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