8 APRIL 2010
Minutes of a meeting of the DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE held in the Council
Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 9.30 am when there were present:
Councillors
H C Cordeaux (Chairman for Minutes 83 and 84)
Mrs C M Wilkins (Chairman for Minutes 75 - 82 and 85 - 93)
S J Partridge (Vice-Chairman (East))
J A Wyatt (Vice-Chairman (West))
Mrs S A Arnold
M J M Baker
B Cabbell Manners
Miss P E Ford
Mrs A R Green
Mrs B McGoun
S C Mears
J H Perry-Warnes
Mrs M Seward
Miss C P Sheridan
B Smith
Mrs A C Sweeney
P J Willcox
Mrs G M D Lisher - substitute for P W High
Mrs P Bevan Jones - Sheringham North Ward
R Combe - Astley Ward
Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett - Poppyland Ward
B J Hannah - Sheringham North Ward
Mrs J P Moss - Sheringham South Ward
Mrs H T Nelson - Sheringham South Ward
Ms V R Gay - observer
Officers
Mr S Oxenham - Head of Planning and Building Control
Mr J Williams - Development Control Manager (East)
Mr R Howe - Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager
Mr G Linder - Senior Planning Officer (West)
Miss J Medler - Senior Planning Officer (West)
Mr I Thompson - Senior Planning Officer (East)
Mr D Sutton - Environmental Protection Officer
Miss K Witton - Landscape Officer
(75)
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND DETAILS OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors P W High, J D Savory, Mrs J
Trett and Mrs L Walker. There was one substitute Member in attendance as shown
above.
(76)
MINUTES
Special Meeting - 4 March 2010
Councillor Miss C P Sheridan stated that an allegation had been made against her
that she had breached the Members’ Code of Conduct at the meeting held on 4
March 2010. She had been advised that this constituted a prejudicial interest and
that in accordance with that advice she would reluctantly withdraw from the Council
Chamber during discussion of matters relating to that meeting.
Development Control Committee
1
8 April 2010
Councillor B J Hannah stated that he disagreed with the decision to exclude
Councillor Miss Sheridan from the meeting on the basis of what could prove to be a
mischievous complaint. He considered that the matters in question should not be
considered until the Standards Committee had heard the case.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager stated that the advice given to
Councillor Miss C P Sheridan was correct.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson stated that all Sheringham Members supported Councillor
Hannah’s comments.
Councillor Miss Sheridan left the Council Chamber.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager reminded the Committee that there
should be no discussion on the minutes except as to their accuracy. He stated that
minutes were not intended to be a verbatim transcript but were a summary of the
business transacted and a record of the decisions made. He reported that an email
had been received from solicitors acting for Tesco suggesting a number of changes
to the draft minutes. This was an unprecedented situation so far as he was aware.
However he would present all the requested changes to Members for their
consideration.
The Committee considered the Minutes of the special meeting of the Committee held
on 4 March 2010. The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager presented each of
the amendments proposed by Tesco’s solicitor for consideration. In each case, the
Committee dismissed the proposed amendments.
Councillor H C Cordeaux referred to page 6 of the draft minutes and stated that the
penultimate line of his comments should refer to Weybourne Road and not Cromer
Road as stated.
No other comments were made as to the accuracy of the minutes.
Councillor Mrs B McGoun asked whether Councillor Miss Sheridan was satisfied with
the accuracy of the minutes. The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager
explained that Councillor Miss Sheridan would have received a copy of the draft
minutes. She had not communicated any amendments to him. As there was a
related item for information on the agenda he strongly advised that the Committee
approve the minutes at this meeting.
It was proposed by Councillor S J Partridge, seconded by Councillor J H PerryWarnes and
RESOLVED
That subject to the amendment of Councillor H C Cordeaux’s comments
on page 6 of the minutes to refer to Weybourne Road, the Minutes of the
special meeting of the Committee held on 4 March 2010 be approved as
a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
11 March 2010
The Minutes of a meeting of the Development Control Committee held on 11 March
2010 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
Development Control Committee
2
8 April 2010
(77)
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
The Chairman stated that there were no items of urgent business which she wished
to bring before the Committee.
(78)
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors Mrs S A Arnold, M J M Baker, B Cabbell Manners, Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett, J
H Perry-Warnes, Miss C P Sheridan and Mrs C M Wilkins declared interests, the
details of which are given under the minute of the item concerned.
(79)
SHERINGHAM – 20090777 – Erection of A1 (retail Supermarket) and D1 (Norfolk
Food Academy) with Associated Kitchen Garden, Parking, Landscaping and
Infrastructure at Sheringham Town Allotments, Land South of Weybourne
Road for Greenhouse Community Projects
SHERINGHAM – 20090818 – Demolish all Buildings except numbers 7, 9 and 11
Cromer Road and Erection of A1 (Retail Supermarket), 5 Class A1/A3 Retail
Units, 2 Flats and a Class D1/D2 Community Space with associated Access,
Landscaping, Car parking and Servicing Arrangements at Land at Cromer
Road for Tesco Stores Ltd
Councillor M J M Baker declared an interest in these applications as he was a retailer
in Holt. However, as this item was for information only and no decisions were to be
made he stated that he would remain in the Council Chamber. The Planning Legal
and Enforcement Manager stated that this was against his advice.
The Committee noted item 1 of the officers’ reports which updated the Committee
following the receipt of legal advice since the meeting on 4 March.
Councillor B J Hannah asked why it would be necessary for the Committee to take
into account any further representations made since the meeting on 4 March when it
met to consider its reasoning for the decision taken at that meeting.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager explained that it was clear from case
law that a planning decision was not made until the issue of the decision notice.
Section 38(6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 stated that planning
decisions must be taken in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material
considerations indicated otherwise. Any further submissions would be material to the
decision and should therefore be taken into account when the matter was
reconsidered.
RESOLVED
That the report be noted.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Where appropriate the Planning Officers expanded on the planning applications;
updated the meeting on outstanding consultations, letters/petitions received objecting
to, or supporting the proposals; referred to any views of local Members and answered
Members’ questions.
Development Control Committee
3
8 April 2010
Background papers, including correspondence, petitions, consultation documents,
letters of objection and those in support of planning applications were available for
inspection at the meeting.
Having regard to the above information and the report of the Head of Planning and
Building Control, the Committee reached the decisions as set out below.
Applications approved include a standard time limit condition as condition number 1
unless otherwise stated.
(80)
CORPUSTY AND SAXTHORPE - PF/09/0906 - Use of land for siting timber
dwelling for supervisor of agricultural/horticultural/agro-forestry unit;
Woodfruits, Locks Farm Road for Mr Den Engelse
Councillor H C Cordeaux declared an interest in this application as he had been
connected with the family in the 1950s and 1960s. Although this was a personal
interest he chose to leave the Council Chamber during consideration of this matter.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes declared a personal interest in this application as the
applicant had visited him when he began the enterprise and he also knew the
applicant’s father and had known his grandfather.
The Committee considered item 2 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Mr Poberefsky (Corpusty Parish Council)
Mr Dunn (objecting)
Mr Den Engelse (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that the Council’s independent consultant had
considered the comments of the agent with regard to the financial information and
concluded that it did not alter his opinion with regard to the viability of the business
and its ability to meet the financial tests required under Core Strategy Policy HO5
and PPS7.
The Senior Planning Officer recommended refusal of this application on grounds that
the applicant had failed to demonstrate that the proposal would be financially viable
and it therefore fails to meet the requirements of the financial tests as required by
Core Strategy Policy HO5 and PPS7.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, the local Member, stated that he had considerable
sympathy with the applicant. However, he considered that the applicant had had
time to make the business viable but had not done so. He proposed refusal of this
application in accordance with the recommendation. This was seconded by
Councillor B Smith.
Councillor Miss P E Ford referred to the small scale of the business and considered
that it was a demonstration of what could be achieved in a changing world. However,
the applicant was expected to follow the economic model of big business. She
considered that the application should be supported. The proposed dwelling was a
small scale, temporary structure and she considered that there were adequate policy
grounds to support it.
Councillor B Cabbell Manners referred to the requirements for selling to
supermarkets and stated that the business would not meet those requirements.
Development Control Committee
4
8 April 2010
Councillor Mrs A C Sweeney questioned the need for someone to live on the site as
there was no livestock.
Councillor M J M Baker stated that the viability of the business was not a relevant
consideration in his view. He considered that there was no evidence of need for
agricultural occupation.
Councillor B Smith considered that there was no reason to have living
accommodation on the site as automatic systems could be put in place.
The Head of Planning and Building Control explained that the Council’s agricultural
consultant had concluded that there was a functional requirement to live on the site
but because there was no reasonable prospect of viability there was no need. In
answer to a question by Councillor Mrs M Seward he explained the policy issues in
this case.
Councillor Mrs B McGoun referred to the need for food security and commended the
applicant on his sustainable approach.
It was proposed by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, seconded by Councillor B Smith
and
RESOLVED by 7 votes to 4 with 1 abstention
That this application be refused on grounds that the applicant had failed
to demonstrate that the proposal would be financially viable and it
therefore fails to meet the requirements of the financial tests as required
by Core Strategy Policy HO5 and PPS7.
It was further
RESOLVED by 7 votes to 4 with 1 abstention
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
commence enforcement proceedings to require the removal of the
unauthorised dwelling within six months from the effective date of the
Enforcement Notice for the same reasons as the refusal of the planning
application.
(81)
HINDOLVESTON - PF/09/1062 - Raising of roof and alterations to provide first
floor accommodation, erection of two-storey front extension and detached
double garage/store; 5, Melton Road for Mr Boyle
The Committee considered item 3 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Mr Howard (Hindolveston Parish Council)
Mrs Boyle (supporting)
Councillor R Combe, the local Member, considered that the proposed garage should
be turned round in accordance with the previously submitted plans.
Councillor J A Wyatt suggested relocating the garage to the rear garden with an
entrance through the existing garage. He considered that the current proposal was
unacceptable.
Development Control Committee
5
8 April 2010
Councillor S J Partridge proposed approval of the application which was seconded by
Councillor B Cabbell Manners.
Councillor H C Cordeaux supported the local Member and as an amendment
proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the originally submitted
plan. This was seconded by Councillor Mrs A R Green.
The Head of Planning and Building Control requested delegated authority to approve
this application subject to the applicant agreeing to reinstate the originally submitted
plan.
With the agreement of his seconder, Councillor Partridge withdrew his proposal.
It was proposed by Councillor H C Cordeaux, seconded by Councillor Mrs A R Green
and
RESOLVED by 10 votes to 1
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to the applicant agreeing to reinstate
the original plan and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions
including the removal of permitted development rights for additional
first floor windows and precise details of materials.
(82)
LETHERINGSETT WITH GLANDFORD - PF/10/0025 - Erection of single-storey
extension and conversion to form one unit of holiday accommodation; The Old
Potting Sheds, Bayfield Hall for Bayfield Farms Ltd
On behalf of the Committee the Chairman declared a blanket interest in this
application as the supporting spokesman’s father was a fellow Councillor.
The Committee considered item 4 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Roger Combe (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, the local
Member, supported this application and considered that the Highway Authority’s
advice was unreasonable.
The Senior Planning Officer reported that at the request of the Committee Chairmen
he had discussed the use of an alternative access with the applicants. However, the
visibility at this access was worse than the proposed access. He recommended
refusal as set out in the report.
Councillor S J Partridge supported this application. He proposed approval of this
application which was seconded by Councillor J A Wyatt.
Councillor H C Cordeaux suggested that a mirror opposite the exit could be helpful.
It was proposed by Councillor S J Partridge, seconded by Councillor J A Wyatt and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the installation of a mirror
opposite the exit.
Development Control Committee
6
8 April 2010
(83)
NORTHREPPS - PF/09/1082 - Removal of conditions 1 and 3 of planning
permission ref: 20081434 and variation of conditions 4, 5 and 8 to continue use
of land as aerodrome with a phased increase in aircraft movement from 1780 to
2100 per annum and to permit take-off and landing at any time in an emergency
and limited banner towing; Northrepps Aerodrome, North Walsham Road for
Mr C Gurney
Councillor B Cabbell Manners declared a prejudicial interest in this application as he
was related by marriage to the Gurney family and vacated the Council Chamber
during consideration of this matter.
Councillor Mrs S A Arnold declared a personal interest in this application as she
knew slightly some members of the Gurney family.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett (local Member) declared a personal interest in this
application as she was a lifelong friend of the owner, applicant and an objector. She
emphasised that she was speaking as a local Member and was not a voting Member
of the Committee.
The Committee considered item 5 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Lorna Fish (Northrepps Parish Council)
Ivor Watkins, Hazel Rowlinson, Louis de Soissons and Simon Gurney (objecting)
Gordon Shaw (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that the proposal had been amended to a
maximum increase in aircraft movements to 2100 instead of 3500. He reported that
the agricultural operations referred to in condition 3 of permission 20041434 had now
ceased. He stated that the Parish Council comments on page 15 of the report were
those of Northrepps Parish Council. 150 letters had now been received from
residents of local parishes objecting to the continuation of flights from the site.
The Senior Planning Officer reported that further comments had been received from
Natural England which maintained its objection but recognised that some of the
proposed mitigation measures could be effective in reducing disturbance to wildlife.
Further research was necessary as to how much disturbance was attributed to the
use of the airfield. The Senior Planning Officer suggested that that a further
temporary period would allow information to be logged.
The Senior Planning Officer requested delegated authority to approve this application
for a temporary period of one year to allow effective monitoring of disturbance to
nearby residents and coastal habitats, resolution of the highway issues and the
imposition of appropriate conditions to include those listed in the report, amended to
allow no more than 800 aircraft movements during the months of June, July and
August. He stated that a circuit flying route had been agreed under the original
application and suggested that this be referred to in any permission which may be
granted.
In response to a question the Senior Planning Officer confirmed that monitoring
would include the keeping of a log and that in the event of concerns residents could
contact Environmental Health.
Development Control Committee
7
8 April 2010
The Development Control Manager reported a letter that had been received from
Councillor G R Jones as County Councillor for the Mundesley Division, expressing
concerns in respect of low flying, aircraft routing, noise, lack of monitoring in
accordance with the previous permission, the complaints procedure and aspects of
the report. Councillor Jones asked that due weight be given to the objections and the
comments of the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager. He had referred to
the comments of Norfolk County Council regarding highway issues, wildlife issues,
monitoring, Human Rights issues, tourism, employment and the applicant’s wish to
expand the microlight business. Councillor Jones had requested refusal of this
application and invitation of a new application incorporating all the amendments
which had been made. A similar letter had been sent to Members of the Committee.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett, the local Member, stated that the applicant had
worked closely with officers to address the concerns. The proposed maximum
number of flights had been drastically reduced and the applicant was prepared to
restrict the number of flights by microlights and similar aircraft. She supported the
views of Northrepps Parish Council. She requested that the Committee support the
officer’s recommendation.
Councillor Mrs A R Green referred to the concerns of Natural England with regard to
disturbance of wildlife. She stated that her own livestock continued to graze even
when military jets flew over and she had never known the animals to be disturbed by
aircraft. She supported this application.
Councillor M J M Baker considered that there were sufficient safeguards built into the
conditions and proposed approval of this application, which was seconded by
Councillor S J Partridge.
Councillor Mrs B McGoun considered that the main problem was flying of microlights
and gyrocopters. She sympathised with the objectors to this application.
Councillor Mrs G M D Lisher asked if microlights and gyrocopters could be routed in
order to cause the least disturbance. She requested information on emergency
services at the site.
The Senior Planning Officer stated that he was unsure as to the emergency services
arrangements at the site. However, this was not a matter for the Local Planning
Authority. It was difficult for the Local Planning Authority to enforce or impose terms
on routing. Informal guidelines could be agreed with the applicant. The operator of
the site could be requested to display guidelines and warning signs at the airfield.
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins expressed concern that hedges had not been cut back in
accordance with the requirements of the previous temporary permission. She
supported a further temporary permission to allow for monitoring.
Councillor Miss P E Ford enquired as to the benefits of this application to local
people and businesses.
The Development Control Manager explained that the proposal should be assessed
with regard to its acceptability in land use terms and impact on the amenity of the
surrounding area. The decision should not be made on the basis of who would
benefit from the proposal.
Councillor Mrs S A Arnold stated that she took on board the concerns regarding
microlight flying. With regard to the highway concerns, she was not aware of any
accidents in the vicinity of the entrance to the site.
Development Control Committee
8
8 April 2010
In answer to a question the Landscape Officer explained the appropriate assessment
process.
Councillor H C Cordeaux requested that any log should be regularly monitored.
The Environmental Protection Officer explained that the previous approval was given
on a temporary basis in response to concerns raised by local residents. No
complaints were received during that period. He explained that monitoring had to be
carried out in complainants’ premises. He stated that many of the powered hang
gliders took off from locations other than Northrepps and it was therefore important
that problems were attributed to the right source. It was also important that noise
problems were reported to Environmental Health. There was no evidence to justify
restrictions as to noise. It was intended to check the log sheets on a quarterly basis.
In response to a question he explained that the log had been missing from the site
but had now been returned and was being maintained.
It was proposed by Councillor M J M Baker, seconded by Councillor S J Partridge
and
RESOLVED by 12 votes to 1 with 2 abstentions
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application for a temporary period of one year (to allow the
monitoring of the effect of aircraft movements upon coastal habitats
and nearby residential areas) subject to resolution of the highway
issues and the imposition of appropriate conditions to include those
listed in the report, amended to allow no more than a total of 800 aircraft
movements during the months of June, July and August, and regular
monitoring of the flying log.
(84)
SCOTTOW - PF/10/0172 - Erection of 70 metre high wind monitoring mast; Land
at Coltishall Airfield for Partnership for Renewables
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins declared a personal interest in this application as she
was an honorary non-voting member of CETAG and had attended presentations by
TAG Aviation and the applicant. The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager
confirmed that it was in order for her to speak and vote on this matter.
The Committee considered item 6 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Khalid Hussain (supporting)
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins reported that the local Member had intended to submit
comments to her by email. However the email system had been down and she had
not received them.
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins referred to Government guidance in PPG13 which sought
to protect sites used for aviation, including former military airfields. She considered
that the measuring device was a precursor to a wind turbine, which would be
unacceptable. She stated that the information required by the applicant was already
available from the MOD or Meteorological Office. She proposed deferral of this
application to allow the applicants to withdraw this application or explain their
reasons as to why the existing data could not be used. She was concerned that the
proposed mast could jeopardise the future use of the site for aviation purposes.
Development Control Committee
9
8 April 2010
Councillor S J Partridge questioned why the applicants required the mast for three
years.
The Development Control Manager stated that a three-year period was the basis for
the application. This did not necessarily mean that the mast would be in place for the
whole three-year period. The Committee was at liberty to reduce the period of
permission, however he considered that less than two years was not appropriate.
Councillor S J Partridge proposed that this application be approved for a period of
two years. This was seconded by Councillor B Cabbell Manners.
Councillor M J M Baker seconded the proposal for deferral put forward by Councillor
Mrs C M Wilkins.
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins explained that she was concerned because a proposal by
TAG Aviation, which had been reported in the press, would bring 400 highly skilled
jobs to the area. This proposal would need to be located 4km from any wind turbine.
She considered that no planning application for developments which would be
incompatible with aviation should be considered. The current application would not
create jobs. She stated that wind speeds had been monitored at the site at various
heights for over 60 years.
The question was put to Mr Hussain as to whether or not the existing data would be
suitable. Mr Hussain explained the need to collect accurate data at a specific height.
The Development Control Manager explained that this application was in response to
a requirement imposed on the planning permission for the prison.
The Head of Planning and Building Control reminded the Committee that it had to
determine the current application. He stated that the data collected by the
meteorological mast could indicate that the site was not suitable for a wind turbine.
It was proposed by Councillor S J Partridge, seconded by Councillor B Cabbell
Manners
That this application be approved for a temporary period of two years.
As an amendment, it was proposed by Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins, seconded by
Councillor M J M Baker
That consideration of this application be deferred to request the
applicant to seek the relevant data from the Ministry of Defence or
Meteorological Office, and that the application be considered in
conjunction with the master plan for the whole of the site.
On being put to the vote, the amendment was declared carried by 11 votes to 4 and
on being put as the substantive motion it was RESOLVED accordingly.
Development Control Committee
10
8 April 2010
(85)
APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR A SITE INSPECTION
The Committee considered item 7 of the officers’ reports.
RESOLVED
That a site inspection be arranged in respect of the following application
and that the local Member and Chairman of the Parish Council be
invited to attend:
BRISTON - PF/10/0143 – Change of use of land to private travellers site
for 6 number pitches including amenity blocks, hardstanding and
parking on land at 53 Reepham Road for Mr and Mrs Kidd
(86)
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 8 of the officers’ reports.
(87)
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 9 of the officers’ reports.
(88)
NEW APPEALS
The Committee noted item 10 of the officers’ reports.
(89)
PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 11 of the officers’ reports.
(90)
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 12 of the officers’ reports.
(91)
APPEAL DECISIONS
The Committee noted item 13 of the officers’ reports.
(92)
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
RESOLVED
That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press
and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of
business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of
exempt information as defined in paragraph 6 of Part I of Schedule 12A
(as amended) to the Act.
(93)
PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE OF CURRENT CASES
The Committee considered item 14 of the officers’ exempt reports updating the
situation previously reported concerning the schedule of outstanding enforcement
cases and unresolved complaints more than three months old as at 31 December
2009.
Development Control Committee
11
8 April 2010
RESOLVED
1.
That the contents of the report and the annexed Schedules of Current
Enforcement Cases be noted.
2.
That the cases where compliance has been achieved be removed from
the first Schedule.
The meeting closed at 1.05 pm.
Development Control Committee
12
8 April 2010