21 OCTOBER 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
J A Wyatt (Chairman)
H C Cordeaux
P W High
S C Mears
J H Perry-Warnes
J D Savory
Mrs M Seward
B Smith
Mrs A C Sweeney
Mrs J Trett
Mrs L Walker
P J Willcox
R Combe - substitute for S J Partridge
Mrs L M Brettle - Glaven Valley Ward
Miss P E Ford - North Walsham East Ward
Ms V R Gay - North Walsham West Ward
Mrs G M D Lisher - Lancaster South Ward
J Lisher - Lancaster South Ward
Mrs B McGoun - St Benet Ward
Mrs A M Moore - North Walsham North Ward
P W Moore - North Walsham East Ward
Mrs C M Wilkins - Worstead Ward
Mrs H T Nelson - Cabinet Member for Conservation, Design and Landscape
Mrs P Bevan Jones - Cabinet Member for Housing
Officers
Mr S Oxenham - Head of Planning and Building Control
Mr A Mitchell - Development Manager
Mr R Howe - Planning Legal Manager
Mr M Ashwell - Planning Policy Manager
Mr P Godwin - Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager
Mr G Lyon - Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases)
Miss J Medler - Senior Planning Officer (West)
Mr P Took - Senior Planning Officer (East)
Mr S Case - Landscape Officer
Mr D Mortimer - Development Control Officer (NCC Highways)
(95)
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND DETAILS OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor S J Partridge. There was one
substitute Member in attendance as shown above.
(96)
APPOINTMENT OF VICE-CHAIRMAN FOR THE MEETING
The Vice-Chairman, who was chairing the meeting in the absence of the Chairman,
intended to vacate the Chair to speak on matters in his Ward. It was therefore
necessary to appoint a Vice-Chairman to take the Chair during consideration of those
matters.
Development Control Committee
1
21 October 2010
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs J Trett, duly seconded and
RESOLVED
That Councillor H C Cordeaux be appointed Vice-Chairman for the
meeting.
(97)
MINUTES
The Minutes of a meeting of the Committee held on 23 September 2010 were
approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
(98)
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
The Chairman stated that there were no items of urgent business which he wished to
bring before the Committee.
(99)
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors Mrs L M Brettle, Ms V R Gay, P W Moore, B Smith and Mrs L Walker
declared interests, the details of which are given under the minute of the item
concerned.
(100) DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADOPTION
The Committee considered item 1 of the officers’ reports which advised the
Committee of the recommended approach to the adoption of the Site Specific
Proposals and Re-use of Rural Buildings as Dwellings Development Plans and to
agree the process for determining planning applications which are ‘on hand’ in the
period before and after formal plan adoption.
It was proposed by Councillor H C Cordeaux, duly seconded and
RESOLVED
That rural building conversions to dwellings proposals which do not
comply with proposed Policy H09 but comply with existing Policy 29,
and which are submitted and registered prior to receipt of the
Inspector’s report (second version following fact check), will be
determined against the provisions of Policy 29, notwithstanding that a
final determination of the application may occur following adoption of
the revised policies.
(101) BLAKENEY – Tree Preservation Order, Westrop, Saxlingham Road
The Committee considered item 2 of the officers’ reports in respect of a Tree
Preservation Order at the above site.
Councillor Mrs L
recommendation.
M
Brettle,
the
local
Member,
supported
the
officer’s
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs L Walker, seconded by Councillor Mrs M Seward
and
Development Control Committee
2
21 October 2010
RESOLVED
That North Norfolk District Council Tree Preservation Order (Blakeney)
No.18 be confirmed.
(102) BLAKENEY Tree Preservation Order 10 818, Pinewood, Saxlingham Road
The Committee considered item 3 of the officers’ reports in respect of a Tree
Preservation Order at the above site.
Public Speaker
Mr Cucksey (objecting)
Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, the local Member, supported the officer’s
recommendation. However, she suggested a site inspection in view of the concerns
expressed by Mr Cucksey.
Councillor R Combe stated that the Tree Preservation Order would not prevent
development. He considered that there would be no problem provided the owner
discussed management issues with the Landscape Officer.
It was proposed by Councillor R Combe, seconded by Councillor Mrs L Walker and
RESOLVED unanimously
That North Norfolk District Council Tree Preservation Order (Blakeney)
No. 21 be confirmed.
(103) NORTH WALSHAM - Enq/10/0187 - The material change of use of former
Anglian Water Sewage Works
Councillor Mrs L Walker declared a personal interest in this matter as she was
acquainted with the owner of the Company.
Councillor P W Moore declared a personal interest in this matter as he was a
resident of this part of North Walsham.
Councillor B Smith declared a personal interest in this matter as he had met the
present owner in 2007 when he had visited the site.
The Committee considered item 4 of the officers’ reports appraising the Committee of
the material change of use of the former Anglian Water Sewage Works, to H.G.V.
operating centre in association with waste transport and the storage and distribution
of portable toilets also the stationing of portable buildings for offices in association
with the business.
The Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases) advised that new and conflicting
evidence had been received regarding the portable buildings on the site and
requested delegated authority to seek removal of these buildings subject to further
investigation as to the length of time they had been in situ.
Councillor P W Moore, a local Member, emphasised the importance of this matter to
residents in the area and along the route through which the HGVs passed. He
referred to the planning history of the site and the comments of the appeal Inspector
Development Control Committee
3
21 October 2010
regarding highway safety matters and proximity to schools and residential dwellings.
He referred to the Company’s stated plans for relocation which had not been
realised. He stated that he understood the reason for the officer recommendation of
one year for compliance, given the number of jobs at stake and the valuable service
provided by the Company. However, he considered that this should not be at the
expense of local people’s safety and amenity and that six months would be a more
appropriate timescale for compliance.
Councillor Miss P E Ford, also a local Member, stated that she had little to add to
Councillor Moore’s comments and requested a speedy resolution to this issue.
Councillor B Smith supported the local Members’ views regarding highway safety.
He stated that this was a well run and well organised site but the surrounding roads
were too narrow for large vehicles. He referred to concerns raised by local schools
regarding danger to schoolchildren and their parents.
Councillor Mrs M Seward stated that she was a resident of North Walsham and did
voluntary work at the schools. She stated that the schools were used outside normal
school hours. She stated that life was intolerable for local residents. She requested
that the Committee balance the concerns regarding jobs against concerns regarding
safety of young and elderly people in the area.
Councillor Mrs L Walker proposed the service of a Stop Notice and Enforcement
Notice, which was seconded by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes.
The Development Manager advised the Committee that he did not recommend a
Stop Notice in this case and explained his reasoning.
Councillor Moore confirmed that he was not requesting a Stop Notice.
The Development Manager advised the Committee that he considered that six
months, as suggested by Councillor Moore, was a tight timescale for compliance in
this case. He suggested that nine months would be an acceptable compromise. He
requested delegated authority to seek removal of the existing portable buildings.
Councillor Mrs L Walker withdrew her proposal with the agreement of her seconder.
It was proposed by Councillor P J Willcox, seconded by Councillor H C Cordeaux
and
RESOLVED unanimously
1) That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
serve an Enforcement Notice under section 172 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990, as amended, requiring the mixed use of the
site as an HGV operating centre and the B8 use for the storage and
distribution of portable toilets to cease and the large waste tanks stored
on the site be removed within 9 months of the effective date of the
Notice.
2) That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
serve an Enforcement Notice under section 172 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990, as amended, requiring the one two storey
block of portable buildings to be removed from site within 9 months of
the effective date of the Notice.
Development Control Committee
4
21 October 2010
Reason for the Notice:The unauthorised development is contrary to adopted Core Strategy
Policy CT5: The Transport Impact of New Development as the site is
incapable of providing safe access to the highway network due to the
access being onto a narrow country lane which is a single carriageway,
with few passing places and no pedestrian footpath. The surrounding
highway network is so unsuitable that any increased usage by vehicles
would unacceptably exacerbate the risk of danger to highway users,
particularly pedestrians.
Furthermore the development is contrary to adopted Core Strategy
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside, since the HGV operating
centre and the storage and distribution of portable toilets do not
require a rural location and do not fall within development permitted in
the Countryside policy area.
3) That the Head of Planning and Building Control explore further the
possibility of removal of the remaining portable buildings from the site.
(104) SHERINGHAM : Land to the rear of 20 Hooks Hill Road
The Committee considered item 5 of the officers’ report concerning the alterations to
the ground level on land to the rear of 20 Hooks Hill Road Sheringham.
The Team Leader (Enforcement and Special Cases) referred to a letter sent to
Members from the Solicitors acting for the neighbouring property owner and reported
that they considered that the recommended action would not repair the injury to their
clients’ amenity. The developer had declined to submit a planning application and
had stated that he would challenge an Enforcement Notice.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson, a local Member, supported the officer’s recommendation.
She considered that landscaping would also be beneficial.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs M Seward, duly seconded and
RESOLVED
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to serve an
Enforcement Notice under section 172 of the Town and Country Planning
Act as amended requiring:
1) within one month of the effective date of the notice the block work
wall to be rendered
2) within 2 months of the effective date the one metre fence along the
northwest boundary of plot 1 shall be replaced with a 1.8 metre fence
3) A landscaping scheme which includes a hedge along the north west
boundary of Plot 2 to be planted within the first available planting
season following the effective date of the Notice
4) The hedge along the northwest boundary of plot 2 shall be allowed
to grow to a height of 1.8 metres and shall thereafter be retained at
the minimum height of 1.8 metres from ground level to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
5) No tree, shrub or hedgerow which is indicated on the landscaping
scheme shall be uprooted, felled or in any way destroyed. Should
the hedgerow, tree or shrub die or in the opinion of the Local
Development Control Committee
5
21 October 2010
Planning Authority become seriously damaged or defective within
ten years of the effective date of the Notice then another tree, shrub,
or hedge shall be planted in its place in accordance with details
which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.
Reasons
The remodelling of the land represents development for which planning
permission is required. Policy EN4: Design requires development not to
have a significantly detrimental effect on the residential amenities of nearby
occupiers and respect the character and landscape of the surrounding
area.
The imposition of the above conditions will alleviate the injury to residential
amenity and the additional landscaping will reflect the character and
landscape of the immediate area.
(105) HUNWORTH - 20090415 EF - Application for Certificate of Lawfulness of
Existing Use as separate unit of holiday accommodation; 1 Green Farm Barn,
The Green
All Members had received correspondence in this matter.
The Committee considered item 6 of the officers’ reports in respect of an application
for a Certificate of Lawfulness.
Public Speaker
Mr Suffling (objecting)
The Planning Legal Manager explained the legal background to this case. He stated
that the test to be applied in this case was the civil law balance of probabilities test
and not the stricter test of beyond reasonable doubt which was applicable to criminal
cases. He stated that issues regarding parking on The Green could not be
addressed by the Local Planning Authority.
The Planning Legal Manager reported the contents of a letter received yesterday
from a local resident which challenged the evidence provided by the applicant and
stating that the applicant could not prove 10 years continuous use as a holiday let.
The Planning Legal Manager stated that there was a longstanding dispute between
the applicant and others into which the Council had been drawn. Some of the issues
had little or no relevance to the application. The Enforcement Officer had received a
number of telephone calls from local residents but had not stated that a Lawful
Development Certificate could not be granted. The Parish Council had disputed the
number of weeks per year in which the property had been used for holiday lets.
Business rates had not been paid since April 2005 but the reasons for this had been
explained by the applicant. However, this was not germane to the application.
Whilst there was evidence on both sides of the argument, officers considered that the
applicant’s case had been made on the balance of probabilities.
The Planning Legal Manager requested delegated authority to grant a Certificate of
Lawfulness subject to seeking the applicant’s views on the recently received letter.
Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, the local Member, stated that it was difficult for her to
comment as she had not seen the letter referred to by the Planning Legal Manager.
Development Control Committee
6
21 October 2010
In response to a question by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, the Planning Legal
Manager confirmed that Mr Suffling had not raised any issues that would change his
recommendation.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs L Walker, seconded by Councillor Mrs J Trett and
RESOLVED by 9 votes to 2
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to grant a
Certificate of Lawfulness subject to seeking the applicant’s written
response to the letter referred to by the Planning Legal Manager.
(106) WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/10/0784 - Erection of 2no. two-storey dwellings
and four apartments; Partners, Northfield Lane for Novus Construction
(Norfolk) Ltd
The Committee considered item 7 of the officers’ reports giving an assessment of
possible reasons for refusal advanced at the previous meeting.
Public Speakers
Mr Ellison (Wells Town Council)
Miss Case (objecting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that a letter had been received from a
neighbour in respect of overlooking and loss of privacy. Correspondence had also
been received in respect of highway issues. A letter had been received from English
Heritage reiterating its objection to this proposal. She reported the contents of a
letter which had been received from the applicant’s agent stating that his client was
open to helpful suggestions to improve the scheme and pointing out that there were
no objections in policy terms nor for highway, Conservation Area, density or
neighbour impact reasons.
Councillor J D Savory, a local Member, stated that he had met one of the neighbours
and had received numerous telephone calls from other neighbours in respect of this
application. He considered that the proposal was inappropriate in terms of design
and lack of local distinctiveness.
He considered that this proposal was
overdevelopment of the site and would have an overbearing impact on properties to
the north and west. In addition he considered that the proposal would be detrimental
to highway safety and the wider Conservation Area.
Councillor Mrs J Trett, also a local Member, disagreed with the views expressed by
Councillor Savory. She stated that there were no planning grounds on which to
refuse this application. However, she considered that the roof materials could be
amended.
In answer to a question the Development Control Officer (NCC Highways) confirmed
that the Highway Authority had no objection and the access construction met its
requirements.
Councillor J D Savory suggested lowering the overall height of the building to reduce
the overbearing impact on the neighbours.
The Development Manager recommended the removal of permitted development
rights for rooms in the roof.
Development Control Committee
7
21 October 2010
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs M Seward, duly seconded and
RESOLVED by 8 votes to 3 with 1 abstention
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to further negotiations in respect of
materials and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions to
include removal of permitted development rights for rooms in the roof.
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.
(107) BLAKENEY - PF/10/0447 - Erection of Storage Barn; Highfield House, 5 Wiveton
Road for Mr Langley
The Committee considered item 8 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Allison (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported discussions that had taken place since the
application was last considered and that amended plans had been received in
respect of amended siting and landscaping. She reported the further comments of
the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) in respect of the
amended plans. She recommended approval of this application, as amended,
subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions, to include agreement on material
details, landscaping, highways, restriction on the uses of the building to those
proposed, and the use of the land to remain as agricultural/paddock and not part of
the domestic curtilage.
Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, the local Member, stated that, whilst she regretted the
intrusion into the open countryside, she considered that as much as possible had
been done to alleviate the problem. She therefore supported the proposal.
It was proposed by Councillor S C Mears, seconded by Councillor H C Cordeaux and
Development Control Committee
8
21 October 2010
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application, as amended, be approved subject to the
imposition of appropriate conditions, to include agreement on material
details, landscaping, highways, restriction on the uses of the building to
those proposed, and the use of the land to remain as
agricultural/paddock and not part of the domestic curtilage.
(108) BRISTON - PF/10/0566 - Siting of mobile home for agricultural worker; Land at
Brambles Farm, Thurning Road for Mr M Holden
Councillor J A Wyatt vacated the Chair to allow him to speak from the floor as local
Member.
Councillor H C Cordeaux (Vice-Chairman for the meeting) in the Chair.
The Committee considered item 9 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Watts (supporting)
Councillor J A Wyatt, the local Member, spoke in support of this application and
referred to the need for security. He considered that the business was likely to
become viable in terms of the policy tests and proposed that this application be
approved for a temporary period of two years. This was seconded by Councillor J H
Perry-Warnes.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes stated that the applicant had spoken to him. He stated
that the nature of the business was not large-scale pig production.
Councillor Mrs L Walker proposed the officer’s recommendation for refusal of this
application.
Councillor B Smith supported the views of the local Member. He referred to the need
to support local businesses.
In response to comments by Mr Watts, the Development Manager stated that an
independent report had been sought as Officers had concerns regarding the
submitted information. He advised the Committee to take account of the need to
meet the financial and functional tests and stated that security was not a reason to
approve this application. He advised that if the Committee were minded to approve
this application it should be personal to the applicant, which would allow the matter to
be reviewed at the end of the temporary period.
Councillor S C Mears asked if a condition could be imposed in respect of the number
of livestock. The Development Manager stated that it would be difficult to impose a
limit on stock numbers.
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved for a temporary period of two years,
personal to the applicant, subject to the imposition of appropriate
conditions.
Reason: The Committee recognises the need for the full-time care of the
livestock and to allow the applicant the opportunity to develop his
business over the two year temporary period.
Development Control Committee
9
21 October 2010
(109) BRISTON - PF/10/0813 - Erection of one-and-a-half-storey dwelling and garage;
Land at 38 Church Street, Briston, NR24 2LE for Mr B Thompson and Ms M
Colley
Councillor J A Wyatt vacated the Chair to allow him to speak from the floor as local
Member.
Councillor H C Cordeaux (Vice-Chairman for the meeting) in the Chair.
The Committee considered item 10 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Eggleton (Briston Parish Council)
Councillor J A Wyatt, the local Member, expressed concern in respect of overlooking
of dwellings in Hewitts Close and highway safety issues. He requested a condition to
prevent access onto Gloucester Place.
The Development Manager explained that there would be no direct overlooking
towards Hewitts Close as there were no windows proposed in the elevation facing
Hewitts Close.
It was proposed by Councillor R Combe, seconded by Councillor B Smith and
RESOLVED by 7 votes to 4 with 1 abstention
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to further consultation with the Fire
Officer in respect of a sprinkler system and to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
(110) FAKENHAM - PO/10/0898 - Erection of two detached one and a half storey
dwellings; Lavengro, Heath Lane for Mr Gilchrist
The Committee considered item 11 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Mrs Chappell (Fakenham Town Council)
Mr Bradley (objecting)
Councillor Mrs G M D Lisher, a local Member, expressed concerns regarding highway
and pedestrian safety and blocking of the road by delivery vehicles.
Councillor J Lisher, also a local Member, stated that Heath Lane was a narrow,
unadopted road. He considered that this road was unsuitable for anything other than
4-wheel drive vehicles and pedestrians. He was concerned at damage to the footway
by HGVs, narrowness of the access and lack of parking provision. He referred to the
vehicle movements associated with the care home opposite the site. He urged
refusal of this application.
Councillor S C Mears stated that many residential roads were narrow, and he
considered that two additional dwellings would make little difference to the use of the
lane by HGVs. He considered that parking on the pavement by existing residents
was a problem.
Development Control Committee
10
21 October 2010
It was proposed by Councillor P W High, seconded by Councillor B Smith and
RESOLVED by 8 votes to 2 with 2 abstentions
That this application be refused on grounds relating to the unsuitability
of the access to cater for the development by reason of its construction
and width and detriment to highway safety.
(111) ITTERINGHAM - PF/10/1131 - Variation of condition 3 of planning reference:
03/0368 to permit retail use of the studio for three days a week; Fair Meadow
House, Wolterton Road for Ms Green
The Committee considered item 12 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Ms Green (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that the Highway Authority had no objection to
this application following the submission of further information. Environmental Health
had no further comments. Itteringham Parish Council had no objection but had
requested a temporary permission and the imposition of a number of conditions
regarding access, signage and operation of the business. Twelve letters of objection
had been received in respect of parking issues, possible damage to listed walls,
unsustainable location, loss of privacy, noise and disturbance and Human Rights
issues. A letter had been received from the occupier of Broomhill Cottage suggesting
a number of conditions. The applicant had clarified how access to the premises
would be controlled and proposed to erect a sign on the pedestrian access to deter
visitors from using the private driveway and adjacent to the carriageway to request
drivers not to block the driveway. She had offered to place a rope across the
driveway if problems arose.
The Senior Planning Officer requested delegated authority to approve this application
subject to no new grounds of objection being received following expiry of the press
notice and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
It was proposed by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, seconded by Councillor Mrs L
Walker and
RESOLVED unanimously
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to no new grounds of objection being
received following expiry of the press notice and subject to the
imposition of appropriate conditions.
(112) LETHERINGSETT WITH GLANDFORD - PF/10/0084 - Conversion of all buildings
on the site to form 8 number two and three bedroom dwellings (excluding the
malt kilns which are to be secured as a permanent bat roost) including
associated hard and soft landscaping; Letheringsett Maltings, Holt Road for
Gainsborough Construction
Councillor Mrs L M Brettle declared a personal interest in this application as she knew
the applicant and was an immediate neighbour to the site.
Development Control Committee
11
21 October 2010
The Committee considered item 13 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Fynn (supporting)
The Development Manager reported that the CPRE supported this application.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager stated that he had taken a
pragmatic view of this proposal as the benefits of finding a use for the building
outweighed his concerns. There were also benefits in terms of contribution to the
wider Conservation Area. The loss of the internal horizontal space was a
consideration. He referred to PPS5, and in particular its reference to substantial
harm. However, he considered that in this case it was necessary to accept some
harm for the greater good.
Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, the local Member, stated that the Parish Council
supported this application and that there was strong local support for the proposals.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson, Heritage Champion, referred to the condition of the
building and supported this application.
It was proposed by Councillor R Combe, seconded by Councillor H C Cordeaux and
RESOLVED unanimously
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application, subject to reference to the Environment
Agency in view of its objection, and subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
(113) MELTON CONSTABLE - PF/10/0738 - Erection of general purpose agricultural
building; Land off Melton Road for G W Harrold & Partners
The Committee considered item 14 of the officers’ reports.
The Development Manager reported that further comments were awaited from the
Parish Council and the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape).
Councillor R Combe, the local Member, reported that the Parish Council had agreed
to withdraw its objection.
It was proposed by Councillor R Combe, seconded by Councillor P W High and
RESOLVED unanimously
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to no new grounds of objection from
the Parish Council or the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager
(Landscape) and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Development Control Committee
12
21 October 2010
(114) NORTH WALSHAM - HZ/09/0996 - Hazardous Substances Consent for Storage
of Gasoline and Naphthas; Station Yard, Norwich Road for British Pipeline
Agency Limited
Councillor Ms V R Gay declared a personal interest in this application as she
understood that her home was within the evacuation area of the site.
The Committee considered item 15 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Price (supporting)
Councillor Miss P E Ford referred to local concerns regarding safety and the
Council’s reluctance to grant planning permission in the area surrounding the site.
She stated that the site had been improved in recent years in response to the
strengthening of HSE requirements. She reminded the Members of their duty of care
towards people in the area. She requested assurance that all necessary measures
would be implemented. She referred to the recent fire at Bacton Gas Terminal.
Councillor Mrs M Seward, a local Member, also requested reassurance for residents
of North Walsham and the surrounding area. She stated that if this application were
approved Members should take ownership and responsibility for the decision. She
requested information regarding the next stage of improvements to the site and the
timescale for implementation.
The Senior Planning Officer stated that the plan of implementation was an ongoing
process and would be agreed with the HSE. Some of the mitigation works may
require planning permission, for example, raising of the bunding walls. No work
would be started unless the HSE was satisfied.
Councillor Mrs Seward requested that local Members were kept informed of activities
on the site.
Councillor Ms V R Gay, a local Member, reminded the Committee of the issues in this
case. She stated that she was inclined to support the recommendation but was
mindful of the comments in the report that the works proposed by the applicant would
in due course satisfy the HSE. She requested the Committee to seek a further report
to ensure that Members were kept appraised of the situation.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs M Seward, duly seconded and
RESOLVED unanimously
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application, subject to the imposition of appropriate
conditions and to receipt of confirmation from the Health and Safety
Executive that the works proposed by the applicant, if implemented,
would enable it to withdraw its objection, and that local Members be
kept informed of activities taking place on the site.
Development Control Committee
13
21 October 2010
(115) NORTH WALSHAM - PF/10/0817 - Erection of 40-Bed Care Home; Manor House,
Skeyton Road for The Manor House (North Walsham Wood) Limited
The Committee considered item 16 of the officers’ reports
Public Speaker
Mr Newbold (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that revised plans had been received in respect
of additional parking and passing bays. The Landscape Officer was satisfied that no
trees of any importance would be affected. Clarification had been received in respect
of room size. Whilst room size and type of accommodation was an issue for Social
Services legislation, confirmation had been sought that the rooms would meet the
required standard. It had been confirmed that room size was 20% above the required
standard.
The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval of this application subject to the
imposition of appropriate conditions.
Councillor Ms V R Gay, a local Member, referred to the concerns of the Town
Council. She also had concerns with regard to size of rooms, design of the building,
the limited number of bathrooms and issues raised by Norfolk County Council. She
requested that consideration be given to possible noise pollution from air conditioning
units. She stated that Councillor Mrs M Seward, who had left the meeting, had
concerns regarding the design of the building.
Councillor Miss P E Ford stated that Councillor Mrs Seward was also concerned with
regard to room space, which was a concern she shared. She was also concerned
about noise pollution and referred to a similar home in North Walsham where there
were noise issues. She stated that she had a smallholding adjacent to the proposed
building. She requested a condition in respect of noise insulation so that it did not
infringe the Human Rights of people in the surrounding countryside.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes considered that this application should not be approved
until Norfolk County Council Community Services was satisfied that its requirements
were met. He considered that this application should be refused.
The Development Manager explained that the Local Planning Authority was primarily
concerned with land use matters. The issues raised by Norfolk County Council in
terms of internal layout and the future control of the facility were issues for that
Authority. He stated that en-suite facilities were being provided. Noise issues in
respect of air conditioning could be dealt with by condition.
At the request of the Chairman, Mr Newbold explained the facilities that would be
provided and stated that the proposed home would exceed the standards required by
the Quality Care Commission.
It was proposed by Councillor R Combe, seconded by Councillor P W High and
RESOLVED by 6 votes to 3
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions including in respect of any air conditioning or
ventilation to control noise.
Development Control Committee
14
21 October 2010
(116) SHERINGHAM - PF/10/0291 - Erection of one and a half-storey extension to
provide two additional flats; 7 Holt Road for Messrs P and T Jenkins
The Committee considered item 17 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr McGinn (Sheringham Town Council)
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson, a local Member, stated that she shared the Town
Council’s reservations. She stated that there was a large development taking place
to the west of Sheringham, which would use this road to access the town.
Congestion on Holway Road would be exacerbated by the Tesco development.
Councillor H C Cordeaux considered that vehicles would park on the road.
considered that the site would be overcrowded.
He
Councillor Mrs L Walker proposed refusal on grounds of overdevelopment.
Councillor P W High seconded the proposal and suggested further grounds relating to
the narrowness of the access and on-street parking.
The Head of Planning and Building Control stated that adequate parking was
provided for the current proposal. This application could not be used to control a
historic situation. He considered that overdevelopment would be difficult to justify.
He advised the Committee to visit the site.
Councillor Mrs L Walker withdrew her proposal.
It was proposed by Councillor H C Cordeaux, seconded by Councillor P J Willcox and
RESOLVED
That consideration of this application be deferred to allow an inspection
of the site by the Committee and that the local Member and Town Mayor
be invited to attend.
(117) SUFFIELD - PF/10/0618 - Restoration and upgrading of building, erection of
replacement workshop and engineering unit and removal of temporary
containers; Blacksmith Shop, The Street for North Norfolk Accident Repair
Centre
The Committee considered item 18 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Anderson-Dungar (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that the applicant’s agent had requested that
consideration be deferred to address alleged inaccuracies in the report. There had
been no indication as to what those inaccuracies were. He suggested that Members
could benefit from visiting the site. However, he recommended refusal as set out in
the report.
Development Control Committee
15
21 October 2010
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins, the local Member, supported the recommendation for
refusal. She stated that she had not called in the application as she had been
satisfied with the recommendation. She considered that the business would be more
appropriately located on an industrial site. She considered that employment issues
did not outweigh planning policy in this case. She expressed concerns regarding
residential amenity and highway safety. She requested that action be taken to
remove the three containers which did not have the benefit of planning permission.
She requested a site visit if the Committee were minded to approve this application.
Councillor P J Willcox stated that he had brought this application to Committee. He
considered that local businesses should be supported. He stated that this was an
established commercial business, with limited opportunity to expand, and the
proposal would tidy the site. He stated that five neighbours closest to the site
supported this application.
The Development Manager suggested that the Highway Authority be invited to attend
a site inspection, which would also give the agent the opportunity to discuss any
inaccuracies in the report.
Councillor Mrs Wilkins requested information on the exact nature of the business to
be carried out.
It was proposed by Councillor P J Willcox, seconded by Councillor H C Cordeaux
and
RESOLVED unanimously
That consideration of this application be deferred to allow an inspection
of the site by the Committee and that the local Member, Chairman of the
Parish Council and a representative of the Highway Authority be invited
to attend.
(118) APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 19 of the officers’ reports.
(119) APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 20 of the officers’ reports.
(120) NEW APPEALS
The Committee noted item 21 of the officers’ reports.
(121) PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 22 of the officers’ reports.
(122) WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 23 of the officers’ reports.
(123) APPEAL DECISIONS
The Committee noted item 24 of the officers’ reports.
Development Control Committee
16
21 October 2010
(124) 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.
(125) WEYBOURNE – PF/09/1270 – Installation of buried electrical cable system in
connection with off-shore wind farm; Land from Weybourne to Great Ryburgh
for Dudgeon Offshore Wind Ltd
The Committee considered item 25 of the officers’ exempt reports relating to legal
advice in connection with an application which will be the subject of a report to a
future meeting of the Committee.
RESOLVED
That the report be noted.
The meeting closed at 2.35 pm.
Development Control Committee
17
21 October 2010