OFFICERS' REPORTS TO DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (EAST) - 3 APRIL 2008

OFFICERS' REPORTS TO

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (EAST) - 3 APRIL 2008

Each report for decision on this Agenda shows the Chief Officer responsible, the recommendation of the Head of Planning and in the case of private business the paragraph(s) of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 under which it is considered exempt. None of the reports have financial, legal or policy implications save where indicated.

PUBLIC BUSINESS - ITEMS FOR DECISION

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Note : Recommendations for approval include a standard time limit condition as Condition

No.1, unless otherwise stated.

1. AYLMERTON - 20080300 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; site adjoining Breck

Lodge Holt Road for Westcrome Properties Limited

MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :24 Apr 2008

Case Officer :Mrs T Armitage

(Full Planning Permission)

CONSTRAINTS

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Corridor of Movement

Countryside

Residential

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

20061114 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of two-storey dwelling

Refused, 06 Sep 2006


Withdrawn, 24 May 2007

THE APPLICATION

Erection of a detached two-storey dwelling with integral double garage on a site of

0.19ha. Traditional facing materials are proposed (brick and flint). The site would be accessed from a section of "stopped-up" carriageway which runs parallel to and connects with the A148.

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE

At the request of Councillor Saunders having regard to the following planning issue:

Access.

PARISH COUNCIL

Awaiting comments.

CONSULTATIONS

County Council (Highways) - The Holt Road (A148) is a designated Corridor of

Movement and a Principal Route in the Norfolk County Council route Hierarchy.

As such a Corridor of Movement the section of A148 to which this proposal will access is protected from any development that will interfere with the principal function of carrying traffic freely and safely between centres of population.

Development Control Committee (East)

1

3 April 2008

The site is accessed from a section of 'stopped up' carriageway which presently serves directly some five or six dwellings. The access road is so aligned with the

A148 that a vehicle approaching its junction with the A148 from the east is unaware of its existence until practically upon the junction and consequently the right turn manoeuvre into this road, where no right hand turn facilities whatsoever exist, is extremely hazardous. This concern is exacerbated by the alignment of the carriageway at this point which restricts forward visibility for a driver approaching a right turning vehicle from the east.

The level of forward visibility is approximately 120m with the requirement for this section of the A148 which is subject to a 50mph speed limit being 160m (Department of Transport advice note TD/93 Highway Link Design June 1993 and as amended).

Furthermore within 500m of the application site there have been three accidents in recent years clearly indicating that the section of Holt Road (A148) onto which the access is positioned has a poor accident record. The alignment of the carriageway and the vehicular speeds being considered the main reason for these accidents. To introduce any such additional slowing, stopping and turning vehicles at this location will inevitably introduce further danger to this section of the A148.

According to TRICS database (Trip Rate Information Computer Services Version

2005b) a residential dwelling will typically generate 8-10 vehicular trips per day.

Therefore must strongly object to this application.

HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS

It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to

Article 8 : The right to respect for private and family life, and

Article 1 of The First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.

It is considered that refusal of this application as recommended may have an impact on the individual Human Rights of the applicant. However, having considered the likely impact and the general interest of the public, refusal of the application is considered to be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.

CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17

The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.

POLICIES

North Norfolk Local Plan - (Adopted 2 April 1998 - saved policies):

Policy 4: Selected Small Villages (small-scale residential development should enhance character).

Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required for new development).

Policy 146: Corridors of Movement (direct access not permitted except for roadside services).

Policy 147: New Accesses (developments which would endanger highway safety not permitted).

MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

1. Principle of development.

2. Design and form of development.

3. Highway safety.

APPRAISAL

The site lies in part within the settlement boundary of Aylmerton and entirely within the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. There is existing built development on either side of the site. In such locations the principle of small scale residential development is acceptable in policy terms, subject to proposals enhancing the character of the village and the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and complying with more detailed assessment criteria set out elsewhere in the Plan.


2

3 April 2008

2.

The detached two-storey property is proposed at the southern road frontage end of the plot and entirely within the settlement boundary. The property would have a substantial rear garden of approximately 50m in length which would extend beyond the settlement boundary. The proposed property is of traditional design and form and consistent with the scale and character of adjacent properties. Space would be maintained between the proposed dwelling and the boundaries with the neighbouring properties of between 2m and 6m. Primary windows are indicated on the main, north and south, elevations of the property, substantially mitigating any adverse impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.

The development would rely on access on to the Holt Road (A148), which is designated as a Corridor of Movement and Principal Route in the Norfolk County

Council Route Hierarchy. Local Plan policy seeks to protect Corridors of Movement from development which would interfere with the principal function of carrying traffic freely and safely. The Highway Authority has raised an objection to this proposal on this basis as well as the hazardous alignment of the access road with the A148 and the accident record in the vicinity of the site.

In view of the highway objection, refusal is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION:- REFUSE, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:-

1) The proposed development would intensify the use of an existing access on a stretch of classified highway (Holt Road A148) where the principal use is that of carrying traffic freely and safely between centres of population. The existence of an access in this location is a matter of fact and therefore some degree of conflict and interference to the passage of through vehicles already occurs, but the material increase in slowing, stopping and turning movements that this proposal would engender would lead to the deterioration in the efficiently of the through road as a traffic carrier and be detrimental to highway safety, in conflict with North Norfolk Local

Plan Policy 146.

2) The proposed development, if permitted, would lead to an increase in right hand turning movements across the opposing traffic stream of a Principal Route/Corridor of Movement (Holt Road A148) at a position where the forward visibility for approaching drivers and the position of the junction of the access road with the A148 makes such a manoeuvre an interference with the free and safe flow of traffic and additionally would cause danger and inconvenience to highway users, in conflict with

North Norfolk Local Plan Policy 146.

COLBY - 20080167 - Conversion and extension of outbuilding to provide additional living accommodation; Sunnyside Farm Colby Corner for Mr and

Mrs Duncan

Target Date :28 Mar 2008

Case Officer :Mr Thompson/Mr Took


CONSTRAINTS

Countryside


20051436 - (Full Planning Permission) - Conversion and extension of barn to provide additional living accommodation

Approved, 24 Oct 2005


3

3 April 2008

THE APPLICATION

Conversion of barn attached to house to provide additional living accommodation

(amended version of previously approved scheme) and extension of barn to provide garden room/study in place of timber/corrugated sheeting former poultry shed.


Applicant is a member of staff.

PARISH COUNCIL

Support - the Council is aware that this application will be determined by the Planning

Committee, since one of the applicants is employed by the District Council. It was unanimously agreed that the proposals fulfilled the requirements of Local Plan Policy

29 - the re-use and adaptation of buildings in the countryside, and the Council was impressed with the "green" credentials of the application. The applicants had committed to the installation of owl boxes. The Council noted that an earlier application had suggested bat activity in the immediate area, and ask that a wildlife survey should be part of any permission granted. On this basis, the Council supports the proposals.

CONSULTATIONS

Norfolk Landscape Archaeology - Suggest that the age of the farmstead dates back to 1819 or earlier is of historic interest and that the proposed scheme may not be in keeping with a 19th century farm. A programme of archaeological work is requested including a historic building recording.





Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.



POLICIES


Policy 5: The Countryside (prevents general development in the countryside with specific exceptions).


Policy 29: The Reuse and Adaptation of Buildings in the Countryside (specifies criteria for converting buildings. Prevents residential conversion unless adjacent to a settlement boundary).

Policy 64: Extensions to Dwellings in the Countryside (specifies design criteria.

Extensions should be subordinate to original dwelling).


1. Conversion of the farm building into ancillary residential accommodation.

2. Scale/design of the extensions.


4

3 April 2008

3.

APPRAISAL

Sunnyside Farm comprises a farmhouse and attached agricultural storage buildings accessed via a quiet lane leading to Colby Corner. The site is situated within the

Countryside policy area where alterations to existing properties through conversion/extension are subject to Policies 29 and 64 of the North Norfolk Local

Plan.

The proposal includes two elements, firstly, the conversion of the existing attached farm buildings into residential accommodation and, secondly, a single-storey extension to the front of building and a double garage to the side.

The principle of the conversion of the farm buildings has previously been agreed by the granting of permission 20051436.

The current proposal is in effect an alternative design solution which allows the cottage and barn to remain largely unaltered. The proposed garden room, which would replace an existing outshoot on the barn and a dilapidated timber building, is designed in a modern style with a glazed southern elevation and a gently sloping sedum roof. This style of development would also link the attached double garage and side extension. This arrangement would result in a very similar footprint to the existing buildings, including the garage that was previously approved as a detached building.

The agent's Design and Access Statement says that the mixture of seamless and low profile glazing will encourage the walls to be recessive allowing the grass roof to float and reduce the visual impact of the walls. This concept and design details are considered appropriate in this situation and taking into account the previously approved scheme, the application is considered acceptable and in accordance with the Local Plan policies.

In terms of the scale of the proposed extension, the use of the existing barn and the creation of a double garage were accepted by the 2005 permission. That permission also allowed the construction of a front extension of 33sq.m ground area. The current front extension would cover a ground area of approximately 40sq.m and whilst this is slightly larger the design means that if anything the potential impact of the latest proposal in the landscape would be much reduced. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with the criteria of Policy 64 in a similar way to that of the approved extension.

Accordingly the proposal is considered to accord with Development Plan policy.

RECOMMENDATION:-

Approve subject to a condition requiring a programme of archaeological work.

CROMER - 20071829 - Erection of single-storey side extension; Thornybank

Hall Road for Mrs V Lucking

MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :18 Jan 2008

Case Officer :Mr Thompson/Mr Took


CONSTRAINTS


Countryside

Tree Preservation Order


5

3 April 2008


20020542 - (Full Planning Permission) - Demolition of garage and erection of twostorey extension

Approved, 09 May 2002

THE APPLICATION

To construct a single-storey extension set into sloping ground in front of the existing two-storey dwelling and close to the southern (side) boundary of the site. The submitted plans indicate additional accommodation comprising two bedrooms, bathroom and 'studio' room. The proposed extension would be constructed of facing bricks to match the ground floor of the main house with a flat roof.

Amended plans show an internal link between the extension and the main house.


The application was deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.

TOWN COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

Letters received from three nearby residents on grounds of possible use of accommodation for holiday lets; impact on trees, and unsuitability of Hall Road for any additional traffic.

CONSULTATIONS

Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Site is subject to an area Tree Preservation Order. Submitted plans do not show any trees or the possible impact the proposed extension would have on them. Suggests need for an arboricultural impact assessment, method statement and tree protection plan.

County Council (Highways) - Existing access has severely sub-standard visibility.

Any proposal which would intensify vehicular use of the site would require improvements to visibility.








POLICIES




Policy 64: Extensions to Dwellings in the Countryside (specifies design criteria.

Extensions should be subordinate to original dwelling).


6

3 April 2008


1. Principle and size of extension to dwelling in countryside.

2. Appearance.

3. Impact on trees.

APPRAISAL

This application was deferred at the last meeting to enable the Committee to visit the site.

The site is within an area of countryside but part of a small group of houses set in woodland on the west side of Hall Road. The house, which was originally constructed with a flat roof, was extended by the addition of a pitched roof upper floor in 1992.

Although originally submitted as a holiday unit (i.e. a separate residential unit)/annexe, the application has been amended so as to create an internal link with the main house and to accommodate two bedrooms, bathroom and studio. On this basis there is no objection in principle to a modest extension, provided that any permission is subject to a condition to ensure the accommodation is occupied solely as ancillary accommodation to the main house.

The proposed extension is on the front of the house but set well back (30m) from Hall

Road where it would have limited impact along the road frontage. The land slopes up steeply from Hall Road and the extension would be built into the slope in a manner which would minimise its bulk. It is proposed to occupy the site of a proposed extension granted in 2002 but never started. That permission was for a full two-storey extension with pitched roof and would have had a far more dramatic impact on the appearance of the area. In terms of Local Plan Policy 64 this more modest proposal would be subordinate to the main dwelling. The proposed extension would have no direct impact on the amenities of the adjacent dwellings to the south and west which are sited approximately 40m away and the adjacent dwelling to the north is protected by a substantial hedge and trees. However, there is potential for overlooking of the adjoining garden from the proposed terrace on the roof of the extension and there is therefore a need for the erection of a suitable screen fence to ensure privacy on the side boundary. There are also civil issues which the applicant would need to address in terms of excavation and construction close to the joint boundary.

The site is within an area where trees are protected by a Tree Preservation Order and the Landscape Officer has asked for an arboricultural impact assessment. This has not yet been received.

Subject to the applicant demonstrating that the proposal would have no adverse impact on nearby trees the proposal is considered to be acceptable. Granting permission would comply with the relevant saved Local Plan policies.


Delegated authority to approve subject to the applicant demonstrating that the proposal would have no adverse impact on nearby trees and the imposition of appropriate conditions.


7

3 April 2008

4. CROMER - 20080117 - Erection of fourteen dwellings; land at Burnt Hills for A

G Brown Builders Ltd

MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :23 Apr 2008


(Outline Planning Permission)

CONSTRAINTS


Residential

THE APPLICATION

To construct an estate road and fourteen dwellings on an area of paddock between

Burnt Hills and Roughton Road. Details of access and layout are included for consideration at this stage. Indicative details are supplied of the scale of the proposed dwellings and show four bungalows, a pair of semi-detached chalet bungalows, two pairs of semi-detached cottages and four houses, with the houses along the western side of the site and the bungalows towards the eastern (Burnt

Hills) side of the site.

Amended plans have been submitted in respect of the estate road access details.


This application was deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.

TOWN COUNCIL

No objection in principle to number of dwellings proposed. However, concerned about close proximity to existing buildings and to mature trees, and about loss of light to existing properties. This area consists of bungalows only, could present proposal be re-designed for bungalows only.

REPRESENTATIONS

Letters received from 18 local residents expressing concern about:-

1. Juxtaposition of two-storey properties with existing bungalows.

2. The number of dwellings.

3. The additional traffic.

4. The type and size of housing.

5. The impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, on wildlife and on trees on the adjoining site.

CONSULTATIONS

County Council (Highways) - No objections subject to conditions.

Community Safety Manager - Makes detailed suggestions about design measures to minimise crime.





Further consideration of this issue will be given at the meeting.


Refer to the Community Safety Manager's comments above.


8

3 April 2008

POLICIES


Policy 2: Small Towns (potential for growth subject to compatibility with existing character).

Policy 6: Residential Areas (areas primarily for residential purposes).



1. Layout and density of development.

2. Type of housing proposed.

3. Highway safety.

4. Crime prevention.

APPRAISAL

This application was deferred at the last meeting for further negotiations in respect of layout and relationship with existing dwellings.

The site lies within the settlement boundary for Cromer and within a defined residential area. It also lies within the historic boundary of the designated Area of

Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). This said, the whole of the Burnt Hills estate lies within the AONB and as such this infill development would not affect the appearance or character of the AONB. Residential development of the site would therefore be acceptable in principle. The application proposes 14 dwellings on 0.47 ha - a density of just below the Government's recommended minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare. This density is considered to be an acceptable compromise between the need to make optimal use of land and the need to safeguard the low density suburban character of the area.

The application indicates a mix of house types, with bungalows on the eastern part of the site where the existing estate comprises bungalows in relatively small plots. The northern and western part of the site adjoins dwellings which are set in larger plots.

Currently the proposal includes two-storey cottages and houses along the northern and western sides of the site where there is a greater degree of separation from neighbouring properties. Although the surrounding area includes almost exclusively single-storey properties, the inclusion of two-storey dwellings in the proposed layout would help to achieve a mix of house types and provide a density which makes more efficient use of the land.

The site has a frontage of 35m to the existing estate road, sufficient to form a properly designed estate road junction and with appropriate visibility splays.

Amended plans have since been submitted which overcome concerns originally expressed by the Highway Authority who now raise no objections subject to the imposition of conditions.

Following the deferral of this application at the last meeting negotiations are planned to discuss further the proposed layout and relationships with adjacent properties.


The Committee will be updated at the meeting.


9

3 April 2008

5. CROMER - 20080308 - Erection of penthouse apartment; Marine View

Promenade for Mr P Mills


Case Officer :Mrs T Armitage


CONSTRAINTS

Archaeological Site

Conservation Area


20071805 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of first floor flat and penthouse apartment

Withdrawn, 07 Jan 2008

THE APPLICATION

The proposed two-bedroom apartment would be created through the alteration to the roof of this three-storey building. The proposal includes the installation of dormer windows and the heightening of the gable walls. An external stair to the rear of the building would provide access to the apartment.


At the request of Councillor Johnson concerning the following planning issue:

Prominent location in Conservation Area.

TOWN COUNCIL

Awaiting comments.

REPRESENTATIONS

Three letters of objection (including one from the Marine View Association of

Residents and Shopkeepers) raising issues regarding the freehold/leasehold arrangement and the terms of the lease. Other objections refer to the adverse effect the proposal would have upon the character of the adjacent listed buildings on The

Crescent and the views they enjoy as well as the detrimental impact on the character of the Conservation Area.

CONSULTATIONS

Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) -

Comments that the building dates from 1830 and has been much changed over the last 180 years. It is a key building on the promenade, and one of only four located on the seafront itself. It received a repair grant in 2004. Commenting on the proposed scheme; access arrangements to the penthouse seem awkward and there is some concern about the relationship of the oriel/bay windows to the eaves of the roof.

Ideally the bays should reach to the eaves on the roof's pitch should be steepened to meet the top of the bays. Overall however the proposed alterations and extensions are acceptable in principle and will safeguard the building for the future, so that it continues to make a positive contribution to the Conservation Area.







10

3 April 2008



POLICIES


Policy 2: Small Towns (potential for growth subject to compatibility with existing character).

Policy 7: Town and Large Village Centres (broad range of development/uses encouraged).


Policy 42: Development in Conservation Areas (developments should preserve or enhance character).

Policy 61: Conversion into Flats (specifies criteria in terms of location, size, amenities, highway safety).


1. Principle of residential development.

2. Design and form of alterations.

3. Impact on neighbouring properties.

APPRAISAL

Marine View comprises a three storey building set into the base of the cliffs to the west of The Gangway. The building dates back to the early 19th century and the

Design and Access Statement submitted with the application describes the historical background and development of the building ( Appendix 1 ). The building, which is in mixed use (commercial and residential), lies within the designated town centre for

Cromer and within the Conservation Area. The premises front directly onto the

Promenade which is listed together with the cliff face to the rear.

The application seeks permission for an additional residential apartment within the altered roof space of the building. The principle of new residential in this location is acceptable and despite the coastal position of the development there are no issues of either flood risk or coastal erosion. The proposed flat exceeds the minimum floor space standards set out in Policy 61 although in common with the other flats within the building it would have no off-street parking or external amenity space. Given the town centre location of the site this is considered acceptable.

The property would be accessed via an external staircase to the rear of the building.

The staircase would extend from a level which currently provides access to the two existing second floor flats. Excavation of the cliff would be required to locate the staircase in the position proposed and the views of the Building Control Officer have been sought on this issue.

The existing shallow pitched roof is an unsympathetic modern addition to the building added in the early 1960s. The proposal seeks to replace this roof form with a conventional slate tiled roof incorporating lead sheathed dormer style windows. The new roof would be comparable to its original form in the 19th century. The ridge height would be increased by approximately 1.8m. The height of the roof would increase the bulk of the building when viewed from nearby properties on The

Crescent and the upper pedestrian footpath. A detailed cross-section indicating this relationship has been requested.


11

3 April 2008

6.

The Conservation and Design Manager has made a number of detailed design comments regarding the proposal and these have been raised with the applicant's agent. There remain outstanding issues relating in particular to the siting, design and visual impact of the external staircase and amended plans are awaited.


To be reported at the meeting following the receipt of further plans/information regarding the external staircase.

HANWORTH - 20071454 - Change of use of barns to provide caravan storage;

Glebe Farm White Post Road for Mr M Attew

Target Date :14 Nov 2007

Case Officer :Mr J Williams


CONSTRAINTS

Area of High Landscape Value

Countryside


20060084 - (Full Planning Permission) - Change of use of land from agricultural to caravan storage and wash down area

Refused, 09 Mar 2006

20061246 - (Full Planning Permission) - Change of use of land and barns to caravan storage

Withdrawn, 06 Jul 2007

THE APPLICATION

As originally submitted this application was for the change of use of two agricultural buildings and an adjoining area of open land for the storage of touring caravans.

An amended plan has now been submitted which deletes reference to any outside storage and proposes covered storage in four agricultural buildings. The plan also makes reference to improvements to the site access at its junction with White Post

Road. The amended Design and Access Statement refers to a maximum of 175 caravans to be stored.

The application is proposed initially on the basis for a three-year temporary permission and a draft Section 106 Agreement has been submitted to regulate users of the storage facility (extract of the covenants proposed in Appendix 2 ).



PARISH COUNCIL

Does not consider that there are sufficient grounds to withdraw their objections made to previous applications in January 2006, August 2006 and May 2007. Their full comments are as follows:-

Traffic

The applicant's Design and Access Statement says: "More and more visitors pick on the North Norfolk area to tour within, but do not want to tow their caravans all the way back to the Midlands, or even as near as Norwich."


12

3 April 2008

This highlights the attraction of storage facilities for users, who would only need to stay at Deers Glade for one week before moving on elsewhere and returning for storage, possibly several times a year. Rather than minimising traffic this would encourage an increased use of the facility, and increase traffic movement both at the

A140 junction and in White Post Road itself.

White Post Road does not take passing traffic easily and there is a noticeable increase in pedestrian use, often groups with children and dogs, between Deers

Glade caravan site and the Fen Cottage access road to Glebe Farm, along a stretch of road which is very dark and overshadowed by trees.

Landscaping

This site is in an area of High Landscape Value, bounded by a Conservation Area which includes part of the farm and the whole of White Post Road; a commercial development would never be acceptable on this site and landscaping to conceal such a development would set a precedent in North Norfolk and beyond.

Security and insurance issues related to commercial development may require lighting at night, which would be totally unacceptable in this rural area.

The proposed demolition of silos and provision of some screening on the west side of the farm is welcomed. However, as the previous site proposed for outdoor storage is now to be retained as a field, there is no longer a need for the proposed "finger" of woodland on the northern boundary, as enclosing additional open landscape with woodland planting is unnecessary and inappropriate.

Generally

The Parish Council is concerned about incremental development along White Post

Road; as well as the existing Deers Glade caravan park for 125 and the current application for 170 stored caravans, the Caravan and Camping Club have use of another site on Glebe Farm for an unlimited number of caravans for up to five days at a time - also accessed from White Post Road. While we are aware that as an exempted organisation this does not require planning permission, it could have up to

85 caravans at Extended Rallies for up to ten days. It is not just the arrival and departure of caravans that create traffic on White Post Road but the everyday use of the cars.

It is felt that if there is a need for caravan storage facilities in North Norfolk, this should be considered as a strategic planning issue and included in the Core Strategy of the North Norfolk Local Development Framework. This location is not an appropriate site for such provision.

It is noted that a large number of caravans are already being stored on the farm without planning permission.

The boundary of the Conservation Area, which includes part of the farm and the whole of White Post Road is not shown.

REPRESENTATIONS

16 letters of objection have been received plus a letter said to be from 76 residents of

Hanworth Parish.

103 letters of support have been received, the majority of which are of an identical format. 18 of these letters from North Norfolk addresses, 32 are from elsewhere in

Norfolk and 53 are from outside the County.

CONSULTATIONS

County Council (Highways) - Raises no objection subject to a suitable legal agreement which will limit caravans being stored to users of the applicant's nearby caravan site, and subject to agreed details of improvements to the existing site access.


13

3 April 2008








POLICIES



Policy 21: Area of High Landscape Value (promotes conservation and enhancement, prevents developments which would be significantly detrimental to appearance and character).

Policy 29: The Reuse and Adaptation of Buildings in the Countryside (specifies criteria for converting buildings. Prevents residential conversion unless adjacent to a settlement boundary).


1. Appropriateness of use of buildings.

2. Highway safety.

APPRAISAL

This application was deferred at the last meeting for a site visit.

The Committee will be familiar with this site and similar previous planning applications, one of which was refused in 2006 on grounds relating to visual impact and highway safety and the other of which was eventually withdrawn last year.

Caravan storage currently takes place on the site (without the benefit of planning permission) within certain of the buildings and the internal farmyard.

The application as now amended is solely for the storage of caravans within existing buildings. Thus previous concerns with regard to the external storage of caravans having a detrimental impact upon the surrounding landscape no longer apply. In terms of the Local Plan, Policy 29 allows for the re-use and adaptation of buildings in the countryside subject to a number of criteria, including that the buildings are suitable for the proposed use without any significant alteration or reconstruction, and that there are no adverse highway safety implications.

The buildings concerned are of rudimentary agricultural construction combining external materials of blockwork, metal cladding and timber. They nevertheless appear to be structurally sound and there is no indication that they would require any substantial external alterations for the nature of the storage use proposed. In this respect it is considered that the proposal would comply with Local Plan policy.

The main issue relating to this proposal relates to the highway safety implications of caravans being delivered to and from the site. The Highway Authority has always maintained concerns with regard to, not only the storage facility, but also the


14

3 April 2008

7. applicant's now established 'Deers Glade' caravan site off White Post Road, particularly with regard to the junction of White Post Road and the A140.

Nevertheless the Highway Authority has indicated that if suitable controls were put in place to ensure that the caravans stored at the facility were ones primarily using the

Deers Glade caravan site, then it would no longer object to the proposal.

To this effect the applicant has submitted a draft Section 106 Agreement. This

Agreement specifies that a Deers Glade Storage Club would be established and only members of that club would be permitted to use the storage facility. A condition of the club membership would be that a caravan owner had stayed at the caravan site for a minimum of 14 days in the same or preceding calendar year. A clause in the

Agreement would be that the applicant maintains a record of the club membership to include members' names, addresses, frequency of visits, details of length of stay, and that this information would be available to the Local Planning Authority on request. The Agreement also specifies that no caravans would be stored on the site outside the existing buildings ( Appendix 2 ).

Subject to formal confirmation by the Highway Authority that it is satisfied with the wording of the Section 106 Agreement it is considered that this proposal, as now amended, raises no significant planning objections. The fact that the application is submitted on the basis of a three-year temporary permission would allow the Local

Planning Authority and the Highway Authority to monitor the use and activity of the storage facility and review the situation in the event of permanent planning permission being applied for on the expiry of a temporary permission.

In conclusion it is considered that the proposal as now submitted complies with

Development Plan policy.


Delegated approval for a temporary three-year permission, subject to approval by the Highway Authority of the terms of the Section 106 Agreement, completion of that Agreement and the imposition of appropriate conditions.

HONING - 20080209 - Continued siting of polytunnel; land at rear of Millbeck

White Horse Lane Briggate for Mr Turner and Miss Bullimore


Case Officer :Miss C Ketteringham


CONSTRAINTS

Countryside


THE APPLICATION

A retrospective planning application to retain a polytunnel (9.6m long x 2.2m wide) comprising plastic sheeting supported by a wooden frame.


Required by the Head of Planning and Building Control given the number and nature of objections received to this application.


15

3 April 2008

PARISH COUNCIL

Objects:-

1. Not within the applicants' ownership.

2. If this is allowed would it stop other land being claimed.

3. The land should be used for the village and not one person.

REPRESENTATIONS

Thirty letters of objection have been received on the following grounds:-

1. Not within the applicants' ownership.

2. Polytunnel is an eyesore.

3. Destruction of a wildlife habitat.

4. Danger from a dangerous structure.

CONSULTATIONS

Worstead Parish Council - Objects:-

1. Validity of application address.

2. Change of use of land not applied for.

3. Obtrusive and damaging to beauty of area.

4. Environmental Impact study should be carried out.

5. Disputed ownership of area.

Worstead Amenity Society - Awaiting comments.

Environmental Health - No comment.








POLICIES




Policy 21: Area of High Landscape Value (promotes conservation and enhancement, prevents developments which would be significantly detrimental to appearance and character).

MAIN ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION

Visual impact.

APPRAISAL

The application site is land that previously formed part of Briggate Mill Close to the

Dilham Canal. The existing use of the land is stated as garden on the application form. Although adjoining the rear boundary of the applicants’ property it does not form the curtilage of the dwellinghouse for planning purposes. It lies within the

Countryside policy area and the Area of High Landscape Value.


16

3 April 2008

8.

It is understood the use of the polytunnel is for private use only.

This is a controversial application locally, attracting a large number of objections, although mainly relating to the ownership of the land, which as Members will be aware is not a material planning consideration. The principal consideration in determining this planning application is the visual impact of the polytunnel.

The polytunnel is of a type to be found not uncommonly in a domestic garden or allotment. Although, not within the domestic curtilage of the applicants' property, the site is adjacent and to the rear of the applicants' garden. The polytunnel is partially screened from public view by dwellings and the remnants of Briggate Mill.

Consequently it does not present any significant adverse landscape impact. It is considered that the appearance of the structure could be satisfactorily mitigated by an appropriate landscaping scheme which the applicant has agreed to.

Consequently, it is considered it would be difficult justify refusal of planning permission n this case and the proposal is considered to comply with the policies of the Development Plan.

RECOMMENDATION:- APPROVE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING

CONDITIONS:-

1) Within two months of the date of this permission a landscaping scheme for the boundaries of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local

Planning Authority.

2) Any new tree or shrub which within a period of five years from the date of planting dies, is removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced during the next planting season with another of a similar size and species to the Local

Planning Authority's satisfaction, unless prior written agreement is given to any variation.

REASONS:-

1) To protect and enhance the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policy

13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.

2) To protect and enhance the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policy

13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.

HORNING - 20071734 - Erection of fifteen two-storey houses/flats and two bungalows; Petersfield House Hotel 101 Lower Street for Cripps Development

Limited

MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :05 Feb 2008



CONSTRAINTS

Residential

Selected Small Village



20051116 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Demolition of hotel and re-development for housing

Approved, 17 Feb 2006


17

3 April 2008

20060715 - (Full Planning Permission) - Removal of condition 10 of planning permission reference 20051116 (off-site footpath)

Approved, 03 Jul 2006

THE APPLICATION

The redevelopment of the site previously occupied by the Petersfield Hotel with the construction of seventeen dwelling units including four affordable flats. All dwellings would have their own private gardens, except for the flats which would have shared amenity space and parking.

An accompanying Arboricultural Report addresses issues with regard to the impact of the development on the trees that are within the site and which are subject to a

Preservation Order. A Design and Access Statement details the design concept and the considerations that have been given to the appearance and layout of the scheme.

Amended plans have also been submitted that indicates a Type 6 adoptable roadway to replace the Type 3 previously indicated, together with three additional parking spaces.



PARISH COUNCIL

Raises concerns in respect of drainage, vehicular parking, access and apparent lack of sustainable homes.

REPRESENTATIONS

Two letters received raising the following issues:-

1. The design of the block of flats.

2. Impact on the existing trees.

3. Parking provision.

4. Affordable housing provision.

Following confirmation from the applicant that drainage from the site would be via a new connection to the public mains, one of the previous letters of objection has been withdrawn. A further letter from a neighbouring resident has sought assurances regarding the retention of trees that currently provide an effective screen to the proposed dwellings.

CONSULTATIONS

Broads Authority - No objections.

Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Having received further details in respect of safeguarding the existing trees, replacement planting and the relationship of the proposed dwellings to the existing trees no objections are raised subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.

County Council (Highways) - Raise no objections to the scheme, as amended, subject to the imposition of conditions.

Environmental Health - Recommends a condition requiring details of refuse storage areas.

Planning Obligations Co-ordinator - Awaiting comments.


18

3 April 2008

Strategic Housing - Confirms that on the basis of the viability of a scheme for 17 dwellings the development can support on-site affordable housing provision comprising 3 x two-bed flats for rent and a two-bed flat for shared ownership. These properties can be provided by a Registered Social Landlord without the need for any public subsidy. Advises that a draft Section 106 Agreement has been received regarding the affordable housing provision.








POLICIES


Policy 4: Selected Small Villages (small-scale residential development should enhance character) (development should be compatible with character).



Policy 58: Affordable Housing in Selected Small Villages (developments of over four dwellings should be made up of affordable housing provision, subject to genuine local needs).

Policy 105: Playing Space in New Housing Developments (refers to playing space requirements).



1. Design and layout of the proposed dwellings.

2. Relationship with existing development.

3. Impact on existing trees.

4. Access and highway requirements.

5. Amount of affordable housing.

APPRAISAL

This application was deferred at the last meeting for improvements to the design of the flat units to be negotiated.

Although the proposal has been submitted as a full application the principle of residential on the site has been accepted by the granting of outline permission for residential development in 2006.

The site comprises the grounds of the former Petersfield Hotel, which has been demolished and cleared from the site. The site has an area of 0.82ha and is situated on the northern side of Lower Street. It lies within the settlement boundary of the village and forms part of an established residential area. The character of the immediate area is one of detached dwellings in relatively large plots, although to the north of the site more recent estate-style dwellings exist. To the south, on the opposite side of Lower Street, other dwellings and boat moorings with access to the river and the Broads exist. The area is thus varied in character.


19

3 April 2008

In terms of Local Plan policy the site lies within the defined settlement boundary of

Horning where Policy 4 allows for small groups of dwellings which would enhance the character of the village. A small group is defined as being up to four dwellings. Policy

58 requires that residential development for more than four dwellings may be permitted provided the excess dwellings are for affordable housing. Current

Government guidance contained within PPS3 requires Local Authorities to ensure that best use is made of development land, but any scheme is nevertheless required to respect the form and character of the area as well as provide an agreed level of affordable housing.

Although the density (22 dwellings per hectare) of the proposed scheme is lower than the PPS3 requirement of 30 dwellings per hectare the character of the locality and the landscaped setting of the site make the proposed lower density form of development more appropriate. This character assessment approach is supported by the latest Government guidance.

The outline permission was conditioned on the need for a scheme for affordable housing to be submitted and agreed. It is acknowledged that affordable housing needs to be provided but also that the development also needs to be viable. The applicant, on request, has provided a detailed viability assessment in accordance with an open accounting approach that is required in situations such as this, and the

Council's Housing Enabling Officer is satisfied that the financial details provided justify the provision of four affordable units as proposed and is appropriate in the circumstances of this development. This assessment has taken into account financial factors, including providing appropriate profit margins and the viability of the site.

Details of the financial assessment are attached in Appendix 4 (confidential).

The application site is on elevated land, sloping up from Lower Street and is bounded by many mature trees which are subject to a Tree Preservation Order. The Design and Access Statement explains that the concept is to maintain a landscaped setting for the development and therefore the majority of these trees are being retained to maintain the character of the area and for the benefit of the development itself. The

Arboricultural Report has been assessed by the Conservation, Design and

Landscape Manager and has required the layout to be revised to safeguard some of the trees and create appropriate distances between the trees and dwellings to provide suitable amenities that would accrue to the residents. A scheme indicating replacement planting of trees that are to be felled would be submitted to include specimens more appropriate to the area and setting.

The amended plans in respect of the road indicate a shared access which is considered a more appropriate design that takes into account the sensitivity of the site and an arrangement that now meets the requirements of the Highway Authority in terms of adoption. The layout has also been revised to provide three additional parking spaces in relation to the proposed apartments thereby providing fifteen spaces for the eight flats; a shortfall of one, but given the nature of the accommodation this is considered acceptable.

For developments of fifteen or more dwellings the Local Plan would normally require the provision of a Local Area of Play (LAP). A LAP is a small area of play equipment intended for use by young children. The applicant is reluctant to agree to such provision on the site but is willing to make a financial contribution instead to play facilities within the village. The Council's Countryside and Parks Manager is supportive of this approach.

The developer has confirmed that drainage from the site would be wholly to a new sewer in Lower Street.


20

3 April 2008

9.

In conclusion, the proposed scheme creates a form of development that is in keeping with the form and character of the area and would provide an acceptable amount of affordable housing.

Subject to the receipt of a suitably amended plan to overcome Members' previous concerns with regard to the design of the proposed flat units it is considered that the proposal accords with Development Plan policy.


Delegated approval, subject to agreement on a financial contribution towards village play facilities, the receipt of amended plans concerning the design of the flats, the applicant entering into a Section 106 Agreement to ensure the provision of affordable housing and the imposition of conditions to include those required by the Highway Authority, material details, tree protection and refuse storage.

NORTHREPPS - 20071895 - Demolition of buildings and redevelop site for residential development and retention of two units to include retail convenience store; Shrublands Farm Church Street for Cherryridge Poultry

Limited

MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :05 Mar 2008

Case Officer :Mr J Williams

(Outline Planning Permission)

CONSTRAINTS


Countryside


Village Employment Area

Conservation Area

THE APPLICATION

The site covers an area of approximately 1.5ha and comprises vacant buildings and land previously used by a poultry processing business. The proposal is to clear all buildings, with the exception of a flint faced building to the front of the site, and redevelop with housing and including a convenience store within the retained building.

The application when originally submitted was described specifically for the erection of thirty-eight dwellings plus retention of one existing building. An illustrative plan was submitted indicating a site layout of these dwellings. The agent has since written to amend the application to one for "residential development and retention of two units to include retail convenience store". The number of dwelling units is therefore no longer being applied for at this stage. A copy of the agent's letter amending the application is attached in Appendix 3.

Whilst no precise details have been submitted, access would be via a single point at the existing entrance onto Church Street. The original illustrative plan and the agent's latest letter proposes an area of open space at the rear of the site.

All matters are now reserved for subsequent approval.


21

3 April 2008

Supporting documentation accompanying the application include the following:-

Design and Access Statement.

Economic Viability Statement.

Report on pre-application consultation (including with public).

Flood Risk Assessment.

Geo-environment Assessment.

Transport Assessment.

The applicants' latest letter states that the proposal would include 40% affordable housing.


The application is a departure from the Development Plan and the Committee has already held a site visit.

PARISH COUNCIL

Raises concerns at the possible permanent loss of this potential employment site and the prospect of Northrepps becoming a dormitory village. Comments that villagers welcome the reduction in HGV traffic but concerned about the need to improve roads into the village given the car generation caused by the development. Supports inclusion of a 'convenience store', but raises serious concerns over additional burden on local infrastructure and services (drainage, local primary school). Considers that the village is being presented with a stark choice between a large housing development and a derelict industrial site (see full comments in Appendix 3 ).

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter received from local resident, not objecting but concerned that the eventual detailed development is in keeping with traditional design of the village and does not cause overlooking. Suggests that if the number of dwellings is reduced there would be the opportunity for open space at the front of the site.

Lengthy letter received from the applicants' traffic consultants rebutting the reasons for objection raised by the Highway Authority (see below) and in particular arguing that the traffic levels resulting from the development would be significantly less than predicted by the Highway Authority (see Appendix 3 ).

CONSULTATIONS

Anglian Water - Confirms that there is both sufficient water supply and capacity within the foul sewerage network to serve the proposed development. Foul drainage would be treated at the Northrepps sewage treatment works.

Conservation, Design and Landscape (Conservation and Design) - Recognises that the current state of the site and a continuation of the existing buildings would not be in the best interests of the form and character of the Conservation Area. On the basis of the limited details applied for at this stage considers that the proposed development potentially offers a way of stitching together the centre of Northrepps and enhancing the appearance, character and setting of the Conservation Area.

Welcomes the retention of the former cottages at the front of the site.

County Council (Highways) - Concludes that the site does not satisfy sustainability objectives and that residents will be car dependent. Disputes the predicted 194 daily vehicle movements generated by the development (referred to in the submitted

Transport Assessment) as an under-estimation and considers between 320-400 movements more realistic. Although recognises that this is a brownfield site and a


22

3 April 2008

smaller scale development proposal generating traffic at a level equivalent to the former employment use would be less strongly opposed, recommends refusal for the following reasons:-

1) The proposed development does not adequately provide off-site facilities for pedestrians, cyclists, people with disabilities (those confined to a wheelchair or others with mobility difficulties) to link with existing provision and local services, contrary to Norfolk Structure Plan Policy T2.

2) The proposed development does not have adequate access to an appropriate level of public transport provision as set out in the adopted Norfolk Bus Strategy published by the Transport Authority, contrary to Norfolk Structure Plan Policy T2.

3) All roads that lead to the site are country lanes that do not provide adequate access to the route hierarchy, due to their width, alignment and lack of forward visibility. Therefore, they area unsuitable to cater for the vehicular movements generated by the proposal which, if consented, would be likely to give rise to conditions detrimental to highway safety, contrary to Norfolk Structure Plan Policy T2.

4) Inadequate visibility splays are provided at the junction of the access with the

County highway and this would cause danger and inconvenience to users of the adjoining public highway, contrary to Norfolk Structure Plan Policy T2 and Local Plan

Policy 147.

Environment Agency - Removes earlier objection subject to conditions regarding provision of SuDS (sustainable drainage systems), repair and maintenance of nearby surface water pond, surface water design details and removal of permitted development rights.

Environmental Health - Recommends the imposition of conditions regarding land contamination and lighting.

Norfolk Constabulary - Requests that a payment of £9,749 (based on contribution of

£257 per dwelling towards policing infrastructure, staff and custody facilities arising from the development) to be secured by a Section 106 Agreement.

Planning Obligations Co-ordinator (County Council) - Requires a financial payment of

£75,439 for primary school provision, £1,900 to the library service and £610 for a fire hydrant to be secured by a Section 106 Agreement. Requests re-consultation in event of the application not being determined within three months.

Planning Policy Manager - In summary:

1. The proposal is contrary to Local Plan Policy.

2. There is a high demand and need for housing in the district.

3. Until new sites are allocated through the LDF there will remain a shortfall in the

District's five year land supply.

4. Northrepps is a relatively unsustainable location due to the absence of key facilities and for this reason is not identified in the emerging Core Strategy as a settlement for new housing development.

5. The current Local Plan employment allocation of the site reflected its historical use. It is unlikely that such an allocation would have been made if the previous business had not existed. This is not to say that it is not important to ensure the provision of local employment opportunities.

6. Possible alternative uses or mix of uses involving some employment opportunities arguably represent a more acceptable development of the site.

Strategic Director (Communities - Economic Development) - Advises that the

Council's Economic Development Unit has considered the submissions made with the application and has no objection to the proposed development.


23

3 April 2008

Strategic Housing - There is a demonstrated need for more affordable housing in the area (currently 445 applicants on the housing register expressing a wish to live in

Northrepps). Considers that the starting point for provision of affordable housing should be current Local Plan policy subject to 'open book' evidence of the viability of development of the site. A minimum of 80% of the affordable housing provision should be for rent and a maximum of 20% for sale on a shared ownership basis. A

Section 106 Agreement would be needed to secure the provision, integration and phasing of an agreed level of affordable housing on the site.







Refer to the response from Norfolk Constabulary above.

POLICIES

Norfolk Structure Plan (Adopted 29 October 1999 - saved policies):

Policy T.2: New Development (to be assessed against effect on traffic generation and alternative modes of access. Adequate access necessary).




Policy 10: Village Employment Areas (reserved for small-scale business, industrial, storage purposes).



Policy 57: Affordable Housing in the Countryside (specifies criteria for 'exception' cases in the Countryside policy area. Sites have to immediately adjoin village boundaries).

Policy 58: Affordable Housing in Selected Small Villages (developments of over four dwellings should be made up of affordable housing provision, subject to genuine local needs).

Policy 105: Playing Space in New Housing Developments (refers to playing space requirements).



1. Loss of employment site.

2. Principle and scale of housing development.

3. Highway safety/infrastructure.

4. Affordable housing provision.

5. Impact on character of village.


24

3 April 2008

APPRAISAL

The proposal represents a departure from the current Development Plan. The main bulk of the site is within the settlement boundary and is designated as a village employment area (Local Plan Policy 10). A significant rear section of the site is outside of the settlement boundary, in the Countryside policy area (Local Plan Policy

5). Neither of these policies permits housing development, except in the case of

Policy 5 provided that the site adjoins a village boundary (which this does) and it is for affordable housing only. There are however, other local and national policy issues, together with other material considerations, to be taken into account before reaching a decision that the application should necessarily be refused because of current land designations.

Physically, the site is an integral part of this small village. It is vacant and has been so since the poultry processing business closed in December 2006. Its derelict industrial appearance does not sit easily with its designation within the AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) and its part inclusion within the village Conservation

Area. Whilst its previous use provided employment, it was a far from ideal neighbour to adjoining residential properties and the local road network was never designed for the heavy vehicle movements associated with the use. Its designation in the Local

Plan as a village employment area reflected its use at the time of preparing the Plan.

It is highly unlikely that such a large designation would have been made in the absence of that former use.

Notwithstanding this, the potential value of the site to provide further employment opportunities in the area needs to form part of the consideration of this planning application. Evidence provided with the application shows that the site was marketed during 2007 (at no set price) but no offers were received. At least in the current economic climate this appears to indicate that the site is not one which is likely to attract alternative business interest. Members will note that the Council's Economic

Development Unit has not raised an objection to the application.

Taking all of the above factors into account, it is not considered that the application should be refused on grounds that the site should be wholly reserved for future employment purposes.

The proposal represents perhaps the obvious alternative use of the site. The agent's response to a possible alternative mixed development incorporating housing and employment related uses is that there is no evidence of demand and anyway employment opportunities exist nearby at the Northrepps Enterprise Development and in North Walsham, in far more accessible locations.

There are a number of arguments in favour of redeveloping the site for housing.

These are as follows:-

1. It would represent a compatible 'neighbour' to existing adjacent residential properties.

2. It would enhance the character and appearance of the village, Conservation Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

3. It would make effective use of previously developed land.

4. It would contribute to the current shortfall in the District's five year land supply.

5. It would contribute to meeting the local need for affordable housing.

Northrepps, however, is not considered to represent a sustainable location for any significant new residential development. It is lacking in a range of local facilities

(although it does have a public house and a school), and public transport is very limited. Consequently it can be expected that new residents would have a high


25

3 April 2008

reliance on car use. It is for this reason that the village is not a selected settlement in the submitted LDF Core Strategy. If it is to be concluded that because of the particular circumstances of this site the principle of residential development is acceptable, then the approved amount of new housing would need to be assessed with these sustainability issues in mind.

The Committee will have noted that the Highway Authority has objected to the application for reasons relating to this issue. This response was made to the originally submitted application, which specifically referred to thirty-eight new dwellings plus conversion of the retained building. The crux of the objection relates to the increase in traffic movements which a development of that scale would generate.

The Highway Authority has made it clear that their position is unchanged having considered the applicants' highway consultant's further representations ( Appendix

3 ).

Having visited the site the Committee will have noted some of the Highway

Authority's concerns, in that Church Street has no footpath provision for much of its length and that the road network leading to the village is of a substandard nature to accommodate significant levels of traffic.

The Highway Authority has been asked to comment further now that the application has been amended and no longer specifies a number of dwellings proposed.

To conclude, it is considered that on balance the principle of re-developing the site for housing represents an acceptable solution, taking into account the particular circumstances of this case. The main issue relates to the scale of this development given that Northrepps is not well suited to significant residential expansion. The applicants have amended the application in order to seek planning permission in principle (particularly in view of the Highway Authority objection), and to delay the issue of dwelling numbers to a future date. However, to grant outline planning permission without some controls set at this stage, in terms of either the area to be developed and/or the density of housing, would place the Council in a weakened position in terms of negotiating the amount of development at the reserved matters stage.

This matter is the subject of discussion with the applicant's agent and the Committee will be updated with progress at the meeting. The Highway Authority will need to be re-consulted on any outcome. In the meantime the Committee will need to consider whether it accepts the principle of residential development of the site.


The Committee will be updated at the meeting following further discussions with the applicants.


26

3 April 2008

10. SUTTON - 20080297 - Erection of three dwellings and garages; Rustic House

The Street for Mr and Mrs P Cutting




CONSTRAINTS

Flood Zone 3

Residential



20071870 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of four dwellings and garages

Withdrawn, 08 Jan 2008

THE APPLICATION

Erection of three dwellings with detached garages on garden land surrounding a detached two-storey house.

A Flood Risk Assessment accompanies the application.


At the request of Councillor Sheridan having regard to the following planning issues:

Flooding and drainage.

PARISH COUNCIL

Awaiting comments.

REPRESENTATIONS

Six letters of representation has been received raising objections on grounds of:-

1. Overloading sewers, drains and increasing the risk of flash floods.

2. Overlooking, overshadowing and loss of privacy.

3. Noise and disturbance.

4. Highway safety - speeding traffic, lack of footpaths.

5. Overdevelopment.

6. Out of character with surrounding properties.

7. Bungalows preferable.

CONSULTATIONS

County Council (Highways) - Awaiting comments.

Environment Agency - Awaiting comments.

Water Management Alliance - Awaiting comments.









27

3 April 2008

POLICIES


Policy 4: Selected Small Villages (small-scale residential development should enhance character).





1. Principle of development.

2. Flood risk.

3. Local drainage issues.

4. Impact on character of village.

5. Residential amenity.

6. Highway safety.

APPRAISAL

The application site is formed from the subdivision of the garden of an existing dwelling which lies within the village development boundary on the western side of

Sutton. Under the terms of Local Plan Policy 4 the principle of small-scale housing development such as this is acceptable subject to enhancement of the character of the village and other planning considerations.

The site lies within an area identified on the Environment Agency Flood Risk Map as at high risk from flooding (Zone 3) and within a part of Sutton where there are clearly documented issues of poor local land drainage. These are issues that require careful examination in the determination of this application.

Members will be familiar with Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood

Risk (PPS25) which requires Local Planning Authorities to apply the sequential test to all new development within areas at high risk of flooding. The consequence of applying this test to proposals for residential development is that wherever possible such development should be located in areas of low flood risk.

In this instance, the application of the sequential test is not straightforward. The site lies close to the outer edge of the flood risk zone. The flood risk assessment (FRA) supporting this planning application makes the point that Environment Agency maps are indicative and imprecise. In detail, the FRA considers the probability of both fluvial flooding and a coastal breach scenario, before arriving at a conclusion that the application should not be included within the area at highest risk from flooding. The

Environment Agency has not yet provided an opinion on the FRA's conclusion. This response is important in terms of applying the sequential test. Members will be updated with the Agency's response at the meeting.

A separate, though not entirely unrelated, issue is that of the local drainage problems experienced in Sutton. Water drains from a small catchment of agricultural land on the eastern side of Sutton under the road westwards towards Sutton Broad through a series of drainage ditches and culverts. This site is important because a large drainage ditch which is located on the northern boundary of the site forms part of that drainage system. The Water Management Alliance (IDB) has previously indicated that it would be advantageous if the ditch were piped, and although it is outside the application site; as an alternative the applicant proposes a pipe through the centre of the application site. The Water Management Alliance has been consulted on this scheme. Members will be updated with its response at the meeting.


28

3 April 2008

The FRA assumes that driveways would be permeable and the water run-off from the buildings would be stored as part of a rain water harvesting scheme. If the application were approved, such measures could provide mitigation for both flood risk and local drainage, but would need to be carefully conditioned to ensure the capacity is adequate and the scheme is fully implemented.

With regard to the other planning details of the scheme, the layout provides for one dwelling on the street frontage with the other two dwellings at the rear of the site.

This pattern of development is not dissimilar to other developments along this side of the village. The proposal equates to a density of 15 dwellings per hectare, which, whilst less than that advocated in PPS3 (minimum of 30 dwellings per hectare), reflects favourably with the character of this part of the village. Furthermore the amount of built development potential on the site is constrained by the need to provide maintenance distances from water courses around the site.

In terms of design, the appearance of the house on the frontage plot would incorporate features of the adjacent Rustic House, whereas the rear plots are a modern interpretation of the cottage style. Overall, given the mix of building styles in the area, the design approach is considered appropriate for this particular location.

The development, in terms of the garden sizes and the relationship of the proposed houses and neighbouring properties, accords with the Council's Design Guide basic amenity criteria.

In conclusion, therefore, whilst the general layout and design aspects of this proposal are considered acceptable there still remain outstanding issues to be clarified, namely those relating to flood risk, drainage and the comments of Highway Authority.


The Committee will be updated at the meeting.

11. THORPE MARKET - 20080049 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; land at Sandpit

Lane for Mr and Mrs A Armstrong

MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :06 Mar 2008



CONSTRAINTS

Residential


Conservation Area


19900861 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Erection of detached single storey dwelling and garage

Refused, 20 Sep 1990

Appeal Dismissed, 15 May 1991

19930478 - (Outline Planning Permission) - One 'cottage style' dwelling

Refused, 04 Jun 1993

19940663 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Erection of one cottage style dwelling

Refused, 27 Jun 1994

19980473 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of cottage style dwelling

Refused, 22 May 1998


29

3 April 2008

19990770 - (Full Planning Permission) - Temporary use of land for standing of residential caravan with car parking area and hardstanding

Refused, 23 Jul 1999

20020927 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Erection of two single-storey units of affordable housing

Refused, 07 Aug 2002

20021528 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Erection of a pair of semi-detached single-storey dwellings

Refused, 28 Nov 2002


Refused, 09 Jul 2007


Withdrawn, 01 Aug 2007

THE APPLICATION

Involves the erection of a detached two-storey dwelling with attached single garage.


This application was deferred at a previous Committee meeting.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter from a local resident not raising objections of principle but commenting on the poor condition of the private track serving the site, and the need for a hedge or fence on the east boundary to protect the privacy of the new and existing dwellings.

PARISH COUNCIL

Objects - plot too small for size of proposed building. Difficult access with restricted width on the unsurfaced road. Access onto the A149 road has restricted visibility at junction for additional traffic.

CONSULTATIONS

County Council (Highways) - Comments as follows:

Sandpit Lane, an unadopted track of poor construction, single track width and with no vehicular passing or turning provision adjoins the North Walsham Road (A149) at two junctions. Whilst the southerly access point is reasonably positioned to enable satisfactory use the northern access has severely restricted visibility in the traffic

(critical) direction at its junction with the A149. As this access is closer to the proposal site it is reasonable to assume that this junction would be more likely to be used to serve the dwelling proposed and, in any case, the potential exists for it to be the main, or sole, means of access to the proposed dwelling.

The visibility at this northern junction is presently approximately 38m at the required

2.4m setback. The visibility requirement as North Walsham Road is subject to a

30mph speed limit is 90m x 2.4m x 90m (Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

DoT).. The actual visibility available therefore amounts to only some 42% of the requirement onto the extremely busy North Walsham Road which is designated a

Principal Route in the County Council Route Hierarchy.

Were Government guidance given in Manual for Streets (DfT & CLG 2007) considered appropriate to this locality then the access visibility requirement would be

2.4m x 59m. However, the visibility available again falls well short of requirements, amounting to only 64%, of what would be considered acceptable.

It should also be noted that visibility given above is believed to be across third-party land; the positioning of Norfolk County Council Highway boundary markers in the grass verge indicating that the visibility that can be controlled in perpetuity is actually significantly less than the 38m detailed.

Sandpit Lane is unsuitable for any further intensification of vehicular use whatsoever.


30

3 April 2008

Recommends refusal on the following grounds:

Sandpit Lane a private unsurfaced track serving the site is considered to be inadequate to cater for any further development whatsoever, by reason of its restricted width, lack of passing and turning provision, substandard construction and particularly it's severely restricted visibility onto a section of the busy and important

North Walsham Road (A149 Principal Route).The proposal, if permitted, would be likely to give rise to conditions detrimental to highway safety, contrary to North

Norfolk District Council Local Plan Policy 147.

Comments further that any permission granted to this application would create an undesirable precedent for a potential number of similar applications which are adjacent to





It is considered that refusal of this application as recommended may have an impact on the individual Human Rights of the applicant. However, having considered the likely impact and the general interest of the public, refusal of the application is considered to be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.



POLICIES








1. Highway safety.

2. Residential amenity.

3. Impact on Conservation Area.

4. Layout and design.

APPRAISAL

The application was deferred at the previous meeting to enable Members to visit the site.

The application site is one of two small, adjoining, overgrown plots of land within the development boundary of Thorpe Market. Both plots have had several planning refusals for new housing, primarily because of poor visibility of the access of Sandpit

Lane onto A149 Cromer Road. The site also lies within the Thorpe Market

Conservation Area. In principle new housing is acceptable within the development boundary of the village, subject to an acceptable relationship with the neighbouring properties, enhancement of the form and character of the village and no adverse highway safety issues.


31

3 April 2008

The Highway Authority has consistently raised strong objections to development proposals served by Sandpit Lane because of the very poor visibility of its junction onto the Cromer Road being unsuitable to any intensification of vehicular traffic. The

Committee will note the very clear objection raised by the Highway Authority to the current application.

In terms of appearance, the dwelling would have a traditional vernacular cottagestyle design, similar to the older dwellings found to the east of the site and elsewhere in the village. This design would help to enhance the character of the village.

In view of the highway objection, refusal is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION:- REFUSE, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:-

1) The District Council adopted the North Norfolk Local Plan on 2 April 1998 for all planning purposes. The following saved policy as listed in the Direction issued by

Government Office for the East of England of the 14 September 2007 is considered relevant to the proposed development:

Policy 147: New Accesses

In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed development would be contrary to the above Development Plan policies for the following reasons:

Sandpit Lane is a private unsurfaced track serving the site is considered inadequate to cater for any further development whatsoever, by reason of its restricted width, lack of passing and turning provision, substandard construction and its severely restricted visibility onto a section of the busy and strategically important North

Walsham Road (A149). Consequently, the development, if built, would give rise to conditions detrimental to highway safety.

12. APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

AYLMERTON - 20080071 - Removal of door and installation of window; 5

Church Farm Barns Church Road for Mrs S M Barnes


BACTON - 20080083 - Conversion of barn to one unit of holiday accommodation; Grange Farm Pollard Street for Norfolk County Council


CROMER - 20080136 - Demolition of detached car port and erection of attached car port; 17 Cliff Avenue for Mr F Chesterfield


CROMER - 20071782 - Demolition of commercial buildings and erection of eight flats; Allens Garage Cabbell Road for Allens Garage


EAST RUSTON - 20080208 - Erection of single-storey and first floor side extensions; 5 High Hill Road for Mr and Mrs Sadler



32

3 April 2008

ERPINGHAM - 20080111 - Erection of first floor rear extension; Alvermead

School Road for Mr and Mrs Compston


FELMINGHAM - 20080105 - Erection of two-storey and single-storey extensions; Woodhaven North Walsham Road for Mr and Mrs O'Mara


GIMINGHAM - 20080078 - Erection of detached annexe; The Retreat Gimingham

Road Trimingham for Mr M Kelly


HICKLING - 20071978 - Erection of one and a half storey rear extension, two front dormer windows and new access; 2 Lilac Cottages The Street for Mr D J

Burdett


HICKLING - 20080110 - Erection of stables; The Croft Stalham Road for Mr and

Mrs A W Simmonds


HICKLING - 20080129 - Erection of single-storey side/rear extension with balcony and detached garage; Claygate Town Street for Mr G Du Fell


HORNING - 20080035 - Erection of garden room extension and detached car port; 6 Church Cottages Upper Street for Mr and Mrs Bird


HORNING - 20080149 - Siting of portable building to provide additional accommodation/facilities for village hall; Village Hall Mill Hill for Horning

Village Hall


HOVETON - 20080113 - Erection of two-storey side/rear extensions, front porch and detached double garage; 49 Stalham Road for Mr and Mrs R R D Carman


INGWORTH - 20080094 - Erection of sunlounge, car port and store; Riverview

Cottage The Street for Mr and Mrs C White


LUDHAM - 20080041 - Conversion and extension of outbuilding to provide habitable accommodation and erection of attached cart-shed; The Orchards

Staithe Road for Mr R Gallagher


LUDHAM - 20080076 - Erection of rear conservatory; 1 Malthouse Lane for Mr and Mrs A J Purton


MUNDESLEY - 20080086 - Erection of single-storey side and rear extensions;

20 Meadow Drive for Mr R Collins



33

3 April 2008

MUNDESLEY - 20080162 - Erection of first floor rear extension; 2 Old

Coastguard Cottages Victoria Road for Mr and Mrs P Winwright


NEATISHEAD - 20080070 - Erection of single-storey side extension and construction of new roof to existing side extension; High House Sows Loke for

Mr and Mrs G Penfold


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080061 - Erection of two-storey rear extension; rear of

15 Mundesley Road for Mr S Farrow


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080112 - Erection of single-storey side extension; 60

Lynfield Road for Mr N Smith


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080142 - Demolition of garage and erection of singlestorey side extension and front bay window; 16 Wilkinson Way for Mr and Mrs

R Gray


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080156 - Erection of rear conservatory; 19 Hazell Road for Mr and Mrs R Smith


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080056 - Demolition of garage and conservatory and erection of side and rear extensions; 52 Bradfield Road for Mr and Mrs S Jones


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080062 - Erection of first floor side extension; 6

Grammar School Road for Mr and Mrs M Ling


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080140 - Retention of wind generator; 45 Skeyton Road for Mr Swindells


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080141 - Erection of single-storey side extension and conservatory and front porch; 39 Yarmouth Road for Mr B Dyer


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080165 - Change of use from A1 (retail) to A2 (financial and professional services) or A3 (food and drink); 5 Market Street for Mr R

Scammell


NORTH WALSHAM - 20080182 - Display of illuminated advertisements; 28c

Market Place for Hughes Electrical

(Illuminated Advertisement)

NORTH WALSHAM - 20080187 - Erection of link extension; 32b Bradfield Road for Mr and Mrs Payne



34

3 April 2008

NORTH WALSHAM - 20080195 - Change of use from B1 (office) to residential;

24 Kings Arms Street for Mr R Scammell


ROUGHTON - 20080058 - Continued use of land for siting mobile home; Heath

Farm Norwich Road for Mrs A Zelos


ROUGHTON - 20080107 - Erection of part two-storey, part first floor side extension; Polruan Back Lane for Mr C Andrews


RUNTON - 20071949 - Certificate of lawfulness for existing use of first and second floors as self-contained flat; The Old Hayloft Tapdon House Sandy

Lane West Runton for London and Norfolk Developments Limited

(Certificate of Lawfulness)

RUNTON - 20080066 - Erection of part two-storey front extension; Three Gates

Cromer Road West Runton for Mr and Mrs J Nottingham


RUNTON - 20080092 - Erection of animal shelter; The Norfolk Shire Horse

Centre Sandy Lane West Runton for Hillside Animal Sanctuary


SEA PALLING - 20080091 - Erection of single-storey side/rear extension;

Wavecrest Beach Road for Mr and Mrs Howard


STALHAM - 20071919 - Erection of ten houses, five flats and two shops; Old

Baker’s Yard High Street for Church Farm Homes


STALHAM - 20080227 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; adjacent to Ye Olde

Clock Cafe High Street for R P Shearwood Builders Limited


SUFFIELD - 20080064 - Retention of mobile home and touring caravans for storage and rest room; land at Long Lane Colby for Mrs E Whiskin


SWANTON ABBOTT - 20080125 - Construction of pitched roof to rear annexe and retention of two-storey extension as constructed; Mill House The Hill for

Ms J Stewart


THORPE MARKET - 20080055 - Erection of dwelling; land adjacent The

Mallards Cromer Road for Mr and Mrs Tweddle



35

3 April 2008

13. APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

BACTON - 20080119 - Erection of two-storey rear extension; 2 St. Andrews

Close for Mr N Lee


CATFIELD - 20080046 - Erection of single-storey side extension and detached car shelter; Galloway House The Street for Mr and Mrs M Irving


MUNDESLEY - 20080045 - Use of land for siting timber holiday chalet; land at

144 Cromer Road for Mr D Pritchard


APPEALS SECTION

14. NEW APPEALS

BACTON - 20071293 - Erection of two single-storey dwellings; land at Sea Holly

Kimberley Road for Mr S Norman

WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS

MUNDESLEY - 20071149 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; land at 20

Beckmeadow Way for Mr and Mrs D Spinks


OVERSTRAND - 20071678 - Erection of single-storey dwelling and garage;

Beckhythe Cottage 3 High Street for Mr and Mrs Aylward


SWANTON ABBOTT - 20071469 - Erection of three detached houses; land adjacent to Ex Weavers Arms Aylsham Road for Horning Properties

INFORMAL HEARING

15. PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS

NORTH WALSHAM (WEST WARD) - 20071135 - Residential development; land at Cromer Road and Bradfield Road for Norfolk Homes Limited

PUBLIC INQUIRY

NORTH WALSHAM (WEST WARD) - 20071136 - Residential development; land at former Marricks Wire Ropes Cromer Road for Norfolk Homes Limited

PUBLIC INQUIRY

SWANTON ABBOTT - 20070243 - Erection of 4 terraced dwellings; land adjacent former Weavers Arms Aylsham Road for Horning Properties

INFORMAL HEARING


36

3 April 2008

16. WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS

CROMER (TOWN WARD) - 20071364 - Erection of eighteen two-bed flats; site at

Cambridge Street for Taylor Patterson Trustees Limited

HOVETON - 20071247 - Demolition of hotel and erection of twenty-four apartments with car parking below; The Broads Hotel Station Road for Mr J R

Herbert

SITE VISIT :- 03 Apr 2008

KNAPTON - 20071727 - Erection of two single-storey dwellings; The Spinney

Mundesley Road for Mr and Mrs Merrill

MUNDESLEY - 01/071/DEV6/07/005 - Authorised enforcement action for removal of unauthorised flue; 32 High Street for Halit Kol

MUNDESLEY - 20070626 - Erection of dwelling; land adjacent to 35 Trunch

Road for Mr J Bonham

SITE VISIT :- 03 Apr 2008

NORTH WALSHAM (WEST WARD) - 20071509 - Erection of two-storey extension to provide two apartments; Garden Court Aylsham Road for T H P D

Properties Limited

SEA PALLING - 20030910 - Erection of single-storey dwelling and garage; land adjacent to The Old Vicarage Church Road for Mr D Buckland

SITE VISIT :- 12 Mar 2008

17. APPEAL DECISIONS

STALHAM - 20070336 - Erection of 4 dwellings; 142 High Street for Mr P Marko

APPEAL DECISION :- DISMISSED


37

3 April 2008

OFFICERS' REPORTS TO DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (EAST) - 3 APRIL 2008

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib