OFFICERS’ REPORTS TO
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE – 6 JUNE 2013
Each report for decision on this Agenda shows the Officer responsible, the recommendation
of the Head of Development Management and in the case of private business the
paragraph(s) of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 under which it is
considered exempt. None of the reports have financial, legal or policy implications save
where indicated.
1.
THE GRAHAM ALLEN AWARD FOR CONSERVATION AND DESIGN
This report outlines the need to establish a Judging Panel for this year’s Graham
Allen Award for Conservation and Design and to agree the proposed dates for the
judging and presentation of the awards.
The Graham Allen Award for Conservation and Design was inaugurated in 1982 as a
memorial to the late Councillor G.S. Allen, first Chairman of North Norfolk District
Council. Since then it has been presented annually by the Council to the scheme
considered to make the most significant contribution to the built environment within
the District. Eligible projects can involve the conservation and restoration of historic
properties as well as new buildings which, through their design, make innovative use
of traditional building forms and detailing.
A Judging Panel needs to be set up to consider, evaluate and judge submissions
under the award scheme, and make awards accordingly. Membership of this Panel
will be drawn from the Development Committee. Please note that the panel no longer
has to be politically balanced. The Panel comprises nine Members (one of whom will
be elected Chairman), the relevant Portfolio Member, and Mr Edward Allen, Graham
Allen‟s eldest son, who once again has kindly agreed to be the permanent
representative from the Allen family. The closing date for entries is 30th June 2013.
It is suggested that the Judging Panel convenes on 2nd August 2013 at the Council
Offices to consider and judge the entries. As in previous years, the day will
commence with a short presentation of all entries in the Council Chamber followed by
a tour of those short-listed. There will then be a brief plenary session back in the
Council Chamber on the merits of each scheme. The day will conclude with members
of the Judging Panel voting on the entries. The awards will then be presented at a
ceremony later in the year. At the time of writing this report 26th September 2013
after Development Committee would appear to be the preferred date, pending
confirmation of Edward Allen‟s availability.
RECOMMENDATION:1.
That the Committee nominates a total of nine Members to form the
Graham Allen Award Judging Panel, one of whom will be elected
Chairman.
2.
That the date for judging the entries be accepted and that the date for
the presentation be noted pending final confirmation.
(Source: Paul Rhymes, Extn: 6367 – File Reference: GA Award)
Development Committee
1
6 June 2013
PUBLIC BUSINESS – ITEMS FOR DECISION
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Note :- Recommendations for approval include a standard time limit condition as Condition
No.1, unless otherwise stated.
2.
ALDBOROUGH - PF/13/0135 - Erection of two-storey and single-storey side
extension; Greenside, The Green for Mr P Clark
- Target Date: 01 April 2013
Case Officer: Mrs M Moore
Householder application
CONSTRAINTS
Conservation Area
Residential Area
Settlement Boundary
PF/12/0289 HOU - Erection of two-storey side extension
Withdrawn by Applicant 20/04/2012
THE APPLICATION
Seeks to erect a two-storey side extension measuring approximately 5.3m wide by
5m deep by 7.3m high and a single-storey element measuring approximately 3.15m
wide by 1.4m by 3.5m high.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor N Smith having regard to the following planning issues:
Loss of light and overshadowing to neighbouring properties.
PARISH COUNCIL
Object to the application. The proposed development will block most of the light from
the rear of the adjacent property known as Fox Cottage and will overshadow Fox
Cottage and Victoria Cottage. Furthermore, in spite of the Parish Council's previous
objections to Application PF/12/0289, this present application is for an even larger
rear extension.
REPRESENTATIONS
4 representations have been received, comprising 3 objections and 1 support.
Objections (summarised)
Size of the extension - even larger extension than previous application reference
PF/12/0289 and would make property longer than existing;
Site notices are misleading and will mean that people will have been led to
believe that the extension would be added to the side of the house parallel to the
road. Documents and notices should be amended and consultation period restarted;
Impact on neighbouring properties given close proximity, resulting in shading,
shadowing, overcrowding, dominating effect and loss of light, including to Fox
Cottage and bathroom and utility room of Victoria Cottage. Only access Fox
Cottage has to sunlight is from the south/south-west and the new building would
remove this;
Object to footings extending into neighbour property;
Drainage concerns - access point on the soil drain is shown as being within
neighbour property;
Development Committee
2
6 June 2013
Applicant's water meter and stopcock within neighbour property and attached to
wall of current utility room. Would have to be moved if wall demolished, which
would cause disturbance to neighbour and land where oil tank situated;
Disruption caused by scaffolding would be considerable and unacceptable;
Drawings lack detail as to how the wall would be demolished or reconstruction of
single-storey extension. No mention what would be done about repairing damage
caused to area around drains;
Pipe shown on single-storey wall which is not apparent on plan;
Increased level of damp around property and there will be virtually no sunlight to
assist with drying process;
Parking concerns as off-road parking on site has been eliminated since change in
ownership. Property has made itself reliant on multiple, permanent use of
concreted area creased on The Green opposite the house. The aspect of site and
property have been improved by the removal of what is a vital facility which is
perhaps a legal requirement is available;
Substantial single-storey blockwork and pantile storage building and sheds to
rear of site. The size, type and location of these structures needs to be
considered with the proximity of the proposal. Will this part of the site become
overcrowded by a two-storey extension? Can only be assessed by submission of
full and accurate details of all structures that exist on site. The site plan indicates
OS accreditation, but the missing building obviously predates the plan and it also
needs to be understood that there is no access to rear of site from The Loke;
Permission for a two-storey extension in the proposed location should not be
swayed by existence of a single-storey extension or configuration of internal
layout of existing house. At the time the house was built, the almost abutting
elevation mirrored those of Fox and Victoria Cottages. The house orientation and
location on site took full advantage of a south-west facing position looking along
the width of plot (viewed from road) which included the ground on which Nelson
House is now built;
Plot can accept further development, but not just where it is convenient to do so;
Limit of the two-storey house as built matches more or less the previously extant
Fox and Victoria Cottages;
Proposal makes little sacrifice in interior design to ameliorate these effects. By
placing it behind and totally in-line with existing house it increases from 3 bed to 5
maximising development on a capacious site to detriment of closest neighbours;
Open aspect would be achieved through a diminution of aspect, shading and
enjoyment of limited recreational areas of the two adjoining properties and total
loss of off-road parking for property;
Any two-storey extension should be located on side of property facing Nelson
House;
Potential to divide and alter and form a one-bed property at end;
Reconstruction of any single-storey extension should be set back from boundary
sufficiently to facilitate construction and scaffolding work;
Any limitation that can be imposed to prevent/prohibit necessity for intrusion of
plant, materials and workmen on neighbouring property would seem to be a
requirement;
Support (summarised)
Development in no way detrimental to the Conservation Area and it is important
that the village has appropriate housing for families, because we are in danger
otherwise of becoming either a holiday location for second home owners or a
retirement community.
Development Committee
3
6 June 2013
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8: The Right to respect for private and family life.
Article 1 of the First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the district).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development
2. Impact on Conservation Area/design
3. Impact on neighbouring amenities
APPRAISAL
Principle of development
The site lies within the Aldborough Settlement Boundary, where proposals for
extensions to existing dwellings are considered to be acceptable in principle, subject
to compliance with relevant Core Strategy policies. The site also lies within a
Conservation Area, where development proposals are required to preserve and
enhance the character and appearance of the area.
The property is a detached, two-storey house, end on to The Green.
Planning permission was sought under reference PF/12/0289 for a two-storey side
extension to the same dwelling. That application was withdrawn by the applicant
following concerns raised in respect of impact on neighbouring amenity.
Impact on Conservation Area/design
The proposed development would involve the demolition of a single-storey extension.
It is not considered that the scale of the proposed extension would dominate the
original dwelling, nor harm its architectural character. At 7.3m, the proposed
extension would have a ridge-height lower than the existing property and would be
sited to the south-east side of the dwelling.
Materials proposed are considered to be acceptable; a red facing brick, render and
tiles to match existing.
It is considered that the design as proposed would preserve the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area, in accordance with policies EN8 and EN4 of
the adopted Core Strategy.
Development Committee
4
6 June 2013
Impact on neighbouring amenities
Greenside is built-hard-up to the north-east boundary. At its closest, the extension
would sit some 2.75m away from the closest neighbouring property (Victoria
Cottage).
In terms of impact on the neighbours to the north-east, it is recognised that the side
extension would be sited close to the boundary and the neighbouring properties
which both have facing windows. The Basic Amenity Criteria recommendations
would be met between the neighbouring tertiary window of Victoria Cottage and the
proposed ground floor blank elevation. Whilst there would be a potential shortfall with
the Basic Amenity Criteria recommendation in terms of the relationship with Fox
Cottage, given the existing relationship and given that the proposed first floor
rooflight would be high-level, it is not considered that the proposed development
would have a significantly detrimental impact in terms of overlooking.
In terms of loss of light/overbearing impact, with a modest eaves height of
approximately 2.6m and total height of 3.55m and a roof that would slope away from
the neighbouring dwelling, it is not considered that the proposed single-storey
extension would have a greater detrimental impact than the existing extension. In
fact, with the extension set in from the rear building-line by approximately 0.25m, it
would be sited further from the boundary than the existing extension.
The two-storey extension would be set approximately 1.6m in from the boundary with
an eaves height of approximately 5.3m and a total height of 7.3m, off-set from the
main ridge-line. Given that the extension would be set in from the rear building-line
and given existing close relationships between the properties, it is not considered
that refusal of permission would be justified in respect of loss of light or overbearing
impact.
The proposal is considered to comply with the policies of the Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve, subject to the imposition of appropriate
conditions, including the below:
2
This permission is granted in accordance with the first submitted location plan
and in accordance with the amended plan (drawing titled proposed extension)
received by the Local Planning Authority on 17 April 2013.
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
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking, amending or reenacting that Order with or without modification) no additional window or
rooflight shall be inserted in the north-east rear elevations or roofslopes of the
two-storey or single-storey extensions hereby permitted unless planning
permission has been first granted by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
To ensure a satisfactory relationship with neighbouring dwellings, in
accordance with Policy EN 4 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy, as
amplified by paragraphs 3.3.9 to 3.3.11 of the Design Guide.
Development Committee
5
6 June 2013
4
The rooflight proposed for the north-east rear roofslope shall be installed at
least 1.75m above the finished internal floor level of the room in which it would
be installed, and shall be thereafter so retained.
Reason:
To prevent undue loss of privacy to the neighbouring property, in accordance
with Policy EN 4 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy as amplified by
paragraphs 3.3.9-3.3.11 of the North Norfolk Design Guide.
5
Materials to be used on the permitted extensions shall match those of the
existing building, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
In order for the appearance of the approved development to merge
satisfactorily with its surroundings, in accordance with Policy EN 4 of the
adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy.
3.
BODHAM - PF/13/0099 - Installation of sheet piling and stop log weir; Selbrigg
Pond for Mr Feilden
Minor Development
- Target Date: 02 April 2013
Case Officer: Miss J Medler
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
County Wildlife Site
Flood Zone 2
THE APPLICATION
Is for the installation of sheet piling and stop log weir.
The sheet piling would be 250mm in front of the existing retaining wall which keeps
the water from Selbrigg Pond at a level of approximately 1m higher than the road
level. The sheets would be 3.5m long and driven level into the ground level with the
top of the current wall and finished with hardwood capping and waling. The sheet
piling would run for a length of approximately 100m. A new purpose made stop log
weir would be incorporated into the sheet metal piling, repairs made to the existing
brick culvert and the old sluice removed. A new reinforced concrete slab would be
formed over the open culvert supported on the existing brick side walls which would
be covered with 100mm of topsoil to blend in with the bank and path.
A Method Statement setting out details of the construction of the works has
subsequently been received.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Wright having regard to the following planning issue:
Potential flooding issues.
PARISH COUNCIL
Support.
Development Committee
6
6 June 2013
REPRESENTATIONS
Two emails have been received from the same person commenting on the
application as follows:
1. Presently the road is very dangerous with the stream running so close.
2. It is even more of a safety hazard and concern when a higher volume of water is
flowing and the area floods directly across the road.
3. There is no safe passing point there – the Highways department have attempted
numerous times to tidy and make the area safe.
4. If there is work to be carried out with piling and repairing the sluice, would this not
be the time to redirect the River Glaven back to its original course though
Selbrigg pond and out via the sluice and directly under the road. This would again
be back to its original course and thus totally avoiding the continuous flooding
during the winter months.
5. With all the concern regarding silt entering the river in its present form is this not
just another area where the river is picking up more mud and silt that should be
addressed?
6. Hempstead mill pond which is the next area to collect all the plastic bottles, dead
fish and rubbish etc. which is left at the bank side at Selbrigg. We also receive all
the silt and mud which washes off the road with each rainfall and even more
when Selbrigg overflows its dam wall.
7. There is no grate to stop the vegetation flowing downstream from Selbrigg pond
or any secondary relief channel to control in times of heavy rains and floods both
of which should be maintained at all times.
8. The “Drain” marked on block plan 13.0099 running around Selbrigg pond is
actually the River Glaven.
9. The pond was temporarily bypassed due to a vegetable washing plant releasing
its dirty water into the river and Selbrigg pond. The washing plant has long gone.
10. The river should therefore be redirected and flowing back via its original course
though the pond via the weir shown on 0113 and out via the “ new sluice” thus
only one point that the Glaven crosses under the highway and removing the
continuous high risk of flooding in the area.
11. The secondary relief pipe could be installed within “the new sluice”.
12. A silt trap could be constructed upstream of Selbrigg pond if required.
13. The river with its present course is unnecessarily lengthened and has a constant
high flow rate. Also consider our changing weather patterns.
An email has been received from the Convenor of the MSc in Aquatic Science from
the Department of Geography at University College London who has commented as
follows:
The Glaven should not be diverted through Selbrigg Pond (a County Wildlife Site)
under any circumstances, as, with current water quality, the conservation value of the
site would be damaged due to the influx of nutrient-rich water. The sound approach is
to arrest terrestrialisation by sediment removal and maintain the isolation of the site
from the Glaven as is planned. In the future, linked to the Upper Glaven project, we
hope to reduce nutrient and sediment inputs to the upper Glaven, but diverting the
Glaven into Selbrigg Pond is not a good idea.
An email has been received from the Norfolk Rivers Trust in support of the
application and is contained in Appendix 1.
An email has been received from the applicant explaining the position in terms of the
timing of the proposed works and the need for the application to be progressed. A
copy of this email is contained in Appendix 1.
Development Committee
7
6 June 2013
A Design and Access Statement has been submitted with the application and a
Method Statement. They are contained in Appendix 1.
CONSULTATIONS
Hempstead Parish Council - No response
County Council Highways - No objection. No records of flooding on that section of
road.
Environment Agency - No objection. Advisory comments made in relation to flood
defence consent and ecology.
Norfolk Wildlife Trust - No objection. Any access to the pond for machinery should
be from the southern bank as the northern bank lies within the County Wildlife Site
and could be subject to damage.
Conservation, Design and Landscape (Landscape) - Original comments: Selbrigg
Pond is a County Wildlife Site designated for its woodland, wet wood, reedbed and
pond habitats(including aquatic plants) and diverse ground flora. Selbrigg Pond is
also the headwater for the River Glaven, which in itself is an ecologically important
river. The proposals involve the installation of galvanised sheet piling driven into the
pond bed adjacent to the existing brick wall to reinforce the retaining wall for the
pond. Concrete is proposed to be poured into the gap between the brick wall and the
new sheet piling. The piling will be finished off on the top with hardwood capping.
Aesthetically the retaining wall will not look significantly different to the existing,
therefore there is no objection raised on these grounds.
The value of the immediate habitat and flora surrounding the actual retaining wall of
the pond is limited, and restricted to open water with some marginal reed
encroachment where the water shallows around the pond edge. The main reedbed is
located to the north and east of the pond fringes and should not be affected by the
development. The lack of reed also limits the likelihood of nesting birds being present
although access to the pond will be required for the machinery, presumably around
the pond edges where nesting is more likely to occur. More detail is required on how
the diggers and machinery will access the development area (including the pond)
and how nesting birds will be protected during the development.
Obviously, the use of mechanical diggers and concrete within and around a water
course raises concerns regarding potential pollutants leaking into the water course,
which in turn could damage the habitats and flora found on the County Wildlife Site
and downstream in the River Glaven. No information has been submitted with the
application in terms of pollution control mechanisms. Further detail is required to
ensure that pollutant events will not occur or how, if they do occur, they will be
managed.
Until this information has been submitted, the Landscape Section object to the
application under Policy EN9 of the Core Strategy.
Comments following receipt of Method Statement: No objection. The method
statement addresses previous concerns and should be conditioned as part of any
approval.
Environmental Health - No objection
Development Committee
8
6 June 2013
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):
Rural Residential Conversion Area (HO9) (The site lies within an area where the reuse of an existing good quality building as a dwelling may be permitted).
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 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 9: Biodiversity and geology (requires no adverse impact on designated
nature conservation sites).
Policy EN 10: Flood risk (prevents inappropriate development in flood risk areas).
Policy CT 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. Highway safety
3. Flooding
4. Ecology
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the Countryside Policy area as designated in the Core
Strategy and Flood Zone 3 as designated by the Environment Agency. It is also a
County Wildlife Site.
The proposed development is intended to improve the existing structure as explained
in the Design and Access Statement contained in Appendix 1. It is therefore
considered to be acceptable in principle in this location and in terms of flood
protection, in accordance with Policy SS2.
The Committee will note that a representation has been received raising concerns in
relation to silt building up in Selbrigg Pond and flooding of the highway. It has been
suggested in the representation that if these improvements works are being carried
out that the River Glaven should also be re-directed along its original course so that
there is only one point where the River Glaven crosses the highway removing the
high risk of flooding in the area.
The Committee will note that no objections have been received from the consultees
including the Environment Agency and the Highway Authority. The Highway Authority
has indicated that it has no record of the road flooding.
Development Committee
9
6 June 2013
The proposed works are intended to prevent the existing structure from leaking and
water running onto the highway.
The Committee will note the comments of the The Norfolk Rivers Trust contained in
Appendix 1 in relation to re-diverting the River Glaven, flooding and silting problems.
The Landscape Officer supports the repair work required to the weir and pond and
has confirmed her agreement with the comments of The Norfolk Rivers Trust. The
Landscape Officer has advised that in relation to any diversion of the River Glaven
into the pond the Council has a statutory duty to have regard to the Water
Framework Directive. Therefore, the Council cannot consent to any works which
would further degrade the ecological status of the river.
Notwithstanding the comments that have been made in relation to re-diverting the
River Glaven, it is considered that the proposed improvement works subject to this
application would strengthen the existing structure and help to prevent flooding of the
road. In view of this and that there are no objections from the relevant consultees it is
considered that the proposal is acceptable and complies with Development Plan
policies.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following condition:
The development to which this permission relates shall be undertaken in strict
accordance with the submitted and approved plans, drawings and
specifications and Method Statement for the Protection of Wildlife and
Prevention of Pollution received by the Local Planning Authority on 22 March
2013.
4.
EDGEFIELD - PF/13/0262 - Erection of bus shelter; Edgefield Village Hall, The
Green for Edgefield Parish Council
Minor Development
- Target Date: 09 May 2013
Case Officer: Miss J Young
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
Conservation Area
THE APPLICATION
Seeks the erection of a bus shelter.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Cllr Perry-Warnes having regard to the following planning issue:
Suitability of the position of the bus shelter
PARISH COUNCIL
No objection
REPRESENTATIONS
50 objections received raising the following points:
Only a few children would use the shelter during term time on rainy days.
The position of the shelter is wrong.
Development Committee
10
6 June 2013
Absolutely no need for it .
The last bus shelter in that position was deemed not necessary to replace it.
Bus shelters often become rubbish receptacles and worse.
Have a very attractive walled green surrounding the village hall with award.
winning pond adjacent and attendant wild life and flora.
It will not enhance the appearance of the village green area.
The shelter would completely transform the aesthetic of the area of a modern
building.
Be an eyesore to neighbouring properties.
To place what is little more than a shed in this area would be disastrous.
There is no precedent for a structure in wood and polycarbonate panelling.
The shelter is incompatible with all structures in the vicinity.
Polycarbonate reacts to sunlight and discolours fairly rapidly – more of an
eyesore.
The proposed position of the bus shelter would be appear to be totally
impractical in relation to the bus stop. Inadequate time to get to the bus in
time.
Have to walk over wet grass to get to the bus.
Take up valuable parking spaces and visitors would use the road instead.
Take up play area.
The bus shelter would lead to being a target for vandalism – leading to future
sizeable repair and maintenance bills.
CONSULTATIONS
Highway Authority - No objection.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - No
objection.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8: The Right to respect for private and family life.
Article 1 of the First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues, since the proposed
bus shelter would have clear panels on 3 sides and would be open on the fourth side.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 2 - Development in the Countryside Policy SS2: Development in the
Countryside (prevents general development in the countryside with specific
exceptions).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
Development Committee
11
6 June 2013
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1.
Principle of the development
2.
Location and design
3.
Impact on Conservation Area
4.
Highway safety
APPRAISAL
Principle of the development
The site lies in the designated Countryside where development required for
communities services and facilities and transport is acceptable in principle, subject to
compliance with other policies of the Core Strategy.
It is considered that the bus shelter would not have an adverse impact on the
surrounding Countryside and would comply with Policy SS2.
Location and design
Policy EN4 advises that design which fails to have regard to local context and does
not preserve or enhance the character and quality of an area will not be acceptable.
The proposed shelter would be approximately 2.88m in height, 3.05m in length and
2.22m wide. It would sit inside the boundary wall of the village hall. The frame would
be bolted onto a concrete hard standing base. The shelter would have a pitched roof
and polycarbonate window panels all around the structure. The frame would be dark
orange hard wood with a wooden bench inside. The materials proposed are
considered to be acceptable and in keeping with the surroundings.
The design is considered to be acceptable and compliant with the aims of Policy EN4
of the adopted Core strategy.
The proposed bus shelter would take up only a small part of the Green and it is
considered that the bus shelter would not affect access or parking at the Village Hall.
It would not have an adverse impact on the village hall or any local neighbouring
amenity and its position is therefore considered to be acceptable.
Impact on Conservation Area
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager has no objection. It is
considered that the proposed shelter would preserve the character and appearance
of the Conservation Area. The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable and
compliant with Policy EN8.
Highway safety
The Highway Authority does not consider that the proposal would affect current traffic
patterns, the free flow of traffic, or restrict the visibility at adjacent road junctions.
It is considered that the proposed bus shelter would comply with the relevant Core
Strategy Policies.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Development Committee
12
6 June 2013
5.
FAKENHAM - PF/13/0349 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; Plot 1, Knoll
Gardens, Sculthorpe Road for Hall and Woodcraft Construction Ltd
Minor Development
- Target Date: 17 May 2013
Case Officer: Mr G Linder
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Residential Area
Tree Preservation Order
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
PO/20090468 PO - Erection of four dwellings
Approved 27/08/2009
PF/11/1348 PF - Erection of three one and a half-storey dwellings
Withdrawn by Applicant 30/11/2011
PF/11/1378 PF - Erection of detached dwelling
Withdrawn by Applicant 30/11/2011
PF/11/1492 PF - Erection of two two-storey dwellings with cartsheds
Approved 22/02/2012
PF/12/0247 PF – Erection of one and half storey dwelling
Approved 08/05/2012
THE APPLICATION
Seeks permission for a dwelling on Plot 1 to the rear of No 37 Sculthorpe Road.
The scheme would involve the erection of a detached, two bedroom, rectangular
form, single storey dwelling, which would have a total habitable floor area of some
69.8 sq. metres. To the northern end of the dwelling would be an attached garage
and open sided carport. Due to the sloping nature of the site a basement room is
proposed to the southern end of the dwelling for the storage of bins, garden
equipment and bicycles. In addition, a balcony area is proposed leading out from the
siting and kitchen area, which would overlook the south facing garden. It is intended
that the dwelling would be set on a brick plinth with a mix of render and vertical cedar
board cladding to the walls, with the roof of a slate, whilst the car port would be
supported off oak posts.
Access to the site off Sculthorpe Road would be via the driveway between Nos. 37
and 39, with a parking and turning area within the site.
An amended plan has been received which would move the dwelling 0.6m from the
eastern boundary with 35 Sculthorpe Road, making a total separation distance at its
closest point of 1.8 metres. In addition the plan shows the boundary being formed by
a 2.0 high close boarded fence. The applicant has also indicated that the window
frames, doors and frames to the apex of the gable would be finished in a paint finish,
colour Farrow and Ball, Drainpipe No. 26.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The Ward Members live opposite the site and have declared an interest in the
application; consideration of the representations under delegated powers is therefore
considered to be inappropriate by the Head of Development Management and the
Committee Chairman.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection.
Development Committee
13
6 June 2013
REPRESENTATIONS
Five letters of objection have been received which raise the following concerns
(summarised):1. Assurances have been given that this dwelling would conform to Development
Plan Policy HO1 which limited the dwelling to 2 bedrooms and an internal floor
area of 70m2. The internal floor area of the proposed dwelling would be almost
double this.
2. The Local Planning Authority has no published definition of internal floor area
and use of floor space.
3. The Valuation Office definition of floor space includes garages and open-sided
covered areas.
4. The erection of the dwelling would result in a loss of amenities to our property.
5. At the outline stage the footprint of the dwelling was 16.6 metres x 8.6 metres
and was intended to be single storey, whilst the current proposal has a footprint
of 20.7 metres x 10.0 metres and the height of the dwelling at the southern end
would be 7.0 metres.
6. The design of the dwelling would allow for the expansion to more than 2
bedrooms which would circumvent Policy HO1.
7. The eastern wall of the dwelling is shown as being 1.5 metres from our
boundary, which is adjacent out back garden. This would not allow tree
protection for the trees along the boundary. The outline plan showed a minimum
of 2.0 to 2.4 metres.
8. Details of material are vague; there is no clear indication of the materials to the
window frames.
9. It is patently obvious that the design would allow a quick conversion to a third
bedroom.
10. Sewage in this area has always been a problem.
11. The proposed materials would not be compatible with other dwellings in the
development or with the neighbouring Victorian houses.
12. The proposal results in a hotchpotch design which does not respect the local
built environment.
13. The increased building area would further reduce valued gardens and wildlife.
Three letters of support has been received which make the following observations
(summarised):1. This new property is immediately adjoining our southern garden boundary but the
design is excellent and causes no imposition of our privacy.
2. We live at 41 Sculthorpe Road and have no objection to the erection of the single
storey dwelling.
3. Another excellent design by the applicant, which compliments the other
properties and neighbouring properties with no impact on privacy of anyone.
4. The development has visually no impact on Sculthorpe Road.
CONSULTATIONS
Building Control - No objection.
Sustainability Co-Ordinator - No objection subject to the imposition of appropriate
conditions
County Council (Highways) - No objection subject to the imposition of appropriate
conditions.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) – Has requested a
revised Arboricultural Implications Assessment and methodology statement which
shows how the development can be accommodated on the site without damage to
the neighbouring trees.
Development Committee
14
6 June 2013
Building Control - No objection
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8: The Right to respect for private and family life.
Article 1 of the First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
Policy HO 1: Dwelling mix and type (specifies type and mix of dwellings for new
housing developments).
Policy SS 8: Fakenham (identifies strategic development requirements).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 6: Sustainable construction and energy efficiency (specifies sustainability
and energy efficiency requirements for new developments).
Policy CT 5: The transport impact on new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development.
2. Compliance with planning policy.
3. Suitability of design.
4. Impact on neighbouring properties.
5. Impact on trees within the site.
6. Drainage.
7. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
The principle of development has already been established with the granting of
outline planning permission 20090468, for four dwellings to the rear of Nos.37, 39
and 41 Sculthorpe Road when all matters were reserved for later consideration; the
reserved matters in respect of Plots 3 & 4 were approved in February 2012, whilst
the dwelling to Plot 2 was approved in May 2012.
The current application needs to be considered against Core Strategy Policies HO1,
EN4, CT5 and CT6. Policy HO1 states that “on schemes of three or four dwellings at
least one dwelling shall comprise not more than 70sq. metre internal floor space and
incorporate two bedrooms or fewer”, whilst Policy EN4 requires that all development
be designed to a high quality, reinforcing local distinctiveness. Development
proposals will be expected to have regard to the North Norfolk Design Guide in terms
of their design, scale and massing and relate sympathetically to the surrounding
Development Committee
15
6 June 2013
area, incorporate sustainable construction principles and make efficient use of land
while respecting the density, character, landscape and biodiversity of the surrounding
area. In addition proposals should not have a significantly detrimental effect on the
residential amenity of nearby occupiers and new dwellings should provide acceptable
residential amenity. Policies CT 5 and CT6 require that the proposal is capable of
being served by safe access to the highway network without detriment to the amenity
or character of the locality and that there are adequate vehicle parking facilities to
serve the needs of the development in accordance with the Council's parking
standards.
As far as Policy HO1 is concerned, although the footprint of the dwelling would be
larger than that envisaged at the outline stage, having an attached garage and car
port, the actual habitable floor area, which would consist of 2 bedrooms, a siting
area, kitchen /diner plus bathroom, would be some 69.8 sq.m. Policy HO1 and the
preamble do not define what comprises internal floor space; although not directly
related, the reference to amenity criteria contained in the North Norfolk Design
Guide, in the case of flat conversions, refers to internal space as being habitable floor
area (i.e.) internal measurements of all living and kitchen areas, excluding toilets,
bathrooms and circulations areas. It is therefore considered that it would be
unreasonable to include the garage and car port in the calculation and the scheme as
proposed is therefore considered to comply with Policy HO1. However it is accepted
that in the event of the application being approved, unless permitted development
rights are removed, the garage and garden store could subsequently be converted to
habitable accommodation without the need for planning permission.
In terms of the design of the dwellings, this part of Fakenham consists of an eclectic
mix of dwellings of different architectural periods, styles and scale, with Nos. 35 & 37
Sculthorpe Road being two and half storey dwellings dating from the late Georgian
period, whilst Nos. 39 & 41 are more modest two storey dwellings. Similarly, further
to the west are bungalows, whilst to the north side of Sculthorpe Road is a mix of
bungalows and two storey dwellings. In Sandy Lane to the west, there is a mix of two
storey dwellings dating from the mid 20th Century and to the south in Hayes Lane
19th Century cottages.
Plot 1 is situated to the eastern end of the development, with the northern end of the
site being at a slightly lower level than the adjoining plots, whilst the remainder of the
site slopes steeply in a southerly direction, with ground level being 2.5 metres lower
within a distance of 10 metres. As a result, although only single storey with a
proposed eaves and ridge height at the northern end being 2.3 and 5.1 metres
respectively, this would increase to 4.7 and 6.9 metres at the extreme southern end
of the dwelling. As such, whilst the southern elevation would have the appearance of
a two storey dwelling given the building's orientation, it is considered that it would be
subservient to the dwelling on Plot 2 and would hardly be discernible from Sculthorpe
Road or Hayes Lane.
The choice of timber cladding would help to given the dwelling a recessive
appearance, especially when viewed from the north and east. Similarly the use of
slates to the roof would diminish the appearance of the dwelling and would blend
successfully with properties fronting Sculthorpe Road, many of which are roofed in
dark smut clay pantiles. It is therefore considered, given the mix of architectural
styles and enclosed nature of the site, that the dwelling as proposed would be
compatible with the area both in terms of its scale, massing and overall appearance,
whilst the choice of materials would also be appropriate.
Development Committee
16
6 June 2013
In terms of the relationship with neighbouring properties, the nearest dwellings are
Nos. 35 and 37 Sculthorpe Road. No. 35 has a rear garden some 74 metres in
length, which slopes in a southerly direction, the same as the application site. The
southernmost 36 metres of the western boundary of this property forms the boundary
with the site and consists of a mix of trees and hedging. As part of the proposal it is
intended to erect a 2 metre high fence on the plot side of this boundary. Whilst the
proposed dwelling would be in fairly close proximity to this boundary, with the upper
two thirds of the gable being visible above the proposed fence line, given that the
majority of the roof of the proposed new dwelling would slope away from the
boundary, it is not considered that it would result in significant overshadowing
especially as this part of the garden area of No 35 is already in dappled shade from
the existing trees and hedging to the boundary. However, it is possible that there
would be a degree of overlooking of this part of the neighbouring garden area from
the window to bedroom 1 of the proposed dwelling. Given the planting to the
boundary and length of the rear garden of the neighbouring property it is not
considered that the proposal would significantly affect the amenities of the this
property and would not result in any direct overlooking of the upper area of garden
closest to the dwelling. There would be negligible impact on No. 37, the neighbouring
property immediately to the north of the site, or on the dwelling on Plot 2 to the west,
which is currently under construction.
As far as the impact of the development on trees within the site is, the Council‟s
Landscape Officer has indicated that the proposal would not affect any of the trees
on the site, some of which are protected by a Tree Preservation Order. However, he
has requested a revised Arboricultural Implications Assessment and methodology
statement which would show how the development could be accommodated on the
site without damage to the neighbouring trees.
In terms of the drainage arrangements foul sewage disposal would be via the main
sewer in Sculthorpe Road.
The Highway Authority has indicated that it has no objection to the proposal. In
respect of the car parking and turning area this would comply with the Council's
adopted parking standards.
In conclusion, it is considered that the size, layout, design and appearance of the
development are acceptable and would not have a significantly adverse impact on
the amenities of the neighbouring property to the east and would accord with adopted
Development Plan policy. However further information is required which would
demonstrate that the construction of the dwelling would not adversely affect the trees
or hedging to the eastern boundary of the site.
RECOMMENDATION:
Delegated authority to approve subject to the submission of a revised
Arboricultural Implications Assessment and methodology statement which
would demonstrate how the development can be accommodated on the site
without damage to the neighbouring trees and hedging, and to the imposition
of appropriate conditions.
Development Committee
17
6 June 2013
6.
NORTH WALSHAM - PO/12/1436 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; 18
Aylsham Road for Mr & Mrs M L Mansfield
Minor Development
- Target Date: 27 February 2013
Case Officer: Mrs M Moore
Outline Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Residential Area
Conservation Area
Tree Preservation Order
Gas Pipe Buffer Zone
THE APPLICATION
Is for the erection of one single-storey dwelling on land to the south-west of 18
Aylsham Road.
Initially, all matters were reserved, but access and parking are now for consideration
under amended plan submitted. Approval of layout, scale, appearance and
landscaping remain reserved matters.
The vehicular access to the site would be created on to Aylsham Road
Two parking spaces for the existing and the proposed dwelling are proposed to the
north-west of the site.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor A Moore having regard to the following planning reasons:
Highway safety and overdevelopment.
TOWN COUNCIL
Object because of overdevelopment of the site which will cause extra vehicles onto a
very busy road. Members wish this application to be called into Committee.
REPRESENTATIONS
Two representations have been received (from the same person) raising the following
objections (summarised):
Road and pedestrian safety and unsuitable access;
Additional traffic;
Conservation of land beside the bridge;
Hope would be reasonable distance between bungalow and fence. Potential loss
of light;
Query in relation to overall height and length of garage;
Concerns in relation to access to rear of garage, close to fence, for maintenance
of roof and gutter;
May be more neighbour-friendly for the garage building to come level with rear
wall of neighbour bungalow (21 Simpson Close) out of objector's line of sight.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - Amended plan addresses both the access and parking
concerns previously expressed.
No objection, subject to the imposition of conditions regarding gates, bollard, chain or
other means of obstruction, provision of a visibility splay, provision of the access, car
parking and turning areas, and addition of an informative note.
Development Committee
18
6 June 2013
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) The site lies within the designated North Walsham Conservation Area. 18 Aylsham
Road has also been identified as a Locally Listed Building within the adopted North
Walsham Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan and makes a
significant contribution to the prevailing character of the area.
The plot holds a prominent position in the street scene lying on the junction of Park
Lane and Aylsham Road. The area is dominated by the highway, the green areas and
vegetation to the west of the plot and either side of the bridge represent important
interruptions to the otherwise hard urban grain.
With regard to the proposal, the 3 bed bungalow will follow the existing building line
and roughly cover the same footprint as number 18. The general form and layout of
the plot raises no heritage cause for concern.
Given the site's prominence within the Conservation Area, the eventual acceptability
of the scheme will depend greatly on the overall design, materials and elevational
treatments. That said Conservation and Design have no overriding objection in
principle.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape)- I do not object to the
removal of the mature holly tree in the Conservation Area to facilitate the above
development. The site does not offer any real potential for landscaping or for a
replacement tree therefore no conditions are suggested.
Sustainability Co-ordinator - recommends condition requiring dwelling to meet Code
Level 3, Sustainable Homes.
British Pipeline Agency Ltd - This proposal will not affect BPA pipeline responsibilities
Health and Safety Executive (PADHI) - Do not advise against proposal.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8: The Right to respect for private and family life.
Article 1 of the First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the district).
Policy SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
Policy SS 10: North Walsham (identifies strategic development requirements).
Policy EN 2: Protection and enhancement of landscape and settlement character
(specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including the Landscape
Character Assessment).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Development Committee
19
6 June 2013
Policy EN 6: Sustainable construction and energy efficiency (specifies sustainability
and energy efficiency requirements for new developments).
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
Policy HO 7: Making the most efficient use of land (Housing density) (specifies
housing densities).
Policy CT 5: The transport impact of new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council‟s car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development
2. Highway safety
3. Impact on Conservation Area
4. Impact on neighbour amenities
APPRAISAL
Principle of development
The site lies within a Residential Area, where the erection of dwellings is considered
to be acceptable and compliant with the aims of Policies SS1, SS3 and SS10 of the
Development Plan.
Highway safety
The access has been revised to meet County Council Highway requirements, with the
garage removed, allowing parking and turning for vehicles.
Therefore, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable and compliant
with the aims of Policies CT 5 and CT 6 of the adopted Core Strategy.
Impact on Conservation Area
It is considered that, subject to a suitable design, materials and elevational treatment
being submitted at reserved matters stage, the proposed development would
preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, in accordance with
policies EN8 and EN4 of the adopted Core Strategy.
Impact on neighbour amenities
Policy EN4 requires that development proposals should not have a significantly
detrimental effect on the residential amenity of nearby occupiers and new dwellings
should provide acceptable residential amenity.
Taking into account the above, it is considered that a single-storey dwelling and
garage would sit comfortably within the plot, whilst also providing sufficient private
amenity space, respecting the existing character and area form and without having a
significantly detrimental impact on neighbouring dwellings.
Summary
In summary, the proposed dwelling is considered to raise no highway safety
implications. In addition, the scale and layout would accord with Core Strategy
policies, having no significantly detrimental impact on the amenities of nearby
properties or on the visual amenity of the area. The proposal is therefore considered
to comply with the Development Plan subject to the imposition of appropriate
conditions.
Development Committee
20
6 June 2013
RECOMMENDATION: Approve, subject to the imposition of the following
conditions:
1
Application for approval of all reserved matters must be made not later than
the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Approval of these reserved matters (referred to in condition 2) shall be
obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development
is commenced. The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later
than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters,
or in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such
matter to be approved.
Reason:
The time limit condition is imposed in order to comply with the requirements of
Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by
Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2005.
2
This permission is granted in accordance with the amended plans (drawing
number 10 C) received by the Local Planning Authority on 18 April 2013, in so
far as it indicates the proposed access and parking areas only.
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
These reserved matters shall relate to the layout, scale, appearance and
landscaping of the proposed development and this condition shall apply
notwithstanding any indications as to these matters which have been given in
the current application.
Reason:
The application is submitted in outline form only and the details required are
pursuant to the provisions of Article 3(1) to the Town and Country Planning
(General Development Procedure) Order 1995 and the Town and Country
Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) (England) Order
2006.
4
The proposed dwelling hereby approved shall be single storey only.
Reason:
To protect the residential amenities of the nearby residential properties in
accordance with Policy EN4 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy.
5
The dwelling hereby permitted shall achieve a Code Level 3 rating or above in
accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes:
Technical Guide (or such national measure of sustainability for house design
that replaces that scheme). The dwelling shall not be occupied until a Final
Code Certificate has been issued and submitted to the Local Planning
Authority certifying that Code Level 3 or above has been achieved unless an
alternative timescale is first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
In the interests of achieving a satisfactory form of sustainable construction in
accordance with Policy EN 6 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy.
Development Committee
21
6 June 2013
6
Notwithstanding the provision of Class A of Schedule 2, Part 2 of the Town
and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any
Order revoking, amending or re-enacting that Order) no gate, bollard, chain or
other means of obstruction shall be erected across the approved access
unless details have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.
Reason:
In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy CT 5 of the
adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy.
7
Prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted a visibility splay
shall be provided in full accordance with the details indicated on the approved
plan. The splay shall thereafter be maintained free from any obstruction
exceeding 0.6m above the level of the adjacent highway carriageway.
Reason:
In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy CT 5 of the
adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy.
8
Prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted the proposed onsite car parking and turning areas for the new dwelling and 18 Aylsham Road
shall be laid out in accordance with the approved plan. They shall be retained
thereafter for those specific uses.
Reason:
To ensure the permanent availability of the parking manoeuvring area, in the
interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy CT 6 of the adopted
North Norfolk Core Strategy.
7.
RUNTON - PF/13/0017 - Conversion of barn to ground floor agricultural storage
and sea food outlet, first floor living accommodation and erection of detached
tractor store; Brick Kiln Farm, Cromer Road, West Runton for Mr & Mrs
Matthews
Minor Development
- Target Date: 01 March 2013
Case Officer: Miss C Ketteringham
Full Planning Permission
CONSTRAINTS
Undeveloped Coast
Article 4 Direction
Countryside
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
PLA/19940361 PF - County reference: c/94/1003 - renewal of planning permission
reference c/93/1009 for the disposal of surplus materials
Approved 04/05/1994
NP/10/1201 PF - To re-roof agricultural storage building
Approved 25/01/2011
PF/12/0260 PF - Conversion of barn to dwelling and sea food bar
Withdrawn by Applicant 26/04/2012
Development Committee
22
6 June 2013
THE APPLICATION
Is to convert a building that has recently been extended upwards by re-roofing for
agricultural purposes to a dwelling within the roof space, and a sea food bar with
seating area on the ground floor whilst also retaining some agricultural storage on the
ground floor. Permission was originally also sought for a tractor shed on the north
side of the building
Amended plans have been received withdrawing the tractor shed originally included
in the proposal, detailing the location of the piggeries to be removed and clarifying
the seating area for the sea food business. However, whereas the original plans
indicated four parking spaces, the amended plans now indicate ten.
The agent has clarified that the applicant envisages that the seafood business would
operate on a modest scale, on a seasonal basis mid-March to the end of October,
selling freshly caught seafood, crabs and lobsters to take away or eat on site. The
seafood business would be located on the western side of the building, with a boiler
room, servery and an outside seating area under a glazed canopy, with extra seating
potentially available to the north of the building.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Objects
1. Inappropriate development will have a negative impact on the visual amenity of
the area. It is a rural location and not for development.
2. Highway safety with extra traffic movements in and out of the site onto a busy A
road.
3. The conversion cannot come under barn conversions; there is no barn to be
converted. The building was simply a covered brick kiln which closed in 1951.
Also the description Brick Kiln Farm is incorrect. There has never been a farm
here. The applicants are in the fishing trade; what agricultural use would the
building be for?
REPRESENTATIONS
103 letters of objection have been received on the following grounds:
Proposal is contrary to policies EN 1,EN 2 and EN 3 and the Landscape Character
Assessment.
Concern that the previous planning application has not been correctly implemented.
Application to convert to a dwelling has been submitted prior to the completion of the
previous approval to re-roof the building.
Unsuitable development in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Lack of information and clarity about the sea food bar.
Development out of character.
Smell from fish processing.
Traffic increase.
Light pollution.
Visual characteristics of the development would be harmful to open undeveloped
nature of the gap between the East and West Runton caravan sites.
Asbestos dumped on site.
Would encourage other ribbon development.
Highway safety.
Car parking is unsightly.
Core Strategy paragraph 3.2.24 states 'buildings.....that have recently been
constructed for another purpose will not be eligible [for reuse as a dwelling]'. As the
Development Committee
23
6 June 2013
second floor has recently been constructed and re-roofed for agricultural purposes it
is clearly contrary to policy HO 9.
The building has not been constructed in accordance with the approved plan, the
timber cladding on the outside has not been completed.
The site is close to an internationally important SSSI.
The West Runton Elephant was excavated out of the cliffs a few hundred feet to the
north of the proposed development.
The site is within 20 metres of a watercourse.
The septic tank run-off would be deleterious to the cliff top with water seepage
through the gravel hastening cliff falls.
This is a area of coastal erosion, eroding on average one metre a year.
Smell from the crab wastage.
Septic tank and crab wastage would harm the fragile nature of the cliff top.
Site is unsuitable for parking 8 cars.
Scar on the landscape.
Photographs submitted with the application are misleading Contrary to Policy EN 3
which states 'only development that can be demonstrated to require a coastal
location and will not be significantly detrimental to the open coastal character will be
permitted'.
Fields around the site have a covenant in perpetuity in favour of the National Trust
preventing building on them.
Oxwell Cross is of local historic importance as an ancient resting place for
pallbearers.
Site encompasses the remains of early Runton manufacturing history with the brick
kiln ruin and clay pits.
Location encompasses an important landfall area and critical flight path for the winter
nocturnal migration of Woodcock from Scandinavia, the Baltic and Russia. Lights,
parking lighting and other obstructions will have a deleterious effect on the migration
flight path.
A copy of a letter of objection is attached as Appendix 2 covering in more detail the
content of many of the objections received.
Three letters of support
Following the closure of the Cromer Crab Factory as a local traditional industry
fishing needs all the local support. Having a local outlet can only help towards
sustaining what has become a reduced source of local employment and tradition.
The site has deteriorated over the years and become an eyesore. To have the site
tidied, used and maintained will be a huge benefit to the area.
CONSULTATIONS
Highway Authority - The site would appear to have previous uses generating
vehicular traffic and has good access and footway links to East and West Runton
villages; therefore no highway objections to the proposal.
Coast and Community Project Manager - The site is outside the indicative coastal
erosion zone.
Environmental Health - No objection, subject to a condition on contaminated land
investigation.
National Trust - The National Trust holds extensive covenants over land in close
proximity to the site the purpose of which is to ensure the landscape and rural
character of the area is protected and upheld. While the National Trust has no
specific objections to the proposals relating to the existing barn, it is concerned there
Development Committee
24
6 June 2013
is no justification for the new tractor shed. Also concerned that the impacts of the
development on the landscape have not been demonstrated, nor how the
landscaping of the development will affect the open landscape character. The
National Trust therefore objects that the development will be detrimental to the visual
and landscape amenities of the area.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape)
The barn is located to the north of the main coastal road between the settlements of
East and West Runton and is readily visible from the road and Incleborough Hill. It is
surrounded by agricultural land, with the nearest dwelling over 130m away towards
West Runton. A further agricultural building is located to the south-west of the barn
and access is gained via an un-made track and through a makeshift
farmyard/storage area. The area has very little in the way of landscaping, some
areas of scrub and banking but no substantial features. The overall character and
appearance of the immediate surrounds is that of a rural agricultural setting.
The site is located adjacent to the North Norfolk Coast AONB area and within the
Coastal Towns and Villages Landscape Character Type (as defined by the North
Norfolk Landscape Character Assessment SPD).
The building is located within an area designated under Policy HO9 as suitable for
conversion and re-use to residential subject to certain criteria. Of these criteria the
most relevant to the Landscape Section are those that stipulate that:
a) the building is worthy of retention due to its appearance, historic, architectural
or landscape value; and
b) the building is structurally sound and suitable for conversion to a residential
use without substantial rebuilding or extension and that the alterations protect
or enhance the character of the building and its setting.
CDL recognise that due to its recent repairs under the previous planning permission
the building is now of a suitable condition which would suggest conversion is readily
achievable, and due to its former use as a brick kiln the building has an interesting
history and architectural features worthy of retention. However, there is a concern
that the alterations required for conversion would fail to protect or enhance the
building and its setting.
The required alterations include the provision of roof windows/lights, balconies,
fenestration and door openings, chimney flue and car parking, together with formal
landscaping (although this is to be agreed). These alterations, which affect all
elevations and the roof, are sufficient to alter significantly the appearance of the
building from agricultural to residential. Whilst this may not necessarily be an issue
in some areas of the District, the agricultural setting and open land in between the
coastal settlements are of paramount importance to the protection of the landscape
character.
The Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) states that it is the open, arable land
that provides the separation between the coastal towns and villages which makes
each settlement a distinctive unit and the separation of considerable importance. In
the analysis of the Landscape Character Type, the LCA recognises the considerable
threats from development which reduce and enclose the landscape, threats to the
views over the landscape from the types of development proposed and the
inappropriate re-use of barns and agricultural sheds. The LCA states that barn
conversions within the open countryside which introduce „suburban features such as
overly large windows, domestic style gates/fences, planting and external lighting can
erode the landscape character.
Development Committee
25
6 June 2013
Specifically within the Sheringham to Overstrand Landscape Character Area the LCA
states that the small areas of open space (farmland, heath etc.) are the essential
element which underlies the character of this Area. Reductions in this element
during the last 70 years have significantly eroded the character of the Area.
It is worth noting that the 20 year vision for this part of the AONB, as stated within
their Integrated Landscape Character Guidance, is “Villages and towns are
separated by areas of high quality undeveloped countryside”.
Changes to the appearance of the barn, the associated car parking, landscaping and
change of use required as a result of the dwelling and proposed sea food bar will all
contribute to the erosion of the landscape character and setting.
The small pockets of farmland and agricultural buildings are of such importance to
the protection of the landscape character that the Landscape section considers that
the proposals would be sufficiently damaging so as to warrant refusal of the
application.
This is supported through policies HO9, EN 1, EN 2 and EN 3 of the Core Strategy
and through the Landscape Character Assessment Supplementary Planning
Document.
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 SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy EC 2: The re-use of buildings in the Countryside (specifies criteria for
converting buildings for non-residential purposes).
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 6: Sustainable construction and energy efficiency (specifies sustainability
and energy efficiency requirements for new developments).
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).
Development Committee
26
6 June 2013
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
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).
Landscape Character Assessment Supplementary Planning Document Policy pages
143 – 145.
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of residential and commercial re-use of building.
2. Impact of development on landscape character and Undeveloped Coast.
APPRAISAL
The application was deferred at the previous Committee meeting to enable Members
to visit the site.
The building to be converted is a former brick kiln which in 2011 was granted
planning permission for re-roofing with a pitched roof. It lies within the Countryside
policy area and an area designated in the Core Strategy as Undeveloped Coast, and
is adjacent to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It also lies within the area
defined in Policy HO 9 where buildings worthy of retention for their appearance,
historic, architectural or landscape value may be granted permission for a permanent
residential use. Policy EC 2 may also permit economic uses if those uses are
appropriate in scale and nature to the location.
The National Planning Policy Framework is supportive of economic growth in rural
areas and of taking a positive approach to sustainable new development. Re-use of
redundant or disused buildings for residential purposes is encouraged where it would
lead to an enhancement of the immediate setting.
While the principle of both types of development may therefore be acceptable, each
application must be considered on its merit and both of the above Core Strategy
policies are clear that the acceptability of any development is conditional upon the
proposal not having a harmful impact on the character of the area within which the
building is set.
From any direction the building is prominent within the landscape, located as it is
among open fields on the seaward side of the A149 midway between East and West
Runton. While not directly on the cliff top, because of the open character of the
landscape it appears as part of the cliff top and is identified as 'Undeveloped Coast'
in the Core Strategy. Policy EN3 indicates that in such areas only development that
can be demonstrated to require a coastal location and that will not be significantly
detrimental to coastal character will be permitted.
The agent advances the argument that in the context of the land along the cliff top it
is already littered with camping and caravan sites. However, it should be noted that
the camping development is seasonal and activity associated with caravans reduces
in the winter. Moreover, Policy EC 10 actively promotes the relocation of those
caravan sites to new sites away from the cliff top and the designated 'Undeveloped
Coast'.
Policy EN2 requires the protection of settlement and landscape character as defined
by the Landscape Character Assessment. This identifies the landscape between
Sheringham and Overstrand as having the largest physical amount of settlement in
Development Committee
27
6 June 2013
the District, yet it still manages to retain parts which are relatively untouched.
Distinctive features are the presence of the cliff, the landform of the area and the
layout and distribution of settlements. The trend has been for development to extend
out in concentric rings from settlements and large caravan parks which mean that
some settlements have nearly joined. Small areas of farmland, woodland, heath and
other open spaces, separate the settings of towns and villages and are vital elements
of the character of the area. It identifies the retention of small areas of open space
as critical for the preserving the character of the landscape, and the necessity of
preventing the piecemeal erosion of the character and maintaining the physical
separation between the settlements
The design of the building for agricultural purposes was constrained by the existing
buildings. The resulting proportions and appearance are not those of vernacular
agricultural buildings, since it incorporates the old brick kiln, and the walls were
raised and the roof constructed above the new walls. The approved application
stated that additional materials for the construction would be reclaimed bricks and
roof tiles; unfortunately it is unclear quite what materials were used as those
materials do not have the weathered appearance expected from reclaimed materials
nor are they a particularly good match for the original bricks. However, the form of
the building has been approved and part of the original building has some historic
value. On balance therefore its retention is considered to be justified.
However, several physical alterations to the building are necessary to convert it to a
dwelling and sea food business and these include the addition of the glazed seating
area, rooflights and balcony on the southern elevation. Those changes would
constitute a further domestication of the site which, together with the car parking and
increased activity associated with the proposals, would lead to the development
having a significant impact on the landscape.
A landscaping scheme has been proposed which would offer little by way of
screening or mitigating the adverse impacts of the development. The landscaping
that would be necessary to offset those concerns is likely to be contrary to the open
character of this area of undeveloped coast between East and West Runton.
For these reasons it is considered that the development would be significantly
detrimental to the open coastal character of this stretch of land; moreover it has not
been demonstrated that a coastal location is required for the commercial or
residential aspects of the development and the development would therefore conflict
with Policies EN3 and EN2.
Although objectors have raised concerns regarding archaeology and coastal erosion
the application site is not within the Site of Special Scientific Interest which is
designated along the cliff edge and it is not within the area at risk from Coastal
Erosion and so those matters are not material to the determination of the application
Finally there is considered to be doubt as to whether the building is no longer
required for agricultural purposes, as evidenced by the agricultural storage proposed
on the ground floor and the additional tractor shed originally sought as part of this
application. The agent has explained the applicant's legitimate agricultural interests
as harvesting reeds, working and harvesting land elsewhere and contracts for
clearance work. Even if this were the case it is considered that other, lower-key
alternative uses could be found for the building which would better suit its sensitive
location.
Development Committee
28
6 June 2013
In summary, this is considered to be a finely-balanced application. The merits of
bringing an underused building and semi-derelict site back into use, including an
economically beneficial one, are acknowledged. However, there remain concerns at
the impact of the development on the character of the area and consequently the
proposal is considered to be contrary to Policies HO9 , EN2 and EC2 of the
Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Refusal, on the grounds that the proposed conversion works and associated
development of a dwelling and seafood business would harm the open
landscape character of the area where the objective of the Authority is to
protect the landscape from inappropriate development in conflict with Policies
HO9, EN2 and EC2 of the Development Plan.
8.
APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR A SITE INSPECTION
A site inspection by the Committee is recommended by Officers prior to the
consideration of a full report at a future meeting in respect of the following
applications. The applications will not be debated at this meeting.
Please note that additional site inspections may be recommended by Officers at the
meeting or agreed during consideration of report items on this agenda.
CROMER – PF/13/0111 - Erection of thirty-five retirement apartments with
communal facilities at Former Police Station and Magistrates Court, Holt Road
for McCarthy and Stone Retirement Lifestyles Ltd
CROMER – PF/13/0112 - Demolition of former police station/court house
buildings at Former Police Station and Magistrates Court, Holt Road for
McCarthy and Stone Retirement Lifestyles Ltd
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Development Management in order to expedite the
processing of the application and to enable Members to appreciate fully this major
development proposal.
RECOMMENDATION:The Committee is recommended to undertake the above site visit.
9.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
ALBY WITH THWAITE - PF/12/1270 - Conversion of barns to annexe
accommodation; Home Farm House, Middle Hill for Mr & Mrs McNamara
(Full Planning Permission)
AYLMERTON - PF/13/0023 - Removal of caravan and siting of timber lodge to
provide continued holiday letting accommodation; Breckwood, Tower Road for
Mr Stubbs
(Full Planning Permission)
BACTON - PF/12/0979 - Retention of vehicular access and driveway; 3
Highbanks, Rectory Road, Edingthorpe for Mr J Ingleton
(Householder application)
Development Committee
29
6 June 2013
BARTON TURF - PF/13/0343 - Construction of two front dormer windows to
facilitate conversion of roof space to habitable accommodation; Japonica, Berry
Hall Road for Mr & Mrs G Cartwright
(Householder application)
BINHAM - PF/13/0297 - Erection of detached garage/garden store; Westgate Old
Farmhouse, Warham Road for Mr & Mrs Van Ree
(Householder application)
BLAKENEY - PF/13/0202 - Demolition of single-storey dwelling and erection of
two-storey dwelling; Glebe Lodge, Saxlingham Road for Mr & Mrs G Nurse
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - PF/13/0363 - Variation of Condition 2 of planning permission
reference: 12/1391 to permit re-location of garage with link extension and
revised fenestration; Land rear of Pinewood, Saxlingham Road for Stuart
Farrow Builders
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - PF/13/0388 - Installation of pitched roof to side extension; 1
Memorial Cottages, New Road for War Memorial Cottages Trust
(Householder application)
BLAKENEY - PM/13/0411 - Erection of two-storey detached dwelling; Land
adjacent Sedges, Back Lane for Mrs S Fardell
(Reserved Matters)
BRISTON - PF/13/0304 - Erection of single-storey side/rear extension; Highfield,
Craymere Road for Mr & Mrs Babbage
(Householder application)
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - LA/13/0294 - Installation of replacement windows to
south side; Rocket House, High Street for Mr R Goodson
(Listed Building Alterations)
COLBY - PF/13/0213 - Erection of detached building to provide music room;
Maybank, Mill Road, Banningham for Mr & Mrs Shinn
(Householder application)
CORPUSTY AND SAXTHORPE - PF/13/0375 - Erection of single-storey side
extension; 10 Heydon Road, Corpusty for Mr & Mrs M Skinn
(Householder application)
CROMER - PF/13/0194 - Erection of replacement garage; 16 Alfred Road for Mr &
Mrs J Patel
(Householder application)
CROMER - PF/13/0197 - Erection of single-storey side/rear extension to provide
self-contained annexe; 2 Grove Road for Mr R West
(Householder application)
CROMER - PF/13/0302 - Erection of two-storey side extension; High Station
House, 61 Norwich Road for Mr & Mrs S Allan
(Householder application)
Development Committee
30
6 June 2013
CROMER - PF/13/0329 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 20A Cliff Road
for Mr T Hatter
(Householder application)
EAST RUSTON - NMA1/11/0248 - Non material amendment request to relocate
door and window in front elevation, revised window design in side and rear
elevations and revision to velux window; 1 Hinckley Cottages, Chequers Street
for Miss Turner
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
EDGEFIELD - PF/13/0370 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; Jordans,
Pecks Lane for Mr Howard
(Householder application)
FAKENHAM - PF/13/0281 - Change of use from A1 (retail) to D1 (community eye
clinic); Shop At, 2 Holt Road for Anglia Community Eye Service Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - PF/13/0334 - Erection of single storey dwelling
accommodation in roof space; 101 Rudham Stile Lane for Mr Daly
(Full Planning Permission)
with
FAKENHAM - AI/13/0340 - Display of illuminated advertisements; 27 Norwich
Street for Lloyds Banking Group
(Advertisement Illuminated)
FAKENHAM - PF/12/1299 - Variation of Conditions 2, 7 and 8 of planning
permission reference: 11/0344 to permit revised design and siting of dwelling
and to regularise the removal of the existing hedge along the eastern boundary;
Land to rear of 75 Norwich Road for Mr J Hammond
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - PF/13/0419 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 12 Fisher
Road for Mr M Smith
(Householder application)
FAKENHAM - PF/13/0374 - Erection of single-storey side/rear extension; 11
Caslon Close for Mr & Mrs Lyons
(Householder application)
FIELD DALLING - PF/13/0203 - Erection of two-storey rear extension, link
extension and conversion of agricultural building to ancillary residential
accommodation; 51 Holt Road for Mr T James
(Full Planning Permission)
FIELD DALLING - NMA1/08/0753 - Non material amendment request to revise
parapet wall detailing; May Cottage, 100 Holt Road for Mr S Collins
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
GIMINGHAM - PF/12/1310 - Variation of Conditions 5,7 & 13 of planning
permission reference: 09/0878 to permit discharge of conditions following
commencement of development; Home Farm Barn, Slaughter Road for Mrs J
Kirby
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Committee
31
6 June 2013
HELHOUGHTON - PF/13/0292 - Conversion of outbuilding to annexe; Wood
Farm, Broomsthorpe Road for Mr P Weston
(Householder application)
HELHOUGHTON - LA/13/0293 - Alterations to outbuilding to facilitate conversion
to habitable accommodation; Wood Farm, Broomsthorpe Road for Mr P Weston
(Listed Building Alterations)
HIGH KELLING - PF/13/0354 - Erection of single-storey side extension, pitched
roof to garage and single-storey front extension, one and a half storey rear
extension and raising part of roof to provide first floor habitable
accommodation; 14 Heathfield Road for Mr & Mrs A Scull
(Householder application)
HINDOLVESTON - PF/13/0392 - Construction of external chimney stack; The
Band House, 93A The Street, Hindolveston for Mrs J Morrissey
(Householder application)
HOLT - LD/13/0244 - Demolition of flint wall and gate and partial demolition of
garden shed; 1A Hoppers Yard, Bull Street for Greenways (Holt) Ltd
(Listed Building Demolition)
HOLT - NMA1/12/1053 - Non material amendment request to increase the length
of side extension and to brick in car-port; 26 St Andrews Close for Mr B Frost
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
HOLT - PF/13/0080 - Conversion and extension of workshop/garage to provide
residential dwelling; The Grove, Cromer Road for Mr T Bradley & Miss A Murday
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - LA/13/0081 - Alterations to former workshop/garage to facilitate
conversion to residential dwelling; The Grove, Cromer Road for Mr T Bradley &
Miss A Murday
(Listed Building Alterations)
HOLT - LA/13/0095 - Internal alterations to ground floor, including removal of
internal walls and demolition of garage; 1 The Grove, Cromer Road for Mr T
Bradley & Miss A Murday
(Listed Building Alterations)
HOLT - PF/13/0333 - Erection of replacement flint wall and gate; 1A Hoppers
Yard, Bull Street for Greenways Holt Ltd
(Householder application)
HOLT - LA/13/0347 - Internal works to strengthen floor joists and supporting
beams; 24 High Street for Miss D Botrill
(Listed Building Alterations)
HORNING - PF/13/0321 - Erection of single-storey side/rear extension; 14
Norwich Road for Mr Mayhew
(Householder application)
HOVETON - PF/13/0146 - Construction of narrow-gauge railway track with
associated works; Bewilderwood, Horning Road for Bure Valley Adventures
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Committee
32
6 June 2013
KELLING - PF/13/0198 - Erection of one and a half storey side extension; 7 The
Old Dairy, The Street for Mr M Flisher
(Householder application)
KETTLESTONE - PF/13/0397 - Variation of condition 3 of planning permission
reference PF11/1333 to permit installation of roof lights and windows and
conversion of roof space to accommodation (part retrospective); Barn 3, Manor
Farm Barns, The Street for Mr B Williams
(Full Planning Permission)
LANGHAM - PF/13/0271 - Conversion of outbuilding to
accommodation; Apple Tree Cottage, Hollow Lane for Mr M Welby
(Householder application)
habitable
LETHERINGSETT WITH GLANDFORD - PF/13/0336 - Removal of condition 4 of
planning permission reference: 06/1013 to permit full residential occupation;
Strawpacks Barn, Blakeney Road, Glandford for Mr & Mrs R Travis
(Full Planning Permission)
LETHERINGSETT WITH GLANDFORD - PA/13/0413 - Prior notification of
intention to erect telecommunications cabinet; Land at Holt Road for Openreach
(Prior Approval (Telecommunications))
MATLASKE - NMA1/12/0608 - Non-material amendment request for revised
window arrangements and installation of additional cladding; 19 The Street for
Miss G Rodwell
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
MATLASKE - LA/13/0395 - Rebuilding of wall to utility room and bricking up of
door opening; 19 The Street for Miss G Rodwell
(Listed Building Alterations)
MATLASKE - NMA2/12/0608 - Non material amendment request to permit
reduction of three rooflights to two on larger one and half storey extension,
remove rooflight and introduction of pitched roof on single-storey rear
extension and insertion of velux window in one and a half-storey side
extension's north roof slope.; 19 The Street for Miss G Rodwell
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
MELTON CONSTABLE - PF/13/0242 - Erection of single-storey extension;
Lavender Cottage, Culpits Farm, Hindolveston Road, Melton Constable for 1st
Choice
(Householder application)
MELTON CONSTABLE - LA/13/0243 - Alterations to facilitate erection of singlestorey extension; Lavender Cottage, Culpits Farm, Hindolveston Road for 1st
Choice
(Listed Building Alterations)
MELTON CONSTABLE - PF/13/0254 - Removal of Condition 3 of planning
permission reference: 00/1640 to permit full residential occupation; Barn 1,
Culpits Farm, Hindolveston Road for Mr & Mrs J Barnes
(Full Planning Permission)
MUNDESLEY - PF/13/0276 - Erection of one and a half storey side extension; 4
Development Committee
33
6 June 2013
Bramble Close for Ms M Mannassi
(Householder application)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/13/0410 - Change of use from B2 (industrial) to a mixed
use of B2 (vehicle repairs) and retail/fitting of tyres; North Walsham Glass 8
Cornish Way Lyngate Industrial Estate for Mr G Snailum
(Full Planning Permission)
NORTH WALSHAM - AI/13/0210 - Display of illuminated advertisements; 18-19
Market Place for LLoyds Banking Group
(Advertisement Illuminated)
NORTH WALSHAM - LA/13/0227 - Installation of replacement advertisements;
18-19 Market Place for Lloyds Banking Group
(Listed Building Alterations)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/13/0324 - Erection of first floor side extension and
single-storey front extension; 7 Poppy Close for Mr & Mrs Overman
(Householder application)
NORTH WALSHAM - PF/13/0282 - Change of use from A3 (restaurant and cafe)
to A4 (drinking establishment); 18 Market Street for Mr P Callaway
(Full Planning Permission)
OVERSTRAND - PF/13/0376 - Erection of metal sculpture; Belfry Arts Centre,
Cromer Road for Belfry Arts Centre
(Full Planning Permission)
OVERSTRAND - PF/12/0828 - Variation of Condition 2 of planning permission
reference: 09/1074 to permit revised fenestration and erection of balcony; 20
Cromer Road for Norfolk Property Services Limited
(Full Planning Permission)
POTTER HEIGHAM - PF/13/0319 - Erection of replacement single-storey rear
extension; 22 St Nicholas Way for Mr R Crowter
(Householder application)
RAYNHAM - PF/13/0286 - Erection of two-storey dwelling (revised siting); Land
at Trees Field Farm, Heath Road, West Raynham for Mr S Agnew
(Full Planning Permission)
ROUGHTON - PF/13/0454 - Installation of air source heat pump; 1 Flaxmans
Farm, Felbrigg Road for Mr C Cox
(Householder application)
ROUGHTON - LA/13/0151 - Installation of replacement windows and door;
Primrose Barn, 2 Flaxmans Farm, Felbrigg Road for Mr E Fernandez-Pino
(Listed Building Alterations)
RYBURGH - PF/13/0308 - Erection of first floor side extension and single-storey
rear extension; 40 Fakenham Road, Great Ryburgh for Mrs Champion
(Householder application)
SCULTHORPE - AI/13/0024 - Display of two illuminated fascia signs and
illuminated totem sign; Thurlow Nunn Standen Ltd, Creake Road for AGCO
(Advertisement Illuminated)
Development Committee
34
6 June 2013
SHERINGHAM - PF/13/0301 - Erection of first floor front extension; 22 Nelson
Road for Mr & Mrs R Edwards
(Householder application)
SHERINGHAM - PF/13/0274 - Erection of rear conservatory and detached
outbuilding; 7 The Rise for Mr & Mrs J Sandford
(Householder application)
SHERINGHAM - PF/13/0132 - Erection of two-storey front extension and singlestorey rear extensions with loggia; 10 The Driftway for Mr J Hill
(Householder application)
SHERINGHAM - NMA1/12/1031 - Non material amendment request to replace flat
roof with pitched roof to link pitched garage roof to residential dwelling; 19
Uplands Park for Mr R Picken
(Non-Material Amendment Request-Household)
SHERINGHAM - AN/13/0231 - Display of non-illuminated advertisement; 33 New
Street for Stuarts Taxi and Travel
(Advertisement Non-Illuminated)
SIDESTRAND - LA/12/1184 - Erection of rear conservatory (revised roof design);
Middle Cottage, 19 Main Road for Mr M Danson-Hatcher
(Listed Building Alterations)
SKEYTON - PF/13/0180 - Erection of two-storey and single-storey rear
extensions; Willow Farm, Swanton Abbott Road for Mrs M Peters
(Householder application)
SLOLEY - NMA2/11/0088 - Non-material amendment request to enclose open
cart shelters to create home office space and garage for East and West Barns
and erection of garden sheds; East and West Barns, High Street for D & M
Hickling Properties Ltd
(Non-Material Amendment Request)
SMALLBURGH - PF/13/0266 - Erection of two-storey side extension; Hill
Cottage, Union Road for Mr R Harris
(Householder application)
SOUTHREPPS - PF/13/0241 - Variation of condition 2 of planning permission
reference PF/11/0738 to permit amended fenestration; Barns adjacent, Pond
Farm Barn, Thorpe Road for Mr A Chatten
(Full Planning Permission)
STALHAM - PF/13/0348 - Variation of Condition 3 of planning permission
reference: 03/2011 to permit permanent residential occupation; 5 West End
Farm, Chapel Field, Chapel Field Road for Mr T Isotta
(Full Planning Permission)
STIBBARD - PF/13/0387 - Erection of first floor side extension, installation of
first floor side window and erection of detached garage block; Owlswood, Moor
End Lane for Mr J Morton
(Householder application)
Development Committee
35
6 June 2013
TATTERSETT - PF/13/0469 - Variation of Condition 4 of planning permission
reference: 07/1651 to permit full residential occupation; East Barn, Wicken Pond
Farm, Tattersett Road, Syderstone for Mr C Faiers
(Full Planning Permission)
THURNING - PF/13/0330 - Erection of single-storey side extension and
construction of replacement roof to provide accommodation in roof space; Field
End Cottage, Saxthorpe Road for Mr & Mrs B Turner
(Householder application)
THURSFORD - PF/13/0277 - Erection of piggery unit; Brookhill Farm, Fakenham
Road for Mr H Cushing
(Full Planning Permission)
TRUNCH - PF/13/0206 - Erection of replacement garage (extension of period for
commencement of planning permission reference PF/10/0015); The Manor
House, Brewery Road for Mr J E Mason
(Householder application)
TUNSTEAD - PF/12/1147 - Erection of detached garage; Hall Farm Cottage,
Market Street for Ms C Lee
(Householder application)
WALCOTT - PF/13/0219 - Conversion of agricultural buildings to two residential
dwellings; Land at Walcott Hall, Walcott Green for D & J Love
(Full Planning Permission)
WARHAM - PF/13/0446 - Installation of bifold doors and double doors (revised
design); The White House, Chapel Street for Mr J Hadley
(Listed Building Alterations)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - LA/13/0245 - Installation of two replacement doors; St.
Michaels House, Red Lion Yard for Mr A Gardener
(Listed Building Alterations)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/13/0158 - Conversion and extension of store to
provide residential annexe; Ware Hall House, Plummers Hill for Mrs C Adams
(Householder application)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/13/0311 - Erection of 1.5m high boundary
wall/fence; Gaelic Stronghold, 1 Northfield Avenue for Mrs S McNally
(Householder application)
WEYBOURNE - PF/13/0284 - Continued use of land for siting storage containers;
Land south of Sheringham Road for Weybourne Community Fund (Norfolk)
(Full Planning Permission)
WEYBOURNE - PF/13/0157 - Erection of dwelling and garage; Land adjacent 2
Martin Close for Mr Thomas
(Full Planning Permission)
WICKMERE - PF/13/0236 - Erection of first floor extension, insertion of dormer
window, and detached garage with ancillary accommodation in roof space; The
Old School, Church Road for Mr P Withers
(Householder application)
Development Committee
36
6 June 2013
WORSTEAD - PF/13/0341 - Erection of single-storey extension to provide store
room; Worstead Vc Primary School, Honing Road, Lyngate for Norfolk County
Council
(Full Planning Permission)
10.
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
CROMER - AI/13/0153 - Continued display of illuminated advertisement; 23 New
Street for Coast Kebab
(Advertisement Illuminated)
SLOLEY - PF/13/0160 - Construction of detached garage to serve The Stables.;
Sloley Farm, High Street for D & M Hickling Properties Limited
(Householder application)
APPEALS SECTION
11.
NEW APPEALS
HOVETON - PF/12/0216 - Erection of detached two-storey dwelling; Land
adjacent 28 Waveney Drive for Mr & Mrs A Bryan
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS
10.
PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
No items.
11.
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - IN HAND
BEESTON REGIS - PF/12/0387 - Variation of Condition 6 of planning permission
reference: 06/1783 to permit use of chapel of rest/office building for a mixed use
of chapel of rest/office/overnight sleeping accommodation; Abbey Pets
Remembrance Gardens And Crematoria Ltd, Britons Lane for Mr R Edwards
SEA PALLING - PF/11/1398 - Continued use of land for siting mobile holiday
home and retention of septic tank; Mealuca, The Marrams for Mr R Contessa
SHERINGHAM - PF/12/0568 - Erection of two detached two-storey dwellings with
garages; Land adjacent 25 Cremers Drift for Mr S Pigott
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - LA/12/1179 - Installation of five replacement front
windows; 5-7 High Street for Mr & Mrs Leftley
SEA PALLING - ENF/11/0084 - Installation of Septic Tank on Unoccupied Land
and installation of mobile home; Land at The Marrams
12.
APPEAL DECISIONS
No items.
Development Committee
37
6 June 2013