
Road, Calthorpe for Mr P Watson
(Householder application)
ERPINGHAM - PF/11/0757 - Erection of solar array; Land at Windmill Farm,
Ingworth for Mrs J Lewis
(Full Planning Permission)
ERPINGHAM - PF/11/0759 - Erection of two-storey side extension; Woodbine
Cottage, School Road for Ms Stevenson
(Householder application)
ERPINGHAM - PF/11/0769 - Conversion of partially constructed building to one
unit of holiday accommodation; Tollgate House, Eagle Road, Ingworth for Mr S
Wooldridge
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - PF/11/0041 - Raising of the roof to provide first floor
accommodation and erection of single-storey side extensions; 11 The Drift for
Mr K Topping
(Householder application)
FAKENHAM - NMA1/11/0111 - Non-material amendment request to add a wood
burning stove and flue; 111 Queens Road for Mr D Grocott
(Non-Material Amendment Request)
FIELD DALLING - PF/11/0784 - Conversion of barn to design studio; Priory
House, 54 Langham Road for Kelling Design
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Committee
20
15 September 2011
FIELD DALLING - LA/11/0785 - Alterations to barn to facilitate conversion to
design studio; Priory House, 54 Langham Road for Kelling Design
(Listed Building Alterations)
HANWORTH - PF/11/0507 - Erection of single-storey extensions and conversion
of outbuilding to guest accommodation with cloistered link extension; Falgate
Farm, The Common for Mr and Mrs M Barclay
(Householder application)
HAPPISBURGH - PF/11/0699 - Erection of single-storey extension; Manor Farm,
Coronation Road for Mr & Mrs N Sands
(Householder application)
HAPPISBURGH - PF/11/0817 - Retention of holiday accommodation unit as
converted with elevation changes; Yeoman Barn, Grub Street for Mr J Dean
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - PF/11/0645 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 27 Bull Street for
Hayes & Storr Solicitors
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - PF/11/0716 - Use of land for siting mobile classroom; Greshams School,
Cromer Road for Greshams School
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - PF/11/0818 - Erection of rear conservatory; Owlet House, 1 Laurel Drive
for Mr & Mrs Dorley
(Householder application)
HORNING - PF/11/0792 - Erection of single-storey side extension and detached
garage/car shed; St Benets, Upper Street for Miss Brown
(Householder application)
HOVETON - PF/11/0360 - Erection of conservatory and removal of condition 3 of
planning ref: 85/0899 to enable annexe to be occupied as holiday
accommodation; 140 Stalham Road for Mrs Gourlay
(Full Planning Permission)
HOVETON - PF/11/0755 - Change of use of land from agricultural to residential
curtilage and erection of four-bay garage with storage in roof space; Two Saints
Barn, Tunstead Road for Mr A Jones
(Full Planning Permission)
HOVETON - PF/11/0761 - Conversion and extension of garage to provide selfcontained flat; Donnybrook, Horning Road West for Mr & Mrs Gwilliam
(Full Planning Permission)
LETHERINGSETT WITH GLANDFORD - LE/11/0662 - Demolition of side
extension of existing dwelling; The Old Barn, Blakeney Road, Glandford for Mr
Osborne
(Conservation Area Demolition)
LETHERINGSETT WITH GLANDFORD - PF/11/0694 - Erection of replacement
side extension, conversion and extension of barn to two-storey ancillary living
accommodation and raising height of boundary wall; The Old Barn, Blakeney
Road, Glandford for Mr Osborne
(Householder application)
Development Committee
21
15 September 2011
LUDHAM - PF/11/0610 - Erection of two-storey side extension and single-storey
rear extension; 32 Whitegates for Ms Shorten
(Householder application)
LUDHAM - PF/11/0615 - Variation of Condition 3 of permission reference:
97/0999 to permit permanent residential occupancy; 9 The Barns, Fritton Road
for Mr D Rozee
(Full Planning Permission)
LUDHAM - NMA1/11/0242 - Non-material amendment request for revisions to
doors and windows and re-location of oil tank; The Sedges, Norwich Road for
Mr & Mrs Martin
(Non-Material Amendment Request)
MELTON CONSTABLE - PF/11/0767 - Erection of extensions; The Big Prawn
Company, Marriott Way for The Big Prawn Co Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
MUNDESLEY - PF/11/0586 - Installation of skate park facility; Gold Park, High
Street for Mundesley Parish Council in conjunction with Mundesley Youth and
Community
(Full Planning Permission)
MUNDESLEY - PF/11/0695 - Up-grading of holiday chalets including re-cladding,
construction of pitched roofs and infilling of canopy; The Dell Chalet Park for Mr
I Gray
(Householder application)
MUNDESLEY - PF/11/0706 - Erection of garage and garden wall; 32 Paston Road
for Mr M Manson
(Householder application)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/11/0677 - Installation of replacement windows; 1-4
Meadow Court and 27-32 Patch Meadow, Lynfield Road for Cotman Housing
Association Limited
(Householder application)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/11/0700 - Erection of single-storey side extension; 10
Ellinor Road for Mr & Mrs Holyland
(Householder application)
NORTH WALSHAM - NMA1/11/0249 - Non-material amendment request for
reduced size of rear extension; 114 Mundesley Road for Mr & Mrs Brown
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/11/0795 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 12
Wood View for Mr & Mrs Lowe
(Householder application)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/11/0796 - Erection of replacement rear conservatory; 7
Mill Road for Mr & Mrs Robins
(Householder application)
Development Committee
22
15 September 2011
NORTH WALSHAM - NMA1/11/0485 - Non-material amendment request for
installation of additional rooflight, relocated first floor window and increased
size and relocation of ground floor window; 54 Wharton Drive for Mr & Mrs
Taylor
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
NORTHREPPS - PF/11/0383 - Erection of two replacement poultry sheds; Poultry
Farm at Crossdale Street for Traditional Norfolk Poultry
(Full Planning Permission)
OVERSTRAND - PF/11/0631 - Erection of part two-storey and part single-storey
rear extensions; 10 The Londs for Mr and Mrs J Muttram
(Householder application)
RAYNHAM - LA/11/0452 - Installation of built-in wardrobe with attachment of
plasterwork ceiling coving and cornice; The Grove, Church Lane, South
Raynham for Mr and Mrs Coghill
(Listed Building Alterations)
ROUGHTON - PF/11/0664 - Erection of single-storey side extension; The
Woodlands, Felbrigg Road for Mr Perry
(Householder application)
ROUGHTON - PF/11/0768 - Variation of permission reference: 98/0505 to permit
permanent residential occupancy; Cart Lodge Barn, Back Lane for Mr & Mrs P
Robinson
(Full Planning Permission)
SCOTTOW - PF/11/0520 - Change of use of land to garden and erection of 1.8m
boundary fence; 145 Ormesby Road, Badersfield for Mr M Long
(Householder application)
SCOTTOW - PF/11/0656 - Erection of first floor and single-storey side
extensions; Beck Cottage, 15 Scottow Row, Stake Bridge Road for Mr & Mrs
Rallison
(Householder application)
SCULTHORPE - PF/11/0741 - Conversion and change of use of barn to
conference facility; Home Farm, Cranmer for Cranmer Country Cottages
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - LE/11/0754 - Demolition of one and a half storey building; 10
Station Approach for Mr & Mrs S P Lee
(Conservation Area Demolition)
SHERINGHAM - PM/11/0837 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; 2 Cremers Drift
for Mr P Little
(Reserved Matters)
SHERINGHAM - PF/11/0838 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 10
Weybourne Road for Mr & Mrs Lowe
(Householder application)
Development Committee
23
15 September 2011
STALHAM - PF/11/0715 - Erection of replacement rear extension and erection of
extension and pitched roof to garage; Springfield, Brumstead Road for Mr & Mrs
G Kirwan
(Householder application)
STIFFKEY - PF/11/0602 - Installation of two front dormer windows and
photovoltaic solar panels to annexe; Red Lion, 44 Wells Road for Mr C Cooke
(Full Planning Permission)
STODY - PF/11/0850 - Variation of Condition 2 of permission reference: 07/0046
to permit revised layout and fenestration to provide two units of holiday
accommodation and an annexe for the existing dwelling; Stody Hall, Brinton
Road for Mr Baker
(Full Planning Permission)
SUTTON - PF/11/0654 - Erection of single-storey front extension; 42 Neville
Road for Mr M Taylor
(Householder application)
UPPER SHERINGHAM - PF/11/0823 - Erection of extension to estate team
building; Sheringham Hall, Sheringham Park for The National Trust
(Full Planning Permission)
WALSINGHAM - PF/11/0718 - Conversion of outbuilding to two-storey annexe; 3
The Hill for Mr P Parker
(Householder application)
WALSINGHAM - LA/11/0719 - Alterations to outbuilding to facilitate conversion
to annexe; 3 The Hill for Mr P Parker
(Listed Building Alterations)
WALSINGHAM - DP/11/0932 - Prior notification of intention to demolish two
nissen huts; Bunkers Hill Mill, Bunkers Hill, Wells Road, Egmere for ABN
(Prior Notification (Demolition))
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/11/0734 - Renovation and extension of outbuilding
(extension of period for commencement of permission reference: 08/1058);
Kings Channel, East End for Mr R Tyler
(Householder application)
WEYBOURNE - PF/11/0749 - Continued use of premises as A1 (retail) and A3
(café); Weybourne Stores, 2 Beach Lane for Mr M Joll
(Full Planning Permission)
WEYBOURNE - PF/11/0788 - Demolition of outbuilding and erection of singlestorey extension; Gable End, The Street for Ms J Van Der Heiden
(Householder application)
WEYBOURNE - PF/11/0843 - Installation of air-source heat pump; 40 Pine Walk
for Mr Brooks
(Householder application)
WIGHTON - NP/11/0907 - Prior notification of intention to erect agricultural
storage building; Land at Copys Green Farm for Dr S Temple
(Prior Notification (Agricultural))
Development Committee
24
15 September 2011
9.
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
BACTON - PF/11/0653 - Erection of 15 beach huts and refuse bin enclosure;
Rainbows End Chalet Park, Mill Lane for Tingdene Holiday Parks Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
GUNTHORPE - AI/11/0819 - Display of replacement pole sign with illuminated
fuel prices; Countryside Filling Station, Fakenham Road, Bale for Mr F Mitchell
(Advertisement Illuminated)
RUNTON - PF/11/0822 - Alterations and erection of first floor extension to
provide two-storey dwelling; 100 Cromer Road, West Runton for Mr P de la
Borda
(Householder application)
APPEALS SECTION
10.
NEW APPEALS
SHERINGHAM - PF/11/0515 - Retention of balcony; 31 Beeston Road for Mr H
Ahrens
FAST TRACK - HOUSEHOLDER
11.
PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
None
12.
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - IN HAND
FAKENHAM - PO/10/1111 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; Land rear of 43
Sculthorpe Road for Mr Patrick & J Brady
NORTH WALSHAM - LD/10/0916 - Demolition of building; Rear of 25 Market
Place for Stonefield Estates Ltd
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/10/0942 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; Land rear of
25 Market Place for Stonefield Estates Ltd
SHERINGHAM - PO/11/0161 - Erection of detached two-storey dwelling and
garage; 5 Meadow Way for Mr P James
13.
APPEAL DECISIONS
None
Development Committee
25
15 September 2011