10 JUNE 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
Mrs C M Wilkins (Chairman)
H C Cordeaux (Chairman (West))
S J Partridge (Vice-Chairman (East))
M J M Baker
Mrs A R Green
P W High
S C Mears
J H Perry-Warnes
J D Savory
B Smith
Mrs A C Sweeney
Mrs L Walker
P J Willcox
Mrs L M Brettle - substitute for B Cabbell Manners
Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett - substitute for Mrs S A Arnold
Mrs P Bevan Jones - Cabinet Member for Strategic Housing
Ms V R Gay - Cabinet Member for Planning
G R Jones - Gaunt Ward
Mrs G M D Lisher - Lancaster South Ward
J Lisher - Lancaster South Ward
Mrs H T Nelson - Sheringham (South) Ward
Miss D A Wakefield - The Raynhams Ward
Officers
Mr S Oxenham - Head of Planning and Building Control
Mr A Mitchell - Development Control Manager (West)
Mr J Williams - Development Control Manager (East)
Mr R Howe - Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager
Mr P Godwin - Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager
Mr I Thompson - Senior Planning Officer (East)
Mr C Young - Senior Conservation and Design Officer
Mr P Rhymes - Conservation and Design Officer
Mr D Mortimer - Development Control Officer (NCC Highways)
(116) APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND DETAILS OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs S A Arnold, B Cabbell
Manners, Mrs B McGoun, Mrs M Seward, Mrs J Trett and J A Wyatt. There were two
substitute Members in attendance as listed above.
(117) MINUTES
The Minutes of a meeting of the Development Control Committee held on 20 May
2010 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
(118) ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
The Chairman stated that there were no items of urgent business which she wished
to bring before the Committee.
Development Control Committee
1
10 June 2010
(119) DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
All Members declared interests, the details of which are given under the minute of the
item concerned.
(120) PROPOSED CONSERVATION AREA AT FORMER RAF COLTISHALL
The Committee considered item 1 of the officers’ reports which sought approval of
the draft RAF Coltishall Conservation Area Designation Report for public
consultation.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager gave a brief overview of the
issues identified in the report. He reported that a letter of objection had been
received from agents acting for the Ministry of Justice expressing concern that the
designation would affect the marketing potential and possible future uses of the site.
He stated that the proposed Conservation Area designation should be seen as an
opportunity as well as a potential constraint.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins, seconded by Councillor J H PerryWarnes and
RESOLVED unanimously
1.
That the Draft RAF Coltishall Designation document, incorporating the
proposed boundary, be approved for public consultation purposes.
2.
That following consultation, a report on designation be brought back to
the Committee for final consideration and adoption.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Where appropriate the Planning Officers expanded on the planning applications;
updated the meeting on outstanding consultations, letters/petitions received objecting
to, or supporting the proposals; referred to any views of local Members and answered
Members’ questions.
Background papers, including correspondence, petitions, consultation documents,
letters of objection and those in support of planning applications were available for
inspection at the meeting.
Having regard to the above information and the report of the Head of Planning and
Building Control, the Committee reached the decisions as set out below.
Applications approved include a standard time limit condition as condition number 1
unless otherwise stated.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager referred to the controversial nature of
some of the applications to be considered, in particular those from members of the
Gypsy and Traveller community and in respect of affordable housing schemes. He
read to the Committee the Council’s Respect Statement.
Development Control Committee
2
10 June 2010
(121) BODHAM - PF/10/0206 - Continued use of land for siting mobile home and
retention of shed/wood store; Drakes Patch Hart Lane for Mr R Drake
All Members declared a personal interest in this application as the speaker was a
fellow Councillor and Committee Member.
All Members had been lobbied by an objector to this application.
The Committee considered item 2 of the officers’ report.
Public Speaker
Candy Sheridan (supporting)
Miss Sheridan stated that she was attending the meeting as a supporting public
speaker only on this application and also Briston PF/10/0143 below, and would not
otherwise participate in the meeting.
The Development Control Manager stated that the change in Government had
resulted in the abolition of the Regional Spatial Strategy, which included the East of
England Plan referred to in the report. This had removed the need for the Council to
proactively provide 15 permanent pitches in the District. However, this had no effect
on the relevant policies in the Council’s Core Strategy regarding Gypsy and Traveller
sites. He stated that the application was considered to be acceptable under those
policies.
The Development Control Manager recommended approval subject to the imposition
of appropriate conditions including conditions relating to the removal/replanting of the
hedge and restriction to domestic use only and personal to the applicant.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, the local Member, declared that he had spoken to the
applicant in the past and to other people who had interests nearby. He stated that
residents of Bodham were generally against the continuation of this site. He
expressed concern at the impact of this site on the landscape. He considered that the
removal of the hedge would open up the site and spoil the appearance of the lane.
He expressed concern at the impact of drainage on the source of the River Glaven
and the installation of a septic tank on agricultural land. He referred to the planning
and enforcement history of the site and stated that the site was being occupied
unlawfully. He expressed sympathy for the applicant but considered that this
application should be refused and enforcement action taken against the unauthorised
use.
In answer to a question the Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager explained that
there was no restriction on the number of applications that could be made, but the
Council had the right to refuse to process identical applications.
Councillor S J Partridge considered that although the hedge was not in good
condition it was an ancient hedge and should be protected. It would take several
years to establish a replacement hedge. He considered that the unauthorised use
was inappropriate for the area.
It was proposed by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, seconded by Councillor S J
Partridge and
RESOLVED by 14 votes to 0 with 1 abstention
That this application be refused on grounds related to the loss of an
ancient hedgerow and detriment to visual amenity.
Development Control Committee
3
10 June 2010
(123) BRISTON - PF/10/0143 - Change of use of land to private travellers site for 6 no
pitches including amenity blocks hardstanding and parking; 53 Reepham Road
for Mr and Mrs Kidd
All Members declared a personal interest in this application as the speaker was a
fellow Councillor and Committee Member.
The Committee considered item 3 of the officers’ report.
Public Speaker
Candy Sheridan (supporting)
The Development Control Manager referred to the changing situation with regard to
the Regional Spatial Strategy as outlined under Minute (122) above, which was also
relevant to this application.
The Development Control Manager reported the comments of Councillor J A Wyatt,
the local Member, who had no objection to the static caravans, but considered that
the touring caravans should be limited to one per static van and restricted to relatives
of the static owners only.
The Development Control Manager reported that a letter of support had been
received. The Environment Agency had no objection to the proposed method of foul
drainage. The comments of the Building Control Manager were awaited.
The Development Control Manager requested delegated authority to approve this
application subject to no objection from the Building Control Manager on the
proposed method for the disposal of foul sewage on the site and imposition of
appropriate conditions, including those set out in the report.
It was proposed by Councillor S J Partridge, seconded by Councillor Mrs L Walker
and
RESOLVED unanimously
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to no objection from the Building
Control Manager on the proposed method for the disposal of foul
sewage on the site and imposition of appropriate conditions, including
that the site should only be used by occupants that meet the definition
of Gypsies and Travellers or the description of travelling show people
as contained in Circular 01/2006, and that the number of touring
caravans be limited to one per permanent static caravan pitch, and that
each is not occupied independently of the static caravan to which it
relates.
(124) CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - PF/10/0410 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; Land at
Fairstead/Post Office Lane for Mr and Mrs Tart
The Committee considered item 4 of the officers’ report.
Public Speaker
Mr Tart (supporting)
Development Control Committee
4
10 June 2010
The Development Control Manager reported that an amended plan had been
received which amended the first floor balcony to a Juliet balcony. He reported the
contents of a further letter of objection that had been received on behalf of a local
resident. This included reference to a current application on a neighbouring site.
The plans for that proposal were displayed.
The Development Control Manager requested delegated authority to approve this
application subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions including those
required by the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager and the Sustainability
Co-ordinator, the removal of permitted development rights for extension and
alterations to the dwelling and the erection of outbuildings, and a reduced
implementation time to accord with the permission for a single storey dwelling on the
site and subject, if necessary, to a Section 106 Agreement to tie the dwelling to the
garden land (as per the previous permission for a dwelling on the site).
Councillor H C Cordeaux, the local Member, referred to the history of applications on
this site. He considered that this proposal was acceptable.
It was proposed by Councillor S J Partridge, seconded by Councillor J H PerryWarnes and
RESOLVED by 10 votes to 0 with 1 abstention
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to the imposition of appropriate
conditions including those required by the Conservation, Design and
Landscape Manager and the Sustainability Co-ordinator, the removal of
permitted development rights for extension and alterations to the
dwelling and the erection of outbuildings, and a reduced
implementation time to accord with the permission for a single storey
dwelling on the site and subject, if necessary, to a Section 106
Agreement to tie the dwelling to the garden land.
(125) FAKENHAM - PF/10/0344 - Erection of Medical Centre and pharmacy with
ancillary parking and new road access; Morrisons, Clipbush Lane for
Fakenham Medical Practice
Councillor Mrs G M D Lisher declared a personal interest as she was a patient of the
existing medical practice and was a member of the Patient Participation Group.
The Committee considered item 5 of the officers’ report.
Public Speakers
Mr Arnold and Mr Fraser (supporting)
The Development Control Manager reported that Fakenham Town Council had no
objection in respect of the revised design details. The Highway Authority now had no
objection in respect of the travel plan or means of access. The comments of the
Highway Authority on footpath provision were awaited. A sum of £2,500 would be
required for monitoring of the travel plan, to be provided by cash deposit rather than
a legal agreement. Anglian Water had confirmed that there was capacity to connect
to the main sewer.
Development Control Committee
5
10 June 2010
The Development Control Manager reported that the Highway Authority would
require the closure of the temporary access and the provision of a new access to any
link road before any of the LDF proposals were granted planning permission. The
Highway Authority had assumed the developer had secured this and suggested that
the Local Planning Authority would require confirmation. It was understood from the
agents that the Environment Agency and Anglian Water had now agreed the
drainage proposals.
The Development Control Manager requested delegated authority to approve this
application subject to confirmation from the Environment Agency, Anglian Water and
Norfolk County Council that flood risk and highway issues have been resolved, and
subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Councillor Mrs G M D Lisher, Member for Lancaster South Ward, emphasised the
need for the improved facilities and the need for the work to commence by
September 2010. She urged the Committee to support this application.
Councillor J Lisher, also Member for Lancaster South Ward, reiterated the urgency to
proceed with this proposal.
Councillor S C Mears, a local Member, stated that the proposed facility was
desperately needed. However, he was concerned that pedestrians from the north of
the town would use Rudham Stile Lane, which had no footpath, to access the site.
In answer to a question regarding the availability of dispensary facilities on Sundays,
Mr Fraser stated that the dispensary would not be open on Sundays. However, the
pharmacy would be open seven days a week.
The Development Control Manager stated that there were no proposals to improve
the footpath link through Rudham Stile Lane. However, he considered that it would
be more appropriate to link footpath improvements with application PO/10/0343.
It was proposed by Councillor S C Mears, seconded by Councillor H C Cordeaux and
RESOLVED unanimously (except for Councillor J H Perry-Warnes who had left the
room during the debate and could not vote)
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application subject to confirmation from the Environment
Agency, Anglian Water and Norfolk County Council that flood risk and
highway issues have been resolved, and subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
(126) FAKENHAM - PO/10/0343 - Erection of Community healthcare facilities
including 48 bed care home, Gym/Healthclub, children's day nursery and office
accommodation (Use Class B1) with pedestrian plaza, associated landscaping
and ancillary parking; Land adjacent Morrisons, Clipbush Lane for Medcentres
Councillor S C Mears stated that he knew a resident of Rudham Stile Lane who
would be affected by the proposal.
The Committee considered item 6 of the officers’ report.
Public Speaker
Mr Arnold (supporting)
Development Control Committee
6
10 June 2010
The Development Control Manager reported the contents of one further letter of
objection that had been received from a local resident. He reported the comments of
the Highway Authority in respect of parking and the Travel Plan.
The Development Control Manager reported that the Highway Authority would
require the closure of the temporary access and the provision of a new access to any
link road before any of the LDF proposals were granted planning permission. The
Highway Authority had assumed the developer had secured this and suggested that
the Local Planning Authority would require confirmation. It was understood from the
agents that the Environment Agency and Anglian Water had now agreed the
drainage proposals.
The Town Council had no objection to the amended plan, but had commented that a
swimming pool would greatly enhance the facilities.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager had no objection to the design of
the building but had expressed concern regarding the connection between the
building and the pedestrian plaza. He had asked that careful thought be given to the
boundary treatments. He had requested that all hard and soft landscaping elements
be deferred at this stage.
The Development Control Manager considered that a phasing agreement would be
necessary to ensure that the medical centre (PF/10/0344) was provided first. He
stated that this application was more difficult in policy terms than the medical centre.
The Development Control Manager considered that there was scope for further
negotiation and discussion about the site layout which could achieve an improved
layout in terms of the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager’s concerns and
an improved relationship with neighbouring properties.
The Development Control Manager requested delegated authority to approve this
application subject to negotiations with regard to layout issues and subject to
satisfactory resolution of outstanding issues in respect of drainage, flood risk and
highways, no objections from outstanding consultees, no objections being received
following readvertisement and reconsultation on an amended scheme, and
appropriate conditions to include phasing of the scheme. He stated that there was
an opportunity for discussions regarding pedestrian facilities on Rudham Stile Lane
which had been referred to by Councillor Mears under Minute (125). Some form of
phasing agreement would also be required given the link between this application
and application reference PF/10/0344. This would require the medical centre to be
built first.
Councillor Mrs G M D Lisher, Member for Lancaster South, considered that the day
nursery should also be available for use by patients while visiting the medical
facilities.
Councillor S C Mears, a local Member, supported the officer’s recommendation.
However, he was concerned that the siting would impinge on neighbouring residents.
In answer to a question Mr Arnold stated that whilst there was not so much urgency
to carry out the development of this proposal as there was with the medical centre, it
was necessary to acquire all the land for both schemes at this stage.
Councillor M J M Baker considered that the scheme would be beneficial to the wider
community and should not be delayed because of its impact on a small number of
residents.
Development Control Committee
7
10 June 2010
The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that the Committee
approve the scheme in principle provided the applicant was willing to remove layout
from the application at this stage. Mr Arnold confirmed that he would be willing to
remove layout at this stage.
It was proposed by Councillor S C Mears, seconded by Councillor S J Partridge and
RESOLVED
That the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to
approve this application, with the exception of layout issues, subject to
the completion of a Section 106 unilateral undertaking or Obligation by
agreement regarding the travel plan bond, and subject to the
satisfactory resolution of outstanding issues in respect of drainage,
flood risk and highways, no objections from outstanding consultees
and appropriate conditions to include phasing of the scheme.
(127) FIELD DALLING - PF/09/1155 - Erection of Eight Dwellings; Land off Holt Road
for Victory Housing Trust
The Committee considered item 7 of the officers’ report.
Public Speakers
Mr Smith (Field Dalling Parish Council)
Professor Mason (objecting)
Mr Archibald (supporting)
The Development Control Manager reported that the Parish Council objected to the
amended plan. He reported that the Highway Authority had stated that the nature of
the highway network would not meet its criteria for the introduction of a 20mph speed
limit, which could have overcome the visibility issues. Junction realignment would be
necessary to meet the visibility standards. However, this would result in an
unacceptable reduction in carriageway width.
The Development Control Manager reported that two letters of support had been
received from local residents. He summarised one of the letters.
The Head of Planning and Building Control reported the contents of the second letter
which responded to the Highway Authority’s comments. The Highway Authority had
not yet seen this letter.
The Development Control Manager recommended refusal of this application on
grounds of highway safety in respect of the lack of visibility at the Langham Road
junction, and lack of sufficient detail to demonstrate that drainage proposals would
work successfully.
The Highway Development Control Officer explained in detail the highway issues.
Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, the local Member, referred to the lack of local facilities
and infrastructure, and possible drainage problems that could arise. However, it was
the Council’s policy to provide much needed affordable housing for local people.
Councillor Mrs L Walker disagreed with the comments of the Highway Authority and
considered that the additional traffic would be negligible. She stated that local people
would occupy these dwellings and would be aware of the road. She proposed
approval of this application subject to the provision of an adequate drainage system.
Development Control Committee
8
10 June 2010
Councillor M J M Baker referred to the number of second homes in the village and
stated that local people were needed to provide the services to support them.
However, he considered that the design of the proposed dwellings was out of
keeping with the local area.
The Development Control Manager referred to the comments of the Conservation,
Design and Landscape Manager in respect of the design of the proposed dwellings.
Councillor J D Savory referred to the need for affordable housing. He stated that he
had used the junction numerous times with large agricultural machinery and had
never had a problem.
Councillor S J Partridge expressed disappointment with the Highway Authority’s
view. He considered that it should be formally expressed that there would be a
limited increase in traffic movements at the junction and the increased risk would be
negligible. He seconded Councillor Mrs Walker’s proposal.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes considered that this application should be refused on
design and highway grounds. He suggested that the applicants be informed that
sites were available in other villages.
The Senior Conservation and Design Officer explained the design ethos of the
scheme. The Conservation and Design Team were satisfied with the design.
As an amendment, Councillor P J Willcox proposed deferral of this application for
design negotiations and to allow a percolation test to be carried out. This was
seconded by Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett considered that the design of the end dwellings was
acceptable but the design of the central block was not acceptable. She referred to
the drainage issues and stated that flood risk could not be ignored.
With the agreement of her seconder, Councillor Mrs L Walker amended her proposal
to give delegated authority to the Head of Planning and Building Control to approve
this application subject to acceptable drainage and design details and the imposition
of appropriate conditions, on the basis that it is considered that there would be a
limited increase in traffic movements at the junction and the increased risk would be
negligible.
On being put to the vote, the amendment proposed by Councillor P J Willcox and
seconded by Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett was declared carried by 7 votes to 5
with 2 abstentions, and on being put as the substantive proposition it was
RESOLVED by 10 votes to 4
That consideration of this application be deferred to allow negotiations
for an amended design more in keeping with the Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty and for a percolation test to be carried out.
Development Control Committee
9
10 June 2010
(128) GIMINGHAM - PF/10/0203 - Erection of one and a half storey dwelling and
garage; Land adjacent Treeside, School Lane for Mr S Colbourne
Councillor Mrs L Walker declared an interest in this application as she was
acquainted with a local resident and took no part in the meeting during consideration
of this application.
The Committee considered item 8 of the officers’ report.
Public Speaker
Mr Phillips (Gimingham Parish Council)
Myra Coe (objecting)
Simon Colbourne (supporting)
Councillor G R Jones, the local Member, stated that the size of the proposed dwelling
had significantly increased compared to the approved scheme. He referred to the
Human Rights of the neighbours. He considered that proposed dwelling should be of
a similar design and sympathetic to the neighbouring bungalows. He requested
deferral for negotiations to lower the height of the proposed dwelling by one metre to
reduce the impact on the neighbouring dwellings.
The Planning Legal and Enforcement Manager explained that Human Rights applied
to the applicant as well as the objectors and had to be balanced. In his opinion, the
officer’s recommendation would not lead to an infringement of any Human Rights.
Councillor P J Willcox stated that he sympathised with the occupiers of Treeside.
However, he considered that the current proposal had less impact than the approved
scheme in terms of loss of view. He proposed approval of this application, although
he was inclined to agree that the height could be reduced slightly.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett considered that the current design was preferable to
the approved scheme. She asked if it would be possible to lower the ground level by
half a metre, otherwise she would be happy to second the proposal.
The Senior Planning Officer stated that lowering the ground level had not been
considered under the approved scheme. He stated that if the ground were lowered it
would involve the movement of a large amount of soil which would not be
sustainable. He was not convinced that lowering the ground level was an
appropriate solution.
As an amendment, Councillor M J M Baker proposed approval of the current scheme
subject to a reduction in ground level. This was seconded by Councillor H C
Cordeaux.
Councillor B Smith suggested that soil removed as a result of lowering the ground
level could be used to reinforce the bank at the bottom of the site.
Councillor Mrs A C Sweeney stated that the objector’s comments in respect of
landscaping should be taken into account.
In answer to a question the applicant explained that he considered there would be no
benefit in lowering the ground level.
Councillor G R Jones considered that lowering the ground by one metre would be
acceptable to the Parish Council and objectors. He considered that landscaping was
important.
Development Control Committee
10
10 June 2010
The amendment was put to the vote and declared lost with 3 Members voting in
favour and 11 against.
RESOLVED by 10 votes to 3 with 1 abstention
That this application be approved in accordance with
recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control.
the
(129) HEMPTON - PF/10/0329 - The erection of 5 two-storey dwellings and 2 flats;
Site adjacent to 21 Dereham Road for Flagship Housing Group
The Committee considered item 9 of the officers’ report.
Vivien Woods (Hempton Parish Council)
Mr Archibald (supporting)
The Development Control Manager reported that an amended plan had been
received in respect of boundary treatments and details of the storage building, and
the footpaths would be finished in tarmac with rolled gravel. Further details had been
received from the agents in respect of drainage, contamination and whether piling
would be required. The further comments of the Environment Agency were awaited.
The Building Control Manager had been consulted regarding waterlogging and had
confirmed that it was possible to develop the site without any particular problems.
However, it would be necessary to seek a specialist view on the impact of
disturbance of the water table on adjacent properties.
The Development Control Manager referred to a suggested amendment that had
been received from a local resident but this was not shown at the meeting.
The Development Control Manager requested delegated authority to approve this
application subject to confirmation that additional details in respect of construction,
drainage and contamination are satisfactory to expert consultees and subject to the
imposition of appropriate conditions.
Councillor Miss D A Wakefield, the local Member, objected to this application. She
recognised the need for affordable housing, but considered that there had been more
emphasis on achieving the Council’s target than listening to local people. She
considered that this application did not comply with Core Strategy policies EN2 and
EN4. She considered that the design of the dwellings was inappropriate and should
be in keeping with the 18th Century buildings on the opposite side of the road rather
than more recent dwellings. She referred to the accident record at the junction. She
expressed concern that the proposal would result in loss of frontage land and loss of
parking for existing dwellings. She stated that the area was extremely waterlogged
and the development would be expensive to construct. She supported further
research into contamination and referred to the former use of the land for animal
burial. She was concerned that the existing drainage system would be unable to
cope with sewage from the development.
She considered that insufficient
consideration had been given to an alternative site in the village which would be
more appropriate for this development.
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett considered that the Environment Agency had
undertaken a desktop exercise with no knowledge of local problems. She expressed
concern that the development would cause problems with drainage elsewhere. She
supported the local Member’s views with regard to design. She considered that this
development was inappropriate in terms of design, drainage and contamination.
Development Control Committee
11
10 June 2010
Councillor Mrs A R Green requested a more imaginative design.
Councillor S J Partridge considered that this was a good site and proposed delegated
approval in accordance with the recommendation. This was seconded by Councillor
P W High.
In response to a question by Councillor P J Willcox, the Development Control
Manager and Highway Development Control Officer explained the problems that had
been identified with the alternative site referred to by the local Member.
Councillor Willcox considered that the current site was the better of the two, but
expressed reservations regarding the design of the development. As an amendment,
he proposed deferral of this application for design negotiations. This was duly
seconded.
The Senior Conservation and Design Officer explained the design issues in respect
of this site.
Councillor Miss D A Wakefield expressed concern at the structural impact of the
proposed development on the adjacent terrace as cracking had occurred when a new
dwelling was constructed on an adjacent plot. She questioned why the previous
development was not allowed to have windows overlooking the site and now it was
proposed to build on the land.
The Development Control Manager explained that structural damage was a civil
matter.
The amendment was put to the vote and declared carried by 9 votes to 5. On being
put as the substantive proposition, it was
RESOLVED by 11 votes to 3
That consideration
negotiations.
of
this
application
be
deferred
for
design
(130) LETHERINGSETT WTH 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
All Members declared a personal interest in this application as Mr Combe was a
fellow Councillor.
The Committee considered item 10 of the officers’ report.
Public Speaker
Robin Combe (supporting)
Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, the local Member, supported this application as it was a
sensible use of an existing building. She stated that whilst the access was not ideal,
the additional traffic would be minimal.
It was proposed by Councillor Mrs L M Brettle, seconded by Councillor S J Partridge
and
Development Control Committee
12
10 June 2010
RESOLVED
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
Reason: The Committee considers that the proposal would be a
beneficial use of an existing rural building which complies with LDF
policies and will result in minimal additional traffic.
(131) SHERINGHAM - PF/10/0114 - Change of use from residential to guesthouse; 29
Holt Road for Ms E Roe
The Committee considered item 11 of the officers’ report.
Councillor Mrs H T Nelson, the local Member, stated that she had brought this
application to the Committee because of the neighbour’s concerns. However, both
she and Councillor Mrs J P Moss, also a local Member, supported this application.
It was proposed by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes, seconded by Councillor H C
Cordeaux and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the imposition of
conditions including limiting the number of letting rooms to 4 and
ensuring external lighting is on a sensor.
(132) SOUTHREPPS - PF/10/0205 - Retention of one temporary storage building and
erection of two temporary storage buildings; Land at Church Farm, Church
Street for Mr R Codling
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett declared a personal interest in this application as the
applicant was known to her and had spoken to her regarding matters of policy and
procedure only.
Councillor J H Perry-Warnes declared a personal interest in this application as he
knew the applicant.
Councillor H C Cordeaux stated that he had known the applicant but was unlikely to
recognise him if he met him.
The Committee considered item 12 of the officers’ report.
Public Speaker
Mr Woodrow (supporting)
The Development Control Manager reported that the Parish Council had requested a
site inspection. A letter had been received from a local resident who had no
objection to the application which will assist the applicant to complete landscaping of
the site.
The Development Control Manager reported that an email in support of this
application had been received from Councillor Mrs S A Arnold, the local Member.
She had also declared an interest because she knew the applicant.
Development Control Committee
13
10 June 2010
Councillor Mrs A M Fitch-Tillett proposed approval of this application as
recommended which was seconded by Councillor J H Perry-Warnes.
Councillor H C Cordeaux proposed a site inspection which was not seconded.
Councillor S J Partridge supported this application but considered that a temporary
period of three years would be appropriate.
Councillor Mrs Fitch-Tillett, with the support of her seconder, stated that she would
be happy to reduce the term to five years.
RESOLVED
That this application be approved for a temporary period of five years,
subject to a condition which requires the adjoining land to the
application site to be cleared of all building materials and equipment
within 12 months, and conditions relating to materials and landscaping.
(133) APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 13 of the officers’ report.
(134) APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 14 of the officers’ report.
(135) NEW APPEALS
The Committee noted item 15 of the officers’ report.
(136) PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 16 of the officers’ report.
(137) WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 17 of the officers’ report.
(138) APPEAL DECISIONS
The Committee noted item 18 of the officers’ report.
(139) QUARTERLY PERFORMANCE REPORT
The Committee noted the quarterly performance report which has been published in
the Members’ Bulletin (issue 551 - 26 June 2010).
The meeting closed at 2.25 pm.
Development Control Committee
14
10 June 2010