23 OCTOBER 2008
Minutes of a meeting of the DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (EAST) held in the
Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 9.30 am when there were present:
Councillors
Mrs C M Wilkins (Chairman)
Mrs S A Arnold
M J M Baker
Miss P E Ford
Mrs B McGoun
B Smith
Miss L Walker
P J Willcox
Mrs A M Tillett - substitute for Miss C P Sheridan
E Seward - North Walsham North Ward
Officers:
Mr J Williams - Development Control Manager (East)
Mr P Godwin - Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager
Mr J Chinnery - Solicitor
Mrs T Armitage - Senior Planning Officer (East)
(131) APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND DETAILS OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors S J Partridge and Miss C P
Sheridan. One substitute Member attended the meeting as shown above.
(132) MINUTES
The Minutes of a meeting of the Committee held on 25 September 2008 were
approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
(133) ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
The Chairman stated that there were no items of urgent business which she wished
to bring before the Committee.
(134) DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillors E Seward declared an interest, the details of which are shown under the
minute of the item concerned.
(135) WORSTEAD CONSERVATION
MANAGEMENT PLAN
AREA:
CHARACTER
APPRAISAL
AND
The Committee considered item 1 of the officers’ reports seeking agreement for the
draft Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Proposals for
Worstead to be approved for public consultation purposes.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager explained the background and
purpose of the Character Appraisal and Management Plan. He explained the key
issues arising from the Appraisal and the Management Proposals which resulted
from it.
Development Control Committee (East)
1
23 October2008
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins, the local Member, expressed her gratitude for the work
undertaken by Franziska Callaghan, who had now left the Authority, and Prue Smith.
She stated that Worstead had suffered in the past from unsympathetic development.
She stated that there were some properties within the village which were not listed
but made a positive contribution and should be considered for local listing.
Councillor Mrs B McGoun referred to the proposed removal of the modern housing
estates from the Conservation Area and considered that if they were retained within it
there would be an opportunity for sympathetic redevelopment in the future.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager stated that it was necessary to
consider the setting of the Conservation Area and not just the built form. The
standard of development within the areas to be removed devalued the rest of the
Conservation Area. It would be unfair to the residents of those dwellings to impose
on them the additional controls that applied to Conservation Areas.
In answer to a question the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager stated
that it would be possible for buildings outside the Conservation Area to be included in
a ‘local list’.
Councillor B Smith considered that new development within Conservation Areas
stood out regardless of how sympathetic it was. He asked if it would be possible to
ensure that recycled materials were used within Conservation Areas wherever
possible to reduce the impact. He also referred to the impact of telephone wires etc
within Conservation Areas and considered that satellite dishes should not be allowed
to be erected on chimneys as it spoilt the roof lines.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager stated that sustainable use of
recycled materials would be encouraged through national guidelines and the
Council’s own Design Guide. The issue of overhead lines required negotiation with
statutory undertakers and success had been achieved in some areas.
Councillor M J M Baker stated that it was difficult to source recycled materials and
they were very expensive. He considered that insistence on recycled materials
would make work in Conservation Areas impossible. He stated that there were new
materials available which were similar to old materials but they took time to weather.
Councillor Mrs C M Wilkins stated that Worstead was not a designated settlement
under the Local Development Framework and therefore there would be very little new
build to impact on the historic centre.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager stated that there were no
immediate budgetary implications, but Cabinet would need to consider bids for
resources to back up the proposals during the course of the current budgetary
process.
It was proposed by Councillor Miss P E Ford, seconded by Councillor Miss L Walker
and
RESOLVED
1.
That the Draft Worstead Character Appraisal and Management
Proposals incorporating the proposed boundary changes and Article
4(2) directions outlined in the report be approved for public consultation
purposes.
Development Control Committee (East)
2
23 October2008
2.
That following consultation, the amended Worstead Conservation and
Management Proposals be brought back before Committee for final
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.
(136) CROMER - 20081244 - Formation of car parking area; SS Peter and Paul Church
Church Street for Cromer Parochial Church Council
The Committee considered item 2 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Rev Dr David Court (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that an amended plan had been received.
Whilst the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager still had reservations about
parking within the setting of the Grade 1 Listed Building he had no overriding
objection to the amended proposal. English Heritage maintained its objection and
would prefer a ‘Grasscrete Solution’. However, the area around the building was
characterised by formal grassed areas and officers considered that Grasscrete would
not result in a satisfactory visual improvement.
The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval of this application subject to the
imposition of appropriate conditions to include the type of gravel and timber edging to
be used. Norfolk Archaeology had confirmed that it did not require any conditions.
In answer to a question the Development Control Manager confirmed that it would
not be necessary to readvertise this application.
It was proposed by Councillor Miss P E Ford, seconded by Councillor Mrs B McGoun
and
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved as amended subject to the imposition
of appropriate conditions to include materials.
Development Control Committee (East)
3
23 October2008
(137) HOVETON - 20081230 - Erection of one-and-a-half-storey dwelling and garage;
Shorna Tunstead Road for Mrs B H Woodrow
The Committee considered item 3 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speaker
Mr Woodrow (supporting)
The Development Control Manager reported the views of Councillor N D Dixon, the
local Member, a copy of which had been sent to all Members. Councillor Dixon was
opposed to this application on grounds that the proposal would be out of character
with existing development along Tunstead Road, it would have an adverse impact on
‘Shorna’ because of its excessive scale and mass and give a visual impression of
continuous and over-intensive development in the street scene. Councillor Dixon
considered that the lack of local objection had resulted from apathy and falling
confidence that objections had any influence. He had requested refusal of the
application or a site inspection.
Councillor Miss P E Ford proposed a site inspection given the concerns of the local
Member.
Councillor Mrs B McGoun referred to a similar development nearby which had been
strongly opposed by the former local Member and refused by the Committee
following a site inspection. Permission had subsequently been allowed on appeal.
Councillor Mrs A M Tillett considered that the application could not be refused on
overdevelopment grounds given the adoption of the Core Strategy policies. She
objected to the design of the proposed building.
Councillor B Smith questioned whether the design was in keeping with surrounding
development and if it would enhance the locality. He considered that the size and
bulk of the proposed dwelling was difficult to envisage and therefore seconded the
proposal for a site inspection.
Councillor M J M Baker considered that a site inspection was unnecessary. He
proposed approval of this application, which was seconded by Councillor P J Willcox.
Councillor Miss P E Ford withdrew her proposal for a site inspection.
RESOLVED by 6 votes to 1
That this application be approved in accordance with
recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control.
the
(138) NORTH WALSHAM - 20081129 - County Council reference: SP/C/1/2007/1011
conversion of former waste water treatment plant to liquid waste transfer
station; Sewage Works Marshgate for HFS Liquid Waste
This item was withdrawn as it had been refused by Norfolk County Council as
determining authority prior to this meeting.
Development Control Committee (East)
4
23 October2008
(139) NORTH WALSHAM - 20081170 - Formation of new access (exit only) and
alterations to car parking layout; Sainsburys Bacton Road for Sainsbury's
Supermarkets Limited
Councillor E Seward declared a prejudicial interest in this application as he lived on
Bacton Road and stated that he would withdraw from the meeting after he had
spoken as local Member.
Councillor Mrs S A Arnold stated that she had received communications in respect of
this application.
The Committee considered item 5 of the officers’ reports.
Public Speakers
Mrs Gadsden (North Walsham Town Council)
Mr Standing (objecting)
Mr Hames (supporting)
The Senior Planning Officer reported that two further letters of support and three
further letters of objection had been received. She summarised the additional
concerns raised in the letters of objection.
The Town Council had no objection subject to conditions to require traffic calming
measures along Mundesley Road with a pedestrian crossing and 20 mph speed limit.
The Highway Authority had discounted the introduction of physical traffic calming
features as they would cause disturbance by HGVs and considered that a 20 mph
speed limit was not justified and unreasonable to impose in isolation. Traffic
consultants acting for the applicant had responded to a suggestion that the new exit
should be left turn only by stating that it would not resolve the problems as only 10%
of vehicles would use the access.
The Senior Planning Officer recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in
the report and an additional condition to secure the provision of a pedestrian crossing
prior to construction of the new access.
Councillor E Seward, the local Member, referred to the importance of Sainsbury to
the local economy and as an employer. He stated that there was considerable
apprehension about this application. Local residents had requested traffic calming
and raised concerns in respect of flooding from the car park. He stated that the
traffic survey had been conducted during a quiet period and traffic numbers were
considerably higher during peak periods. He stated that the proposal would result in
a significant increase in the amount of traffic on a residential road. He considered
that traffic speeds suggested a very strong need for traffic calming. He accepted that
speed humps were not appropriate but considered that the possibility of traffic islands
or other measures should be explored to reduce traffic speeds which were often in
excess of the current speed limit. He referred to concerns that had been raised in
respect of the location of the pedestrian crossing. He welcomed the measures to
address the flooding problems. He requested the Committee to consider if the
highway measures were adequate given the increased amount of traffic that would
pass residential dwellings as a result of the proposal. Councillor Seward then
withdrew from the meeting.
Development Control Committee (East)
5
23 October2008
Councillor Miss P E Ford acknowledged local concerns regarding noise disturbance.
However, she recognised the need for the proposed access in alleviating traffic
congestion. She stated that it was not possible for emergency vehicles to gain
access because of the congestion. She considered that there would be benefit from
flood alleviation measures, installation of a pedestrian crossing and additional
parking spaces. She considered that the proposal would benefit the whole of North
Walsham and proposed approval subject to the imposition of the conditions listed in
the report and a condition to secure the provision of a pedestrian crossing prior to
construction of the new access. She requested that local residents be consulted on
the position of the crossing.
In answer to a question the Senior Planning Officer explained the suggested location
of the pedestrian crossing.
Councillor Mrs A M Tillett was concerned that there was no footway on one side of
the crossing and considered that it would be more appropriate if it were moved closer
to the town centre. She stated that she would second the proposal subject to
amending the location of the crossing and a requirement for traffic calming.
The Development Control Manager explained that the Highway Authority did not
support the introduction of traffic calming measures. If Members wished to pursue
this issue he suggested that they visit the site and that the Highway Engineer be
invited to attend.
The Solicitor stated that it was important that no highway conditions were imposed
without consultation with the Highway Authority.
Councillor Mrs B McGoun proposed a site inspection. Councillor Mrs A M Tillett
withdrew her seconding of Councillor Miss Ford’s proposal and seconded this
proposal.
Councillor B Smith seconded Councillor Miss Ford’s proposal to approve this
application subject to conditions, as an amendment. The amendment was put to the
vote and declared carried by 5 votes to 2. On being put as a substantive proposal it
was
RESOLVED unanimously
That this application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the
report and an additional condition to secure the provision of a
pedestrian crossing prior to construction of the new access.
(140) NORTH WALSHAM - 20081351 - Erection of Sixth Form College; Playing Field,
Station Road for Paston College
The Committee considered item 6 of the officers’ reports.
RESOLVED unanimously
That consideration of this application be deferred to allow a site
inspection by the Committee and that the local Member and Chairman of
the Parish Council be invited to attend.
Development Control Committee (East)
6
23 October2008
(141) APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 7 of the officers’ reports.
(142) APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
The Committee noted item 8 of the officers’ reports.
(143) NEW APPEALS
The Committee noted item 9 of the officers’ reports.
(144) PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 10 of the officers’ reports.
(145) WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
The Committee noted item 11 of the officers’ reports.
(146) APPEAL DECISIONS
The Committee noted item 12 of the officers’ reports.
The meeting closed at 12 noon.
Development Control Committee (East)
7
23 October2008