24 JUNE 2013
Minutes of a meeting of the PLANNING POLICY & BUILT HERITAGE WORKING PARTY
held in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 10.00 am when there
were present:
Councillors
Mrs S A Arnold (Vice-Chairman)
M J M Baker
B Cabbell Manners
N D Dixon
Mrs A R Green
Mrs P Grove-Jones
Miss B Palmer
P Williams
D Young
Mrs V Uprichard – observer
Officers
Mr M Ashwell – Planning Policy Manager
Mr P Godwin – Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager
Mr J Williams – Team Leader (Major Developments)
(1)
ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs S A Arnold, seconded by Councillor Miss B
Palmer and
RESOLVED
That Councillor B Cabbell Manners be elected Chairman of the Working
Party.
(2)
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
An apology for absence was received from Councillor P W High.
(3)
MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting held on 8 October 2012 were approved as a correct
record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the inclusion of Councillor N D Dixon’s
apologies under minute 33.
(4)
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
The Chairman stated that there were no items of urgent business which he wished to
bring before the Working Party.
(5)
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor B Cabbell Manners declared an interest in respect of items on the agenda
as he was a Trustee in an application which was in process of consideration.
Councillor M J M Baker declared an interest in Minute (7) as he ran a business in
Holt.
Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party
1
24 June 2013
(6)
NORTH NORFOLK BUILDINGS AT RISK REGISTER
The Working Party considered item 1 of the Officers’ reports in respect of the
adoption of the Council’s own Buildings at Risk Register which explained the process
by which Listed Buildings and Scheduled Ancient Monuments come to be identified
on the register.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager explained that English Heritage
maintained a list of Grade I and II* Listed buildings. The Council’s list would cover all
listed buildings at risk in the District regardless of their grade. He referred to a
number of buildings which were included on the list and the ways in which the
Council was able to assist in their repair or preservation. He emphasised the
importance of listed buildings and heritage assets in contributing to the character of
the District. He also stated that the reuse of such assets contributed to the
sustainability agenda and could very often perform as well as modern buildings.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager stated that the aim of the
Register was not to shame anyone. Its purpose was to list the buildings which the
Council was aware of, which would be updated on a regular basis, and use it to
address any prevailing issues. Wherever possible, the Council would work with
owners to bring about repairs, or through the North Norfolk Historic Buildings Trust
and English Heritage.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager recommended that Cabinet be
requested to adopt the Buildings at Risk register, and suggested that basic
information in respect of buildings on the register be published on the Council’s
website. This was proposed by Councillor M J M Baker and seconded by Councillor
Mrs S A Arnold.
Councillor Mrs S A Arnold updated the Working Party with regard to the Mundesley
Hospital building, which she understood had been purchased.
Councillor Mrs V Uprichard expressed concern as to the power the Council had to
ensure that historic buildings were cared for. She asked whether North Walsham
Parish Church was on the list.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager explained that North Walsham
Parish Church was not in sufficiently poor condition to be on the list. The list would
be monitored and updates made to it as required. The list would be used to address
some of the key buildings and, where necessary, the Council had the powers to deal
with issues arising.
Councillor N D Dixon stated that the Broads Authority maintained a similar list. He
asked if there was merit in including on the Council’s list those buildings which also
fell within the NNDC administrative area. He considered that it was necessary to be
creative and innovative in planning terms as to what could be done to assist people
in saving buildings, rather than just providing financial assistance, and requested
more information on the work the Council was doing in this regard.
Councillor P Williams suggested that a Lottery-funded apprenticeship scheme be
introduced to train people in the traditional skills required to maintain historic
buildings, similar to the millwright apprenticeship run by the Broads Authority.
Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party
2
24 June 2013
Councillor Mrs S A Arnold requested that the Working Party be updated with regard
to progress. The Chairman suggested that regular updates be provided at
appropriate intervals at future meetings.
Councillor P Williams suggested that a map be included on the website for people to
click on. The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager stated that he would
need to check the legal position as to how all information could be placed on the
website.
RECOMMENDED
That Cabinet adopts the North Norfolk Buildings at Risk Register, with
the possible inclusion of those buildings contained on the Broads
Authority’s list which fall within North Norfolk, and that subject to
investigation of the legal requirements, the list be published on the
Council’s website.
(7)
HOLT DEVELOPMENT BRIEF
The Working Party considered item 2 of the Officers’ reports which provided a
summary of the representations made in relation to the draft Development Brief for
land at Heath Farm, Hempstead Road, Holt following a recent public consultation
exercise.
The Team Leader (Major Developments) reported that the Highway Authority’s
response had been received and emailed to Members. The number of responses
received from members of the public had been low, but a successful exhibition had
been held in Holt and it was clear that the site was of great interest to local people.
Highway issues had been raised as the main concern.
The Team Leader (Major Developments) presented the Development Brief and
Masterplan. He outlined the issues raised by the Highway Authority, and in
particular, the requirement to prevent the use of Hempstead Road by HGV traffic,
with possible closure of Hempstead Road or physical measures to prevent access by
HGVs. The Highway Authority had suggested changes to the Brief to allow flexibility.
The Highway Authority also did not favour the land earmarked for ‘other residential’
being accessed from Hempstead Road because of poor visibility and lack of
footpaths. However, the Brief indicated possible access through the centre of the
area earmarked for public open space. The Team Leader (Major Developments)
considered that it would be preferable to relocate this access to the edge of the
employment area.
The Team Leader (Major Developments) reported the comments of Councillor P W
High, a local Member, who was unable to attend the meeting. Councillor High
supported the Brief. However, he did not support the closure of Hempstead Road,
but would support restrictions which would prevent access by heavy vehicles.
The Team Leader (Major Developments) stated that no substantial changes to the
Brief were necessary as a result of the consultation exercise. He recommended that
the wording be amended as requested by the Highway Authority and a slight change
made in respect of access from the ‘other residential’ site to avoid crossing the centre
of the public open space. Detailed highway matters would be addressed through
planning applications. He reported that a planning application was being prepared
for a large part of the site earmarked for phases 1 and 2.
Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party
3
24 June 2013
The Team Leader (Major Developments) recommended that the Brief be referred to
Cabinet with a recommendation for approval.
Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party
4
24 June 2013
Public Speaker
Mrs D Dann (Holt Town Council)
Councillor M J M Baker, a local Member, reported that he had spoken to Officers of
Norfolk County Council who appeared to accept that Hempstead Road would not be
closed, accept the pedestrian link to the town centre and that the Hopkins Homes
part of the site would be accessed from Hempstead Road. He stated that there was
a footpath from the entrance to that part of the site which was classified as ‘adequate
or good’. The developers had indicated to him that phase 1 could be expanded
slightly to allow the road through the site to be built in its entirety. He considered
that restrictions and traffic calming would be preferable to closure of Hempstead
Road. This would reduce the amount of traffic using Hempstead Road and improve
pedestrian safety. He considered that it would be necessary to introduce traffic
calming on Charles Road to prevent it being used by HGVs. He considered that the
hopper bus being proposed by the Town Council should be taken into account.
The Team Leader (Major Developments) explained that the physical works to restrict
HGVs included in the brief were non-specific and could include signage.
Councillor P Williams considered that phase 1 should include the link road down to
the industrial estate, with narrowing of the access to Hempstead Road to prevent
HGV access. He supported the provision of a hopper bus. He supported the Team
Leader (Major Developments)’s suggestion for re-routing the access from Hopkins
Homes’ site.
Councillor Mrs S A Arnold considered that the all of the green open space area
should be developed in phase 1.
Councillor M J M Baker stated that whilst he would like to see the open space and
roadway developed as part of phase 1, but it could be expensive and require more
plots to be developed in phase 1 to fund it.
The Team Leader (Major Developments) stated that amendments to the phasing of
development would be acceptable. With regard to the hopper bus, if it were the
expectation that it should be funded by the developer, there may be implications for
financial viability. The Development Brief made provision for public transport and
pedestrian movement through the site. He suggested that hopper bus provision be
addressed through a planning application rather than through the Development Brief.
Councillor D Young supported the views of Councillor M J M Baker regarding
phasing. He referred to the Town Council’s concerns regarding parking, and
considered that very few people would walk into the town centre from the site. He
considered that the hopper bus could be mentioned in the Brief. He considered that
there would be a need for bus access to Hempstead Road.
It was proposed by Councillor M J M Baker, seconded by Councillor P Williams and
RECOMMENDED
That Cabinet approves the Holt Development Brief, subject to minor
amendments to the wording as suggested by the Highway Authority,
and to ensure internal access roads did not divide the open space.
Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party
5
24 June 2013
(8)
LEGISLATION UPDATE – PUBLICATION OF GROWTH AND INFRASTRUCTURE
ACT
The Working Party noted item 3 of the Officers’ reports which provided an overview
of the provisions of the Growth and Infrastructure Act in relation to land use planning
and explained new allowances for undertaking development without the need to
apply to the Council for planning permission.
The Planning Policy Manager anticipated that the changes in legislation outlined in
the report would start having an impact in a year to eighteen months’ time.
RESOLVED
That the report be noted.
(9)
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORTS AND HOUSING LAND SUPPLY –
PUBLICATION OF AMR AND STATEMENT OF FIVE YEAR SUPPLY OF
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LAND
The Working Party considered item 4 of the Officers’ reports which provided an
overview of the main development trends in the District in the period 2011-2013 and
measured performance against adopted Core Strategy policy and corporate
objectives and seeks authority to publish Annual Monitoring reports and Five Year
Land Supply Statements.
Councillor Mrs S A Arnold raised concerns regarding land banking and referred to a
radio report which indicated that the Government intended to bring about the
development of large sites more quickly.
The Planning Policy Manager stated that the Government was considering the
introduction of a land banking tax, but he was unsure as to whether it would progress.
His team was considering incentives which could be used which were linked to oneyear planning permissions and positive measures to ensure delivery of sites.
Councillor Mrs P Grove-Jones referred to the need to create employment
opportunities as well as build houses.
In answer to a question by Councillor P Williams, the Planning Policy Manager stated
that he thought the figures excluded the Broads Authority area as they recorded their
development separately. He would check and contact Councillor Williams direct.
In answer to a question by Councillor N D Dixon, the Planning Policy Manager
explained that the reference in the report to rising values related to increases in
house prices but there was no reported increase in the volume of new-build sales.
Councillor Mrs V Uprichard expressed concern that in the future it might be desirable
to allow large housebuilders to develop sites in order to meet targets, but at the
expense of affordable housing or other benefits. She referred to a site in North
Walsham which was being proposed by Hopkins Homes with no affordable housing
or Section 106 contributions.
The Planning Policy Manager explained that the site at North Walsham had been
derelict for a number of years and housing was not being delivered against the target.
There was a balance to be struck between securing delivery now or waiting for
economic recovery. These judgements would be for Development Committee to
Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party
6
24 June 2013
make when the application came before it. He stated that it might be necessary to
take a different view in respect of developments in North Walsham than elsewhere in
the District.
Councillor Mrs A R Green asked if there was an advantage in encouraging an
element of self-build on some of the sites. The Planning Policy Manager considered
that self-build was unlikely to achieve the level of building required but it was not
ruled out.
RECOMMENDED
That Cabinet approves the publication of the Annual Monitoring Reports
and Statements of Five Year Land Supply covering the period 2010/13.
(10)
COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY
The Working Party considered item 5 of the Officers’ reports which provided an
update in relation to the potential introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy in
the District.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs S A Arnold, seconded by Councillor M J M Baker
and
RECOMMENDED
That Cabinet suspends consideration of the potential introduction of the
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).
The meeting closed at 11.35 am.
Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party
7
24 June 2013