OFFICERS' REPORTS TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (EAST) - 30 JUNE 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 - ITEM FOR DECISION
1.
ALDBOROUGH CONSERVATION AREA: CHARACTER APPRAISAL AND
MANAGEMENT PLAN
Agreement is sought for the adoption of the Aldborough Conservation Area
Character Appraisal and Management Plan (June 2008) for statutory planning
purposes and as a material consideration in the planning process.
1.0 Background
1.1 Conservation Area Character Appraisals and Management Plans
Conservation areas are designated under the provision of Section 69 of the Planning
(Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. A conservation area is defined
as ‘an area of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of
which it is desirable to preserve or enhance’. Section 71 of the same Act requires
local planning authorities to formulate and publish proposals for the preservation and
enhancement of these conservation areas.
The Council’s Corporate Plan Changing Gear 2008-11 identifies the preparation of
character appraisals as a key target.
1.2 Aldborough Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plan
At the Development Control Committee on 26 July 2007, Members gave approval for
the Aldborough Draft Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management
Proposals to be taken to public consultation.1
The final draft is now to be considered by the Development Control Committee (East)
for adoption in order that the guidance document can be applied for development
control and management purposes.
1
Note: A copy of the final draft Aldborough Conservation Area Character Appraisal
and Management Plan is available for inspection in the Members’ Room and online
at http://www.northnorfolk.org/planning/documents conservation/AldboroughCA.pdf
2.0 The amended document following public consultation
A six week public consultation was undertaken from 12 November to 23 December
2008. This included:
•
•
Leaflets with feedback forms were delivered to all household and businesses in
the Conservation Area.
Contact was made with key community groups and relevant public consultees.
Development Control Committee (East)
1
30 June 2008
•
•
•
A public exhibition was prepared and a public meeting held.
The draft appraisal has been available on the NNDC’s webpages.
Several press releases.
Following public consultation (13 written responses were received and a public
meeting held on 12 December 2008 (attended by 26 members of the public), views
and suggestions were carefully considered and appropriate changes made to the
appraisal and management proposals. However, the majority of responses and
votes at the public meeting were in agreement with the character appraisal and in
favour of the main management proposals:
•
•
•
•
Need to adopt a list of buildings of local interest.
Introduction of Article 4(2) directions.
Review and extend the Conservation Area as proposed.
NNDC to support enhancement schemes around the Green.
Main amendments to the document:
•
•
•
•
Several important views were added to the document.
The overlay ‘negative’ on the maps was deleted.
Changes to desensitise wording describing changes within the conservation area,
changes to properties etc.
Areas defined as water meadows in draft document are actually set-aside arable
land.
Please see the attached document for a more detailed report on comments received,
actions and recommendations (Appendix 1).
Following amendments to the draft document, the assessment, key characteristic,
key issues and management proposals for the Aldborough Conservation Area read
as follows:
3.0 Assessment of the Aldborough Conservation Area
The format of the appraisal includes the planning policy context, a summary and
assessment of special interest including location and setting, historic development
and archaeology, layout and planform, architectural and villagescape character,
spatial analysis and key views, character analysis including the qualities of buildings,
prevailing uses and the contribution of green spaces and suggested boundary
changes. However, it must be noted that no character appraisal can ever be
completely comprehensive and omission of any particular building, feature or space
should not be taken to imply that it is of no interest.
The Aldborough Conservation Area was designated by North Norfolk District Council
on 26 January 1989. It has a historically large, triangular village green as central
feature. There are several listed buildings and buildings of local interest as well as
simple brick or flint cottages that define the architectural interest of the conservation
area. The setting of the village is defined and enhanced by the open meadows (setaside arable land), groups of trees and the surrounding landscape. Aldborough and
Thurgarton is a rural parish with a mixture of trade and residential properties.
The traditional buildings which encircle the large Green and their informal placing, the
setting of the village in the landscape together with the brooks that link the different
parts of the settlement together, all give the Conservation Area of Aldborough and
Thurgarton a distinct character. To preserve and enhance this special character is
the main aim of the character appraisal and management plan.
Development Control Committee (East)
2
30 June 2008
Key characteristics
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The large historic Green is the central feature of the village both in terms of form
and function.
Buildings around The Green are in a continuous line of historic houses, buildings
and cottages with few modern infill sites.
The Green presently retains its historic mixed trade and residential character
Important group of Grade II listed buildings and structures around the Black Boys
PH
Great diversity of building types and architectural styles
The open fields (meadows at present) to the north, east and south of the Green
define the settlement pattern.
Its landscape setting in the small Scarrow Beck valley
Generally quiet with little traffic
Key issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
Permitted development resulting in loss of architectural details, boundary
treatment and detrimental alterations and extensions: need to protect identified
areas through Article 4(2) directions
Need to adopt a list of Buildings of Local Interest
Need for siting and design of new development to relate to historic context and
prevailing character
Some areas have poor boundary and ground surface treatment
Retention and management of green spaces
Need to review the Conservation Area boundary: Proposed amendments to the
conservation area boundary to include a field boundary along Thurgarton Road
and an area identified north of School Road (see main document)
Management Proposals
•
•
•
•
Review of the Conservation Area boundary.
Encourage and support enhancement in the public realm as identified
Protect identified areas through Article 4(2) directions.
Adopt a list of Buildings of Local Interest as identified in the document.
4.0 Budgetary Implications
There are no immediate budgetary implications at this stage. Specific budgetary
implications will, however, need to be assessed and agreed during the Council’s
budgetary cycle for 2009/10 and beyond in order to deliver the management
proposals.
5.0 Recommendations
•
•
That the Final Draft of the Aldborough Conservation Area Character Appraisal
and Management Plan (June 2008) be formally adopted by the Council for
statutory planning purposes and as such be a ‘material consideration’ in the
planning process.
That the proposed boundary changes as recommended in the draft appraisal
document be adopted and publicised in accordance with the Planning (Listed
Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
Development Control Committee (East)
3
30 June 2008
•
•
That further reports be brought before the Committee relating to specific
proposals contained in the above document (e.g. the introduction of Article 4(2)
directions).
That a scheme of enhancement and improvement programme be prepared for
the Conservation Area and budgetary provision be sought accordingly.
Source: (F Callaghan, Extn 6367– File Reference: Aldborough CAA )
PUBLIC BUSINESS - ITEMS FOR DECISION
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Note :- Recommendations for approval include a standard time limit condition as Condition
No.1, unless otherwise stated.
2.
HOVETON - 20080777 - Erection of 18m wind turbine; Hoveton Old Hall Stone
Lane Ashmanhaugh for Mr M Woodfine
Target Date :14 Jul 2008
Case Officer :Miss T Lincoln
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of High Landscape Value
Countryside
Listed Building Grade II
NATS Zone (Wind Turbines)
THE APPLICATION
Erection of a wind turbine within the grounds of Hoveton Old Hall. The turbine would
be 18m high to the hub height with a 10m diameter blade.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Dixon having regard to the following planning issue:
Visual amenity.
PARISH COUNCIL
No objection.
REPRESENTATIONS
Supporting documentation from the agent attached as Appendix 2.
CONSULTATIONS
Ashmanhaugh Parish Council - Object to the application on the following grounds:
1. Mast too high.
2. Visual impact on landscape.
3. Sited within the grounds of Grade II listed building.
4. Noise level.
5. Limited information on the Environmental Statement.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Awaiting comments.
Environmental Health - Satisfied that there would be minimal noise intrusion to
nearby properties subject to the turbine being installed and maintained to the
manufacturer’s specifications.
Development Control Committee (East)
4
30 June 2008
National Air Traffic Services - Awaiting comments.
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.
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.
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 6: Residential Areas (areas primarily for residential purposes).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required
for new development).
Policy 99: Wind Turbines (specifies criteria in terms of appearance, character,
amenity, noise health and highway safety considerations).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy EN 7: Renewable energy (specifies criteria for renewable energy proposals).
Planning Policy Statement 22 (2004) on Renewable Energy sets out the
Government's objectives, key principles on policies, and comments on locational and
other considerations. This includes landscape and visual effects and the issue of
noise.
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
Impact on visual amenity.
APPRAISAL
The turbine is to be sited within the grounds of Hoveton Old Hall, a Grade II listed
building. It is to be sited 60m away from the associated dwelling and approximately
90m away from the next residential dwelling. The immediate surrounding area to the
south and west is agricultural and the site is delineated by mature trees and planting
on its north-west side and a more sparse line of mature trees on its southern
boundary. Screening to the south-west is good and so views of the proposal would
be limited. The clearest view would be from Wroxham Barns to the west.
Local Plan Policy 99 states that wind turbines will only be allowed where there would
be no significant detrimental impact on the appearance, amenity or character of the
area, along with other matters such as noise and shadow flicker. Core Strategy
Policy EN7 adopts a more positive emphasis towards renewable energy projects but
also contains similar safeguards in terms of landscape impact and amenity.
In this case however it is not considered that the proposed turbine would cause any
significant detriment to the surrounding landscape, residential amenities or the
setting of the listed building.
Development Control Committee (East)
5
30 June 2008
Subject to no objection from the National Air Traffic Services and Conservation
Design and Landscape Manager the proposal is considered to accord with
Development Plan policy.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to approve subject to no objections raised by the
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager and National Air Traffic
Services.
3.
MUNDESLEY - 20080808 - Demolition of single-storey dwelling and stables and
erection of eight two-storey dwellings; 17 Marina Road for Mrs P Smith
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :16 Jul 2008
Case Officer :Miss C Ketteringham
(Outline Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Coastal Erosion Risk
Residential
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20071338 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Demolition of single-storey dwelling and
stables and erection of eight two-storey dwellings
Refused, 19 Mar 2008
THE APPLICATION
Involves the demolition of single-storey dwelling and stables and erection of eight
two-storey dwellings. Means of access and siting are included for determination.
PARISH COUNCIL
Awaiting comments.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Planning and Building Control in view of the Committee's
previous consideration of an identical proposal.
REPRESENTATIONS
A letter from the agent presenting the applicant’s case is attached as Appendix 3.
CONSULTATIONS
Environmental Health - Awaiting comments.
County Council (Highways) - No objection subject to conditions relating to provision
of the access, visibility splay, on-site parking and turning, and drainage.
Community Safety Manager - Contains advice on crime prevention measures on any
subsequent detailed planning application.
Head of Coastal Strategy - This site falls outside the 60 year erosion line as shown in
the 1998 Local Plan. The frontage is presently defended with a concrete wall, which
is over 120 years old with a life expectancy of between 3 and 20 years.
The Kelling to Cromer Shoreline Management Plan indicates that in the short term
(20 years) the policy is "to hold the line, where this can be economically justified."
Development Control Committee (East)
6
30 June 2008
The long term (100 years) aspiration for this length of coast is for managed
realignment. However the Council's view is that such a policy should not be
implemented without mitigating measures, in the absence of those measures the
stated policy is to 'hold the line'.
The Council recognises that it is unlikely that it would be able to secure funds to
maintain the defences into the long term or those suitable mitigating measures would
be put in place to enable the realignment policy.
This site falls within the 100 year predicted erosion zone so in the long term the site
is at a real risk from erosion. Adopting a precautionary principle it can therefore be
expected that the site will be at risk from erosion well within the period 50 to 100
years and that the access may be lost sooner.
The projections of anticipated loss for this site are:Mains Drainage 50 - 75 years.
Access 60 years (or earlier if Highways imposes a safety margin).
Other services 60 - 75 years.
Seaward edge of the site - 70 years.
Whole site - 97 years.
Therefore, the application should be refused on the grounds that the entire site will
be lost to erosion within the expected life of the development.
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
See comments of the Community Safety Officer (above).
POLICIES
North Norfolk Local Plan - (Adopted 2 April 1998 - saved policies):
Policy 3: Large Villages (small-scale residential development should enhance
character).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required
for new development).
Policy 42: Development in Conservation Areas (developments should preserve or
enhance character).
Policy 48: Coastal Erosion Risk Areas (development which would increase risk to life
or significantly increase risk to property, not permitted).
Policy 147: New Accesses (developments which would endanger highway safety not
permitted).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy HO 1: Dwelling mix and type (specifies type and mix of dwellings for new
housing developments).
Policy HO 2: Provision of affordable housing (specifies the requirements for provision
of affordable housing and/or contributions towards provision).
Development Control Committee (East)
7
30 June 2008
Policy HO 7: Making the most efficient use of land (Housing density) (specifies
housing densities).
Policy EN 11: Coastal erosion (prevents development that would increase risk to life
or significantly increase risk to property and prevents proposals that are likely to
increase coastal erosion).
MAIN ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Coastal erosion.
APPRAISAL
The Committee considered the previous application for an identical proposal at the
meeting on 6 March 2008. Copies of the report to and minute of that meeting are
attached as Appendix 3.
The site currently contains a bungalow and stable block which would be demolished
to make way for the new dwellings. Within this part of Mundesley the principle of
residential development is acceptable provided that proposals comply with other
policies in the Local Plan.
The proposed dwellings, comprising two pairs of semi-detached cottages and a
terrace of four dwellings, would be laid out in a row along the south-eastern edge of
the site overlooking the area of the village known as The Dell, which includes the
River Mun and the Mill Pond. There is a mixture of residential housing styles in the
area, but characteristically development is of a higher density where traditional brick
and flint vernacular cottages prevail.
The proposal would result in a housing density of 32 dwellings per hectare, which
represents an efficient use of land, compliant with the guidance in PPS3 (Housing).
Some rear garden areas would have less than the Design Guide minimum depth.
Whilst the site lies close to the boundary with the Mundesley Conservation Area and
is prominently visible from it, it is considered that the proposal, subject to the final
approval of the detailed designs, would at least preserve the setting of the
Conservation Area.
The existing site entrance provides the only feasible means of access to the site and
this would be altered to provide improved visibility splays. The Highway Authority
raises no objection to the application subject to certain conditions.
The site lies outside the coastal erosion zone indicated in the Local Plan which was
based on a 60-year prediction (base date 1993). However, it lies within the 100-year
erosion line identified in the Kelling to Lowestoft Shoreline Management Plan (SMP).
Policy EN11 of the Core Strategy (Submission Document) is worded similarly to
Local Plan Policy 48 but specifically relates to the 100-year erosion line.
The Committee will note above and be aware from previous discussions on this
proposal, of the concerns raised by the Council's Head of Coastal Strategy, on the
basis that the site would be threatened by coastal erosion within a period of 100
years. The anticipated loss of the seaward edge of the site is 70 years and the whole
site 97 years. Unless alternative drainage measures are provided these could be lost
in 50 years and the access in 60 years.
The Committee was previously given advice by the Legal Services Manager on
whether the Local Plan or the emerging Core Strategy should be used in the
determination of this proposal. That opinion is contained in the previous Committee
report (Appendix 3).
Development Control Committee (East)
8
30 June 2008
Notwithstanding that advice the Committee concurred with the views of the Head of
Coastal Strategy, accorded greater weight to the emerging Core Strategy policy, and
refused permission on coastal erosion grounds. A number of other planning
applications for new dwellings in the 100 year erosion zone have since been refused
on similar grounds. Two appeals have subsequently been lodged against these
decisions (including against the previous refusal on this site) and one has recently
been dismissed on grounds including coastal erosion risk. In the interests of
consistency it is suggested that the current application should be refused on similar
grounds.
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 policies as listed in the Direction issued by
Government Office for the East of England on 14 September 2007 are considered
relevant to the proposed development:
Policy 48: Coastal Erosion Risk Areas
Furthermore, the District Council submitted its Core Strategy (incorporating
development control policies) on 18 June 2007. The following policy is considered
relevant to the proposed development:
Policy EN 11: Coastal erosion
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the establishment of new residential
development on this site, in an area where the best available evidence indicates that
it is likely to be affected by coastal erosion within the next 50-100 years would result
in a significant and unacceptable risk to life and property within the lifetime of the
development. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to the
responsible long-term planning of the area, the objectives of the above Development
Plan policies and to the precautionary approach recommended in Government
advice, particularly paragraph 2.16 of PPG20 "Coastal Planning".
4.
NORTH WALSHAM - 20080134 - Erection of one hundred and forty-nine
dwellings, (forty of which are sheltered), sixty-bed care home, ten employment
units and convenience store; Hopkins Homes site Norwich Road for Hopkins
Homes Limited
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :25 Apr 2008
Case Officer :Mrs T Armitage
(Outline Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Corridor of Movement
General Employment Area
Contaminated Land
Tree Preservation Order
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20030646 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Residential development, associated
infrastructure, open space, landscaping and pedestrian footpath to railway station
Refused, 03 Jul 2003
Development Control Committee (East)
9
30 June 2008
THE APPLICATION
Seeks a mixed development of this 5ha site. All matters are reserved apart from
access, in respect of the junction arrangement onto Cromer Road. The revised
application seeks permission for a mixed development of the following land uses in
the quantities indicated:a) 149 dwellings (40 of which would be sheltered).
b) 10 commercial units providing a total of 1,189sq.m of employment floor space.
c) 60 bed residential care home.
d) Convenience store - approximately 186sq.m.
In addition a twenty space rail users' car park is indicated as well as an area of public
open space.
The application has been accompanied by a large number of supporting documents
including:
Flood Risk Assessment.
Asbestos Survey Report.
Transport Assessment.
Draft Travel Plan.
Noise and Vibration Assessment.
Ecological Survey.
Utilities Report.
Environment Review.
Proposed Head of Terms (Section 106).
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous Committee meeting for a site visit.
TOWN COUNCIL
Supports in principle the mixed development on this site but have a number of
outstanding concerns:1. The level of affordable housing is not 40%.
2. Encourage the developer to increase the proportion of the site used for
employment purposes.
3. The employment units should be part of the first phase of the development.
4. There is concern from residents about the highways issue. The District Council to
look closely to ensure best possible scheme to encourage best flow of traffic and
pedestrian safety.
5. Before the application is approved the District Council to be satisfied that there will
be an enlargement of health provision at GP level in the town.
6. That permission is granted only subject to the District Valuer issuing a statement
that a mixed development is a proper use and value of public money.
7. As part of the conditions, the employment units be marketed to encourage a range
of skilled employment.
8. That footpaths shall be provided on all the site roads.
9. The proposed convenience store will not create unfavourable competition with
shops in the town centre and other convenience stores elsewhere.
10. That acoustic barriers should be erected to curb noise by the railway line,
particularly where residential properties are being erected.
REPRESENTATIONS
Nine letters of objection (although two also support redevelopment of the site in
principle) raising the following concerns:1. Highway safety.
2. Norwich Road already very busy.
Development Control Committee (East)
10
30 June 2008
3. Increase in traffic.
4. Need for a relief road.
5. Proposed location of shop would encourage parking on Norwich Road.
6. Impact on residents of Norwich Road who live directly opposite the proposed
development.
7. Pedestrian safety/crossing of Norwich Road.
8. Opening hours of convenience store and possible disturbance.
9. Less of site for possible redevelopment for business/light industrial use.
10. Pressure on local services and infrastructure.
In addition letter received from adjoining landowner requesting that in the event of
planning permission being granted the internal road layout should allow for the
further expansion of the site.
The Griffon Area Partnership - Consider a mixed redevelopment of the site a
practical solution. Consider industrial scale operations on the whole site no longer
valid given the proximity to residential areas. Consider the application offers
significant and much needed improvements to the area around the railway station, a
key and visually very poor gateway to the town.
CONSULTATIONS
Anglian Water - In the event of planning permission being granted suggest the
imposition of a number of informatives regarding water supply, waste water and trade
effluent.
British Pipeline Agency - No objection.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Following the receipt
of two further Bat Surveys (dated 21 March 2008 and 28 may 2008, prepared by
Southern Ecological Solutions) the impact of the development on bats (European
Protected Species) has now been clarified. Based on the information contained in the
reports, the development should have no adverse affect on bats, with the exception
of the loss of some foraging habitat; however, this may be mitigated through some
effective landscaping and planting. Now satisfied that the ecological impacts of the
development have been assessed and any future requirements can be dealt with
through appropriate conditions.
The only other concern relates to the two protected Hornbeam trees at the front of
the site. Amended plans now illustrate the roadway being aligned directly in front of
the two trees and a bus stop positioned in between the trunks of the trees. The
excavation required to install a main highway within the root protection area of the
trees is likely to cause severe damage and their probable demise. In addition,
physical damage could also be caused to the canopy of the trees by passing traffic.
The trees have a fastigiated form meaning that a crown lift is unlikely to alleviate the
problem without resulting in the loss of the two trees. Object unless an Arboricultural
Implication Assessment or Method Statement can determine that there will be no
impact to these trees which would lead to their removal.
Countryside and Parks Manager - Considers that the indicative layout plan fails to
provide public open space/outdoor play space at a level required by the Local Plan.
Notwithstanding this under provision it is suggested that the areas proposed as local
areas for play (LAPs) be deleted and one large open space be provided. In addition
in the event of Local Plan standards not being met it is suggested that the developer
be required to make a financial contribution towards off-site provision.
Development Control Committee (East)
11
30 June 2008
County Council (Highways) - The inclusion of a ghost island right turn facility is a
welcome feature of the revised drawing 07035/01B and additional drawing
07176001CTT 13A. The former drawing also addresses concerns relating to rail
passenger parking provision and the internal estate road layout, which now
incorporates a loop road and an emergency access route to Norwich Road.
If it transpires that I am satisfied with the future operation of the junctions for which I
have yet to received data, and agreement is reached to provide a direct link to the
northbound platform at the Station, I would wish for the following to be included in the
event of consent being granted:Obligation to be secured by a Section 106 Agreement.
A financial contribution towards the cost of providing a vehicle to operate a demand
responsive transport facility. It will also be necessary to impose highway related
conditions.
County Council (Planning Obligations) - Advises that a development of the scale
proposed would require financial contributions to be made towards the fire service
and library provision.
EDF Energy - No response received.
Emergency Planning Section - Raises concerns regarding a development of this size
in such close proximity to BPA site (Appendix 4).
Environment Agency - No objection subject to the imposition of conditions relating to
surface water management issues, pollution control, contamination and sustainable
construction.
Environmental Health - Recommends the imposition of conditions regarding
contaminated land, waste disposal, noise attenuation measures and lighting.
Natural England - Originally objected to the proposed development on the grounds
that the application contains insufficient survey information to demonstrate whether
or not the development would have an adverse effect on legally protected species.
Comments awaited on additional survey information.
Planning Policy Manager - Comments relating to policy context, housing needs and
demand, suitability/sustainability of the site and wider policy objectives, including
supply of employment land attached as Appendix 4.
Strategic Director (Communities) - Economic and Tourism Development Manager 1. This planning application provides a reasonable assurance that this development
will create employment for 80-100 people. (The equivalent occupation of this site by
a large highly automated distribution company could in comparison employ 25
people.) However, this is not to say that any other high level diversity service sector
development would not easily exceed this level of employment.
2. The likelihood of attracting a large sector specific inward investment is relatively
small, given the weakness in the surface transport infrastructure and connectivity of
the town to the main commercial corridor to Cambridge, London and other European
destinations.
3. Growing importance of the service and knowledge sector - a nationwide trend
linked to the decline of manufacturing.
4. Skills gaps in the workforce - an issue seen as a barrier to value added growth.
Full comments attached at Appendix 4.
Development Control Committee (East)
12
30 June 2008
Strategic Housing - Sets out the affordable housing requirement for a development of
this scale. (Comments attached at Appendix 4)
Water Management Alliance - No objection.
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.
Further consideration to this issue will be given at the meeting.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
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).
North Norfolk Local Plan - (Adopted 2 April 1998 - saved policies):
Policy 1: Growth Towns (main towns for growth in district).
Policy 9: General Employment Areas (primarily reserved for business, industrial and
warehousing purposes).
Policy 70: Employment Strategy
Policy 72: Proposed General Employment Areas
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
Policy SS 5: Economy (strategic approach to economic issues).
Policy SS 10: North Walsham (identifies strategic development requirements).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of residential development on designated employment land.
2. Impact on employment objectives.
3. Sustainability/suitability for housing.
4. Affordable housing.
5. Highway safety.
6. Wildlife issues.
APPRAISAL
The application site comprises 5ha of industrial land with a road frontage on to
Norwich Road. The site is currently vacant and has been since Premier International
Foods ceased business in June 2002. The Cromer to Norwich railway line and North
Walsham station lie to the east of the site. To the south and west the site backs on to
agricultural land with housing beyond. To the north of the site lies an electricity substation and an established builders merchant.
The site is characterised by a large number of vacant buildings up to four storeys in
height, extensive hardstandings, open storage areas and parking areas. An area of
open land is located at the southern end of the site.
Development Control Committee (East)
13
30 June 2008
Planning Policy Context
In the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan the site is designated as a General
Employment Area (GEA). Local Plan Policy 9 states that the introduction or
intensification of non-employment uses will not be permitted within GEA's.
Consequently the proposal is, and has been advertised accordingly, as a departure
from the Development Plan. The Local Plan will remain a statutory part of the
Development Plan until its replacement with the new Development Plan Documents.
The application should be determined in accordance with the Development Plan
unless it is demonstrated that there are material considerations to justify a departure.
Emerging LDF policies and guidance contained in PPS3 (Housing) together with the
Regional Spatial Strategy are all material to the consideration of the proposal.
The LDF Core Strategy Submission Document proposes the retention of 65ha of
designated employment land for North Walsham. It is proposed that the land subject
to this application forms part of this designation. Emerging LDF policy for such
employment land would only be permissive of Class B1, B2 and B8 proposals as well
as other commercial uses provided that there are no sequentially preferable sites
available. The proposal therefore would also represent a departure from emerging
Core Strategy policy.
PPS3 requires Local Planning Authorities to identify and maintain a five year land
supply. The Council has recently revised its Housing Land Supply Statement which
identifies sufficient sites within the District to provide a 5.17 year supply. In this
context there is no presumption that the Council should consider housing on sites
which have not previously been identified for residential development.
It should be borne in mind however that this application seeks permission for a mixed
development, including a range of employment generating uses. In addition the site
constitutes previously developed land (brownfield), well-placed within the town.
National planning policy advice recognises the benefits of effectively re-using
previously developed land.
In terms of assessing the application against this policy context (and whether a
departure from policy is acceptable in this case), two particular issues need to be
considered in detail. These are firstly, would the proposal undermine employment
policy objectives, and secondly how suitable and sustainable is the site to
accommodate housing development?
1) Employment Objectives
North Walsham is identified as a growth town in the Local Plan. Over time the town
has experienced high levels of housing and economic growth and it continues to be
well-placed, strategically, to serve the rural hinterland. The town's economic growth
will continue to be an important aspiration for the future, particularly following a
number of high profile business closures and that of RAF Coltishall.
The comments of the Planning Policy Manager on the employment land issue are
appended to this report (Appendix 4). The response makes a number of key points:North Walsham currently has a comparatively low level of self-containment for jobs.
Around half of those in employment leave the town for work.
The Core Strategy identifies the creation of good quality job opportunities as a key
priority for the town
The identification and retention of employment land is an important part of the Core
Strategy and the mechanism for creating the potential for job creation.
The application site is substantial vacant employment site, well placed within the
town.
Development Control Committee (East)
14
30 June 2008
It is considered important to retain a choice of employment development
opportunities in the town and as a general principle it would be preferable to focus on
the redevelopment of brownfield sites.
The application seeks to acknowledge the employment designation of the site
through the mix of development being proposed. In terms of employment generating
development the proposal includes: 1189sq.m of business (B1) floor space; a local
convenience store; residential care home and sheltered accommodation. The
applicant's agent has indicated that this range and quantity of development would
have the potential to generate around 161 FTE jobs (B1:50-75 jobs; convenience
store: 10 jobs; care home: 76 jobs; sheltered housing: 5 jobs). This figure, according
to the agent, exceeds the number employed at the site during normal operational use
as HL Premier Foods (on closure 90 job losses were announced). In the event of the
planning application being approved it would be possible to secure the phased
construction of this employment development to ensure delivery.
Additionally, the applicants have suggested that the exceptional development costs
associated with site demolition, clearance and decontamination ensure that a sole
employment use would not be viable and despite being marketed for employment
purposes previously (2003-2006) no appropriate interest was shown by prospective
purchasers.
The Core Strategy North Walsham Town Policy (SS10) states that 65 ha of
employment land should be retained and this will be provided through a choice of
brownfield and greenfield opportunities. The site forms part of the 65ha designation
and 50% of the vacant brown field land available in the town for redevelopment. The
former HL Foods site has been identified by the Council as an employment site of
strategic importance as stated in 'Employment Land in North Norfolk: March 2007'.
This document summarises the characteristic of the site as follows;
'Substantial complex of vacant buildings suitable for re-use or redevelopment. Good
location for employment in relation to highway network. Although currently vacant is
considered that the site is ideally suited to meet any long term needs, particularly for
employment buildings. The site is within a principal settlement where employment
growth is being promoted. Retention and re-use of the site/buildings for employment
uses would assist in fulfilling strategic objectives in a sustainable manner.'
The loss of the potential to develop the whole of the site for employment reduces the
amount of identified employment land to below 65ha (by approximately 3.5ha) and
substantially impacts on the amount of brownfield land remaining for new growth over
the plan period. In the event of planning permission being granted for this application
this may raise the need for replacement of this provision elsewhere. This opportunity
would arise at the next stage of the LDF process (Site Specific). It would be likely to
require the consideration of greenfield land.
2) Sustainability/suitability of site for residential development
North Walsham is clearly a relatively sustainable location for development and this is
reflected in the Core Strategy which identifies the town as a Principal Settlement. As
part of the preparation process for identifying Site Specific Proposals in the town the
relative sustainability of individual sites for housing has been appraised. This
involved scoring sites against a matrix of criteria such as whether the site is
brownfield/greenfield, its location and proximity to key facilities, together with issues
such as access to public transport. Of all the sites considered, the application site
was the highest scoring in the town, reflecting its central location, brownfield status
and close proximity to key facilities.
Development Control Committee (East)
15
30 June 2008
Thus, notwithstanding the value of the site for employment development, the site also
has significant benefits in terms of accommodating new housing growth in the town.
Given the proximity of the site to key facilities and to the railway station, future
residents of the development would have real choices as to how to travel both for
local and longer journeys. As a consequence there is the potential to reduce
dependency on the car which is a key objective in achieving sustainable patterns of
development.
A further factor relevant to assessing the suitability of the site for housing is the
proximity of the BPA condensate tanks. There are two tanks storing gas condensate,
a light crude, 140m to the north of the site. Given the quantities of substances stored,
the site is not an identified 'Hazardous Installation' and therefore falls outside the
jurisdiction of the Health and Safety Executive. The operators of the site BPA have
produced safety zone map information to assist the Local Planning Authority and
developers in accounting for potential risk. Parts of the application site fall inside
these safety zones (Appendix 4). The applicant has taken into account this
constraint when planning the mix of development on the site and has used a HSE
computer tool to influence the layout and mix of development relative to the safety
zone information. In particular this has influenced the location of the employment
zone and that of the care home.
The Council's Emergency Planning Section has raised concerns regarding a
development of this size in such close proximity to the BPA site. They point out that
the majority of the site falls within the 400m radius initial evacuation zone set out in
the emergency response plans for the BPA site. This development would add
approximately 400 people to the number to be evacuated and accommodated
including a significant portion of vulnerable people (from the care home).
Other Factors for Consideration:
Affordable Housing - The application proposes a total of 149 dwellings. Applying
current policy and a requirement of 40%, the development provides the potential to
achieve 60 affordable homes or 67 if the emerging core strategy requirement of 45%
were to be applied. The application proposes 30% affordable housing and therefore
fails to comply with policy requirements. The application proposes a total of 45
affordable dwellings comprising:9 x I bed flats.
7 x 2 bed flats.
9 x 2 bed terrace.
1 x 4 bed terrace.
5 x 2 bed house (shared ownership).
2 x 3 bed terrace (shared ownership).
12 x sheltered flats.
The applicants have submitted an Affordable Housing Statement in support of the
proposal (Appendix 4) and consider that the wider community benefits of the overall
scheme should be taken into account (i.e. provision of employment units, shop, rail
parking, sheltered housing and care home). In addition they have submitted financial
information detailing the viability of the proposed development, suggesting that as
proposed the projected profit margin would be in single figures. Independent
verification of this confidential financial information has been sought, but the figures
suggest that to increase the affordable housing percentage would render the
development unviable.
Development Control Committee (East)
16
30 June 2008
Highway issues - The application proposes to utilise the existing junction on to
Cromer Road to provide the main point of access on to the site. The revised proposal
includes work to reconfigure Norwich Road (B1150) to provide for a right turn lane in
to the site. It is understood that the Highway Authority has no overriding objection to
the principle of the proposed development but remains in discussions with applicants'
agents regarding a number of issues including the junction of Norwich Road with
A149, the location of the convenience store and a possible direct link from the site on
to the north bound rail station platform.
Ecological Issues - The Ecological Report submitted with the application confirmed
several areas on the site with high and medium bat roost potential. The report
identified the need for further activity and emergence surveys to be undertaken (mid
May - August). This further survey work has now been completed and the Council's
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager is satisfied that the development
would have no adverse units on bats. Concerns remain however regarding the
impact of the proposed highway works on two Hornbeam trees on the Cromer Road
frontage. Both trees are covered by Tree Preservation Orders and an Arboricultural
Implication Assessment has been requested.
The comments of Natural England to the further survey work are awaited.
Conclusion
This site has been identified as an employment site of strategic importance. It is
considered integral to providing for future employment growth in North Walsham. The
judgement to be made is therefore whether it is considered that the employment
opportunities which are being offered now, in terms of the number and potential
quality of jobs, are sufficient to justify the 'loss' of the remainder of the site for
employment development. On the one hand the Development Plan takes a long-term
view and concludes that the entire site should be retained. However, as part of this
judgement some consideration can also be given to the contribution that mixed
development would make to other objectives such as housing provision, affordable
housing provision, providing car parking for the station and improving the appearance
of what is acknowledged to be an unsightly site at a key location in the town.
On balance, and on the basis of the analysis above, it is considered that the mix of
development now proposed offers sufficient benefits to justify in principle a departure
from adopted policy. However there still remain outstanding detailed issues in
relation to affordable housing, highways and trees, and for this reason no formal
recommendation is made at this stage. Members will be updated on progress at the
meeting. If planning permission is to be approved it will need to be the subject of a
Section 106 Agreement to secure infrastructure payments and affordable housing
provision.
RECOMMENDATION:To be reported at the meeting.
Development Control Committee (East)
17
30 June 2008
5.
SCOTTOW - 20070144 - Sub-division of eight dwellings to provide eight
additional dwellings; 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 Hoveton Place RAF Coltishall
for Annington Homes Limited
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :20 Mar 2007
Case Officer :Mrs T Armitage
(Full Planning Permission)
See applications 20070145 and 20070161 also on this agenda.
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
Selected Small Village
THE APPLICATION
Subdivision of eight dwellings to provide an additional eight dwellings.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Wilkins having regard to the following planning issue:
Affordable housing.
PARISH COUNCIL
No comments received.
CONSULTATIONS
Environmental Health - Recommend conditions relating to refuse disposal and
method statement regarding asbestos removal.
Strategic Housing - Considering all three applications collectively, Policy 58 would
require 18 of the proposed additional 22 dwellings to be affordable. The applicants
have submitted financial information regarding the viability of providing affordable
housing. Following protracted negotiations and projected profit margins (exempt
Appendix 7) the Strategic Housing Section are satisfied that 4 affordable houses is
the maximum that is achievable without compromising the viability of the conversion
scheme. The applicants have agreed to this number.
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.
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.
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) (development should be compatible with character).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required
for new development).
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).
Development Control Committee (East)
18
30 June 2008
MAIN ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Affordable housing provision.
APPRAISAL
The application relates to former RAF personnel houses which previously served the
now disused Coltishall Airbase. The dwellings concerned comprise three bedroom
terraced properties sited within the village development boundary. Policy 4 of the
Development Plan is permissive of new housing development in such locations
subject to compliance with other relevant policies of the plan and proposals
enhancing the character of the village.
This is one of three applications on this agenda which collectively seek to subdivide
22 existing homes to provide a total of 44 properties. The existing properties
comprise spacious three bedroom homes and were created many years ago by
combining smaller two bedroom houses. This application therefore seeks to revert
the houses to their original format and in so doing the three applications collectively
result in net gain of 22 dwellings. The conversion would require only minor
modification to the external appearance of the properties and each would have a
private garden area. In keeping with the layout of the whole estate, parking would be
provided communally rather than within the curtilage of each of the properties. The
proposed design alterations are considered acceptable and the form and scale of
dwellings created reflect the character of the wider residential setting.
With reference to Policy 58, in Selected Small Villages development proposals for
more than four dwellings may be permitted provided that all the excess dwellings are
for affordable housing. Considering all three applications collectively, Policy 58 would
require 18 of the proposed additional 22 dwellings to be affordable. Where applicants
consider that there is an issue of viability in providing the required number of
affordable dwellings they have the opportunity, on an open-book basis, to provide
financial information to support their stance. This has been done in this instance and
the Council's Strategic Housing Section have been in protracted negotiations with the
applicant regarding this information and the affordable requirement that could be
supported by the scheme.
The Strategic Housing Section have been mindful of a number of factors including
the projected profit margins when comparing the option to refurbish the existing 22
dwellings or convert to 44, and the present and projected value of the houses
(exempt Appendix 7). Having given full consideration to the information submitted
the Strategic Housing Section are satisfied that four affordable houses (equivalent to
18%) is the maximum that is achievable without compromising the viability of the
conversion scheme. The applicants have agreed to this number and identified the
location of the affordable homes, 7, 8, 9 and 10 Hoveton Place. Although it is
acknowledged that this number falls well below the normal policy requirement it is
considered that a higher requirement may well result in none of the homes being
sub-divided and the properties being marketed in their existing form. The Council's
Strategic Housing Section are mindful that the sale price of the existing larger
properties would be out of reach of most first time buyers, whilst the proposed subdivision provides four affordable units and 40 low cost two bed starter homes.
In conclusion it is considered that the proposal as submitted is reasonable and
accords with the Council's policy for negotiation affordable housing.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated approval subject to a Section 106 Agreement securing the provision
of affordable housing.
Development Control Committee (East)
19
30 June 2008
6.
SCOTTOW - 20070145 - Sub-division of dwellings to provide six additional
units; 53, 55 and 57 Ormesby Road and 22, 24 and 26 Hoveton Place RAF
Coltishall for Annington Homes Limited
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :21 Mar 2007
Case Officer :Mrs T Armitage
(Full Planning Permission)
See applications 20070144 and 20070161 also on this agenda.
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
Selected Small Village
THE APPLICATION
Subdivision of 6 x 3 bed houses to provide six additional units (total 12 x 2 bed
houses).
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Wilkins having regard to the following planning issue:
Affordable housing.
PARISH COUNCIL
No comments received.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - No objection.
Environmental Health - Recommend conditions relating to refuse disposal and
method statement regarding asbestos removal.
Strategic Housing - Considering all three applications collectively, Policy 58 would
require 18 of the proposed additional 22 dwellings to be affordable. The applicants
have submitted financial information regarding the viability of providing affordable
housing. Following protracted negotiations and projected profit margins (exempt
Appendix 8) the Strategic Housing Section are satisfied that 4 affordable houses is
the maximum that is achievable without compromising the viability of the conversion
scheme. The applicants have agreed to this number.
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.
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.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
Development Control Committee (East)
20
30 June 2008
POLICIES
North Norfolk Local Plan - (Adopted 2 April 1998 - saved policies):
Policy 4: Selected Small Villages (small-scale residential development should
enhance character) (development should be compatible with character).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required
for new development).
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).
MAIN ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Affordable housing provision.
APPRAISAL
The application relates to former RAF personnel houses which previously served the
now disused Coltishall Airbase. The dwellings concerned comprise three bedroom
terraced properties sited within the village development boundary. Policy 4 of the
Development Plan is permissive of new housing development in such locations
subject to compliance with other relevant policies of the plan and proposals
enhancing the character of the village.
This is one of three applications on this agenda which collectively seek to subdivide
22 existing homes to provide a total of 44 properties. The existing properties
comprise spacious three bedroom homes and were created many years ago by
combining smaller two bedroom houses. This application therefore seeks to revert
the houses to their original format and in so doing the three applications collectively
result in net gain of 22 dwellings. The conversion would require only minor
modification to the external appearance of the properties and each would have a
private garden area. In keeping with the layout of the whole estate, parking would be
provided communally rather than within the curtilage of each of the properties. The
proposed design alterations are considered acceptable and the form and scale of
dwellings created reflect the character of the wider residential setting
With reference to Policy 58, in Selected Small Villages development proposals for
more than four dwellings may be permitted provided that all the excess dwellings are
for affordable housing. Considering all three applications collectively, Policy 58 would
require 18 of the proposed additional 22 dwellings to be affordable. Where applicants
considers that there is an issue of viability in providing the required number of
affordable dwellings they have the opportunity, on an open-book basis, to provide
financial information to support their stance. This has been done in this instance and
the Council's Strategic Housing Section have been in protracted negotiations with the
applicant regarding this information and the affordable requirement that could be
supported by the scheme.
The Strategic Housing Section have been mindful of a number of factors including
the projected profit margins when comparing the option to refurbish the existing 22
dwellings or convert to 44, and the present and projected value of the houses
(exempt Appendix 8). Having given full consideration to the information submitted
the Strategic Housing Section are satisfied that four affordable houses (equivalent to
18%) is the maximum that is achievable without compromising the viability of the
conversion scheme. The applicants have agreed to this number and identified the
location of the affordable homes, 7, 8, 9 and 10 Hoveton Place. Although it is
acknowledged that this number falls well below the normal policy requirement it is
considered that a higher requirement may well result in none of the homes being
sub-divided and the properties being marketed in their existing form. The Council's
Development Control Committee (East)
21
30 June 2008
Strategic Housing Section are mindful that the sale price of the existing larger
properties would be out of reach of most first time buyers, whilst the proposed subdivision provides four affordable units and 40 low cost two bed starter homes.
In conclusion it is considered that the proposal as submitted is reasonable and
accords with the Council's policy for negotiating affordable housing.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated approval subject to a Section 106 Agreement securing the provision
of affordable houses.
7.
SCOTTOW - 20070161 - Sub-division of dwellings to provide eight additional
units; 1, 3, 5, 67, 69, 71, 73, 75 and 76 Cromes Place RAF Coltishall for
Annington Homes Limited
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :23 Mar 2007
Case Officer :Mrs T Armitage
(Full Planning Permission)
See applications 20070144 and 20070145 also on this agenda.
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
Selected Small Village
THE APPLICATION
Subdivision of existing dwellings to create an additional eight dwellings.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Wilkins having regard to the following planning issue:
Affordable housing.
PARISH COUNCIL
No comments received.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - No objection.
Environmental Health - Recommend conditions relating to refuse disposal and
method statement regarding asbestos removal.
Strategic Housing - Considering all three applications collectively, Policy 58 would
require 18 of the proposed additional 22 dwellings to be affordable. The applicants
have submitted financial information regarding the viability of providing affordable
housing. Following protracted negotiations and projected profit margins (exempt
Appendix 9) the Strategic Housing Section are satisfied that 4 affordable houses is
the maximum that is achievable without compromising the viability of the conversion
scheme. The applicants have agreed to this number.
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.
Development Control Committee (East)
22
30 June 2008
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.
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) (development should be compatible with character).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required
for new development).
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).
MAIN ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Affordable housing provision.
APPRAISAL
The application relates to former RAF personnel houses which previously served the
now disused Coltishall Airbase. The dwellings concerned comprise three bedroom
terraced properties sited within the village development boundary. Policy 4 of the
Development Plan is permissive of new housing development in such locations
subject to compliance with other relevant policies of the plan and proposals
enhancing the character of the village.
This is one of three applications on this agenda collectively seek to subdivide 22
existing homes to provide a total of 44 properties. The existing properties comprise
spacious three bedroom homes and were created many years ago by combining
smaller two bedroom houses. This application therefore seeks to revert the houses to
their original format and in so doing the three applications collectively result in net
gain of 22 dwellings. The conversion would require only minor modification to the
external appearance of the properties and each would have a private garden area. In
keeping with the layout of the whole estate, parking would be provided communally
rather than within the curtilage of each of the properties. The proposed design
alterations are considered acceptable and the form and scale of dwellings created
reflect the character of the wider residential setting
With reference to Policy 58, in Selected Small Villages development proposals for
more than four dwellings may be permitted provided that all the excess dwellings are
for affordable housing. Considering all three applications collectively, Policy 58 would
require 18 of the proposed additional 22 dwellings to be affordable. Where applicants
consider that there is an issue of viability in providing the required number of
affordable dwellings they have the opportunity, on an open-book basis, to provide
financial information to support their stance. This has been done in this instance and
the Council's Strategic Housing Section have been in protracted negotiations with the
applicant regarding this information and the affordable requirement that could be
supported by the scheme. The Strategic Housing Section have been mindful of a
number of factors including the projected profit margins when comparing the option
to refurbish the existing 22 dwellings or convert to 44, and the present and projected
value of the houses (exempt Appendix 9). Having given full consideration to the
information submitted the Strategic Housing Section are satisfied that four affordable
Development Control Committee (East)
23
30 June 2008
houses (equivalent to 18%) is the maximum that is achievable without compromising
the viability of the conversion scheme. The applicants have agreed to this number
and identified the location of the affordable homes, 7, 8, 9 and 10 Hoveton Place.
Although it is acknowledged that this number falls well below the normal policy
requirement it is considered that a higher requirement may well result in none of the
homes being sub-divided and the properties being marketed in their existing form.
The Council's Strategic Housing Section are mindful that the sale price of the existing
larger properties would be out of reach of most first time buyers, whilst the proposed
sub-division provides four affordable units and 40 low cost two bed starter homes.
In conclusion it is considered that the proposal as submitted is reasonable and
accords with the Council's policy for negotiation affordable housing.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated approval subject to a Section 106 Agreement securing the provision
of affordable houses.
8.
SCOTTOW - 20080705 - Conversion of former RAF buildings to Category C
prison and erection of buildings to provide ancillary accommodation; former
RAF Coltishall Tunstead Road for National Offender Management Service
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :13 Aug 2008
Case Officer :Mr J Williams
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Archaeological Site
Countryside
Tree Preservation Order
THE APPLICATION
The applicant is the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), part of the
Ministry of Justice which owns the site.
The proposal is to utilise part of the 'technical area' of the former RAF Coltishall
airbase as a 500 place Category C prison. The application site covers an area of
approximately 12ha. The proposed use falls within Class C2A of the Town and
Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. A Category C prison is defined as one
for prisoners who cannot be trusted in open conditions but who do not have the
resources and will to make a determined escape attempt.
The proposal involves a combination of the conversion of existing buildings,
demolition/partial demolition of existing buildings and new build. The site comprises
two distinct areas, the secure prison area itself and ancillary/operational areas
outside of it.
The secure area (4.5ha) would be enclosed by a 5.2m high fence with a solid sheet
steel panel for the first 2.4m of its height. Six existing two-storey 'H block' buildings
would be converted for prisoner accommodation. The main external alterations to
these buildings would involve changing the window styles and arrangements and
constructing pitched roofs on two existing flat roofed blocks. A further two-storey 'H
block' building (to the rear of the nearby Douglas Bader Centre) would be used as an
education and learning resource centre. Similar alterations are proposed to the
windows of this building with those facing towards the Douglas Bader Centre to be
obscure glazed and fixed shut.
Development Control Committee (East)
24
30 June 2008
Other buildings proposed within the secure area include the conversion of the former
junior ranks mess to a world faith, prisoner development unit and gym, and four new
buildings comprising a segregation unit, kitchen, reception/health care/store and
entry/visits/administration block.
Additional security fencing is proposed within the secure area which would mean that
the outside movement of inmates would be contained within this inner zone.
All existing trees and soft vegetation are proposed to be removed within the secure
area.
Outside the secure area existing buildings would be converted to staff facilities, a
store and a visitor centre. Separate staff and visitor car parking areas are proposed
(185 spaces and 95 spaces respectively), together with covered cycle shelters.
Vehicle access is proposed via what is presently a gated entrance onto Hautbois
Road to the west of the main site. An existing unadopted road would be widened to
6m. This access has a junction with Filby Road (a residential street), but vehicles
would be prevented from using this route by a locked barrier.
It is proposed to remove all trees within a 7.5m perimeter outside the secure area
fence. Elsewhere outside the secure area the only trees to be removed would be
three diseased/poison berry trees and a row of Cherry trees affected by the widening
of the access road.
In terms of other security measures a total of 87 lights (column, wall and fence
mounted) are proposed around the security fence. These lights would be directed at
the bottom 2m of the fence. Lamp standards would light the car park area. CCTV
cameras would be installed on 5m columns and buildings.
The application is supported by the following documentation:Supporting letter from NOMS (Appendix 5).
Planning Supporting Statement. (Executive Summary Appendix 5)
Design and Access Statement.
Transport Assessment.
Framework Travel Plan.
Energy Statement.
Noise Statement.
Arboriculture Statement.
Electrical Statement.
Statement of Economic Benefits.
Statement of Public Consultation.
Sustainability Statement.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Planning and Building Control in view of the national and
local significance of the proposal.
PARISH COUNCIL
Awaiting comments.
REPRESENTATIONS
Letter received on behalf of applicants concerning a wide range of issues attached as
Appendix 5.
Development Control Committee (East)
25
30 June 2008
8 letters from private individuals received, including 1 lengthy letter of objection and
another purporting to represent the views of approximately 50 local residents
following a meeting held at the Douglas Bader Centre. The grounds of objection
raised in these letters are as follows:1. No need for prison in the area.
2. Contradicts Government guidelines for location of prisons near to families of
potential inmates.
3. Not in interests of society as a whole.
4. Use of H blocks proven inappropriate.
5. Problems of security.
6. No strategic case made for a prison in Norfolk.
7. Likelihood of extension.
8. 'Thin end of the wedge'.
9. Public Inquiry needed to consider all issues.
10. Opportunity elsewhere on airbase site to build a fit for purpose prison away from
houses and school which would reduce light pollution, risk/fear of crime, traffic
problems.
11. Surrounding road network unfit to cater for traffic.
12. Hautbois Road unsuitable for prison traffic.
13. New road link to Scottow Road required.
14. Junction of Hautbois Road/Scottow Road needs improvement.
15. Loss of trees.
16. Too close to residential properties creating disturbance, noise, disruption, light
pollution.
17. Lack of local facilities for visitors.
18. Unacceptable visual impact from nearby properties and wider countryside.
19. Inappropriate relationship with Douglas Bader Centre.
CONSULTATIONS
Broadland District Council - Awaiting comments.
Buxton with Lamas Parish Council - Support, with the following to be taken into
consideration:1. Prison accommodation is restricted to this application, and no further buildings of
this type are considered on the whole site.
2. The Douglas Bader school is protected as far as possible.
3. The Planning Authority ensures full replacement planting takes place to mitigate
the loss of trees.
4. The access road is constructed before the prisoners are housed.
5. The sewage system is adequate for the development and no sewage is
discharged into the existing local system in Lamas.
Coltishall Parish Council - No objection, but raises the following concerns:1. The exit from the prison, with just advisory highway signs to turn right and join the
B1150. Once people know that the Hautbois Road is a considerably shorter route
and with the high fuel costs, they will use this as an exit route causing increased
traffic on a minor road.
2. The number of trees being felled. Perhaps a community wooded area nearby
dedicated to the memory of service personnel would be appropriate.
3. The close proximity of the education block to the Douglas Bader school, even with
frosted windows is inappropriate and should be relocated.
4. The name of the prison should not have any relation to Coltishall.
5. The support of prisoners whose families are outside the local area is vital for their
eventual increase.
Development Control Committee (East)
26
30 June 2008
Swanton Abbott Parish Council - No objection, other than the removal of trees that
are memorials.
Skeyton Parish Council - Objects for the following reasons:1. Inappropriate site for a prison. There is no local demand and the road and rail links
are totally inadequate. All evidence points to the need for prisons to be sited near the
families of inmates, to assist in their rehabilitation. The prison at Coltishall
immediately removes a significant part of its raison d'etre'.
2. To cut down the 154 trees subject to a Tree Preservation Order is an act of
vandalism of the highest order. It would completely destroy the credibility of Tree
Preservation Orders. The Arboriculture report is a sham. There is no mention of their
contribution to biodiversity.
3. 18% of the proposals involve new build. National planning guidance and the Local
Development Plan restrain new development in the countryside.
4. The application contains no environmental assessment of the site.
5. There is a lack of provision of renewable energy. The application does not meet
the targets. Sustainability is also poor.
6. The Douglas Bader school unavoidably overlooks the site. This is entirely
inappropriate. The application makes several attempts to mitigate this but they
remain unsatisfactory. Calling the neighbouring buildings an education centre is not
the answer.
7. Application shows little consideration for the fact that this is a heritage site. It was
the last operational Battle of Britain RAF station - 'the Nation's finest hour'.
8. The application offers no Section 106 Agreement in order to mitigate the
inconvenience and inevitable planning blight which will affect the neighbouring
communities.
Overview - Councillors totally support the Minister of Justice in its urgent need to
increase the prison accommodation. However this urgency is being used to support a
completely flawed application. Internal reports within the Justice Ministry, obtained
under the Freedom of Information Act, indicate that H-blocks are not suitable for
managing prisoners. RAF Coltishall would undoubtedly make a bad prison. It is
important for the sake of everyone, both prisoners and the community that NNDC do
not feel pressured to making an equally bad decision.
Sloley Parish Council - Supports. Comments that it would welcome an assurance
that the prison will remain as a category C (or less) and not be upgraded, and
information regarding the remainder of the site's future would be appreciated.
Tunstead Parish Council - No objection.
Worstead Parish Council - Support.
Westwick Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Comments that the
loss of 154 trees protected by a TPO is significant and will remove a large area of the
historic landscape on the site that the Order was intended to preserve.
Has major reservations regarding the arboricultural statement submitted with the
application which de-values the trees on the site and does not take into consideration
the historic landscape value.
Suggests that the applicants should show real commitment not only to replace the
trees but suggests ways in which it can mitigate the loss of the historic and
commemorative landscape value. No new landscaping linked to the development
itself should be used to replace the loss of trees.
Development Control Committee (East)
27
30 June 2008
A detailed landscaping plan will be required specifying the density and species mix of
trees and shrubs.
Environmental Health - Requests further details of proposed foul sewage and lighting
prior to making final comments. Confirms that the noise report covers all areas of
concern and recommends the imposition of conditions with regard to maximum noise
levels, delivery hours, staff parking areas to be used during early morning hours and
details of any kitchen extract systems.
Planning Policy Manager - Has considered the application in terms of Policy EN6
(Sustainable Construction and Energy Sufficiency) of the Council's Core Strategy
submission document. Confirms that the techniques referred to in the accompanying
Sustainability Report comply with the policy requirements in terms of:1. Minimising energy consumption (new and existing buildings will achieve BREEAM
ratings of 'excellent' and 'good' respectively; dedicated shuttle bus for visitors and
framework travel plan).
2. Minimise resource consumption (re-use of existing buildings; rainwater harvesting;
waste management unit).
3. Adaptation to future climate change (rainwater harvesting).
Comments however that the application does not presently comply in terms of
providing 10% of the development's energy requirement to be met by renewable
energy. Appreciates that there are unique constraints associated with providing
certain forms of renewable energy technology. Is satisfied that exploring the
possibility of a wind turbine is the only viable solution of all this development.
Strategic Director (Communities) - Awaiting comments.
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.
Further consideration of this issue will be given at the meeting.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
Further consideration to this issue will be given at the meeting.
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).
North Norfolk Local Plan - (Adopted 2 April 1998 - saved policies):
Policy 5: The Countryside (prevents general development in the countryside with
specific exceptions).
Policy 16: Pollution Control (aims to protect public amenity and natural habitats
against potentially polluting developments) (prevents sensitive development near to
existing polluting environments).
Policy 17: Control of Noise (aims to protect public amenity from noise generating
developments) (prevents sensitive developments near to noisy environments).
Policy 18: Light Pollution (aims to prevent insensitive lighting schemes to protect
residents, traffic safety and environment).
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).
Development Control Committee (East)
28
30 June 2008
Policy 74: Non-Conforming Uses (specifies criteria for employment uses outside of
designated employment areas in terms of residential amenities, highway and
environmental impacts).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 6: Sustainable construction and energy efficiency (specifies sustainability
and energy efficiency requirements for new developments).
Policy EC 2: The re-use of buildings in the Countryside (specifies criteria for
converting buildings for non-residential purposes).
Policy EC 4: Redundant defence establishments (specifies criteria for development at
redundant defence establishments).
Policy CT 5: The transport impact of new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. National need for prison places.
2. Suitability of site as prison.
3. Economic impacts.
4. Traffic impacts/highway safety.
5. Loss of trees.
6. Impacts upon nearby residential properties and education facility.
APPRAISAL
Background
This report follows the Members' site visit at former RAF Coltishall on 29 May 2008.
Previously on 1 May certain Members and Officers visited Lindholm Prison near
Doncaster at the invitation of the Ministry of Justice. Lindholm is a Category C prison
which was established on a former RAF base some 20 years ago.
The main part of the application site lies within North Norfolk’s administrative area.
However the access route proposed to serve the development from Hautbois Road
lies within Broadland District. Accordingly duplicate planning applications were
submitted to both Councils. Subsequently Broadland District Council at its Council
meeting on 20 May 2008 resolved to exercise its powers under Section 101(1)(b) of
the Local Government Act 1972 to delegate determination of the planning application
to North Norfolk District Council. Before resolving to do so, Broadland District Council
received Counsel's advice, a copy of which has been provided to this Council.
This report is being presented at a relatively early stage; hence not all consultation
responses have been received at the time of its preparation. This potentially allows a
further opportunity for the Committee to reach a decision on the application within the
13-week determination period.
Prison need
The background to this proposed development arises from an urgent identified need
for more prison places nationally as outlined in submissions accompanying the
application (Appendix 5). Certain of the representations received have not disputed
this need as such, but have challenged the Government's decision to seek to
address it by proposing a new prison in rural Norfolk. The role of this Council as
Local Planning Authority is not to make judgements upon the Government’s
locational strategy for prisons but to determine the application on land use planning
issues relating to this specific site.
Development Control Committee (East)
29
30 June 2008
Land Use Policy
In terms of current land use policy the whole of the former technical area of the
airbase, together with the adjacent housing estate, lies within the Countryside policy
area in the adopted Local Plan. The Core Strategy proposes a similar designation.
Clearly, however, this is not open countryside where normally issues relating to
landscape impact would be paramount. The site comprises previously developed
(brownfield) land of which both local and national planning policies seek to
encourage appropriate forms of redevelopment.
Local Plan Policy 29 allows for the re-use and adaptation of buildings in the
countryside, although in this case a significant amount of new buildings is proposed.
The Core Strategy includes a similar policy although more pertinent to this
application also includes a specific policy on redundant defence establishments.
Policy EC4 allows for proposals involving the re-use of existing or development of
replacement buildings within the defined 'technical areas' of such establishments,
provided that there is no overall increase in gross floor space. Details provided with
the application illustrate that new buildings proposed account for 2,853sq.m of
floorspace, but this is offset by the demolition of 2,322sq.m floorspace within the
application site and a further 705sq.m elsewhere within the former 'technical' area.
Economic Impact
The Statement of Economic Benefits submitted with the application includes a study
commissioned by the NOMS on the economic impact of prisons in England and
Wales. Case studies of four prisons were undertaken. The conclusions of the study
are attached in Appendix 5.
In the case of this proposal it is stated that the prison would provide 380 full time and
60 part time jobs of which it is estimated that around 200 would be taken by local
residents. An additional 35 full time jobs would be supported through the expenditure
of those employed at or visiting the prison, and by goods and services purchased by
the prison. In total it is estimated that the prison would inject £7.2 million per annum
into the local economy. This would help to offset the loss experienced following the
closure of the airbase.
The comments of the Council's Economic Development Manager are awaited on the
proposal and these stated benefits.
Transport and access
As referred to above, vehicular access to the proposed prison would be via an
existing entrance onto Hautbois Road. This would enable traffic serving the prison to
avoid passing through adjoining residential areas, apart from a number of properties
on the eastern side of Hautbois Road.
The submitted Transport Assessment concludes that there are considered to be no
overriding highway capacity or access issues relating to the proposal to prevent the
granting of planning permission. The assessment demonstrates that predicted traffic
levels associated with the prison would be far below those which were present when
the base was operational (850 two-way trips compared with 2,800 in 2005).
The Transport Assessment recommends a number of mitigation measures in order to
improve pedestrian access to the site; the provision of safe and secure cycle parking
facilities on site; discussion with the local bus service operator to review the position
of bus stops; consideration of a shuttle bus service to Norwich bus and railway
stations at peak hours; and as an essential measure, new highway signage to route
traffic along the most suitable routes to and from the site (i.e. to and from the B1150).
Development Control Committee (East)
30
30 June 2008
The comments of the Highway Authority are still awaited.
Impact on trees
As a matter of detail perhaps the most controversial and emotive aspect of the
proposal is the removal of 154 trees within the secure prison area and within the
7,5m perimeter zone outside the security fence. Security reasons dictate this
requirement and clearly it is not an issue open to negotiation.
All of these trees and others within the base are protected by a Tree Preservation
Order (TPO) served in 2006. The grant of planning permission as currently proposed
would however override the Order. The TPO is a 'group order' served to protect the
historic landscape value of the tree planting scheme.
As referred to above the Council’s Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager
does not consider that the submitted Arboricultural Statement properly addresses the
value of these trees and does not consider that the screen landscaping zones
proposed around the boundaries of the site are sufficient in themselves to mitigate
against the loss of this historic landscape.
It is understood that NOMS are considering other areas within and around the site
where replacement planting could take place to compensate for this loss. This is one
of several issues covered in the recent letter submitted on behalf of the applicants
(Appendix 5).
Impacts on local amenity
The surrounding built up area to the application site includes some 337 former RAF
personnel houses which are currently being sold on the open market. There is no
doubt that there would be a local 'awareness' of the prison in such close proximity
and residents' attitudes towards this are likely to vary. In their various submissions
the applicants have attempted to consider the more tangible impacts of the proposal
and how these could be mitigated. As reported above traffic would skirt the main
residential area rather than pass through it.
In terms of visual impact, the areas of the site beyond the main security fence would
retain much of their present appearance apart from becoming active once more and
there being further landscaping. Any public views of the secure area would be
dominated by the outer 5.2m high security fence.
Those buildings closest to the secure area are private houses to the north on Barton
Road and the Douglas Bader Centre on Filby Road which provides specialist
teaching for children. Views from the houses on Barton Road would be softened by
well established existing, and proposed, trees and planting. Only two dwellings would
have a direct aspect towards the security fence and the relationship is considered
acceptable.
At the site visit Members viewed the site from the Douglas Bader Centre and will
have appreciated the proximity (particularly from the rear playground) of the
proposed security fence and a wing of the two-storey 'H' Education and Learning
block. It is proposed to provide a planting screen between the rear boundary of the
centre and the security fence. It is also proposed to install fixed/obscure glazed
windows to the first floor of the building to avoid any overlooking. Nevertheless there
would remain a perception of overlooking towards what is a sensitive neighbouring
facility and the applicants have been requested to reconsider this issue. (It should be
noted that the use of this 'H' block was initially proposed for inmate accommodation,
but was altered following the pre-application public consultation.)
Development Control Committee (East)
31
30 June 2008
Security lighting is another aspect which will be evident from outside the site. The
submitted Electrical Statement provides data regarding light spillage. This
demonstrates that the proposed lighting would vary in intensity from 48/49 lux on the
inside of the perimeter fence to 7.1 lux within 5m of its outside and 0.1 lux within
20m. (A full noon on a cloudless night reaches approximately 2 lux and street lighting
is between 5 and 10 lux.) All lighting would be designed to cast its beam downwards.
Subject to additional technical data the Environmental Health Officer has raised no
real concerns regarding this aspect.
The submitted Noise Report concludes that neither operational nor traffic noise from
the site would have significant impact on the amenity of nearby residents. The
Environmental Health Officer has concurred with this view subject to conditions
referred to above. Those Members who visited HMP Lindholm will have gained an
impression on the level of noise generated outside the secure area by a similar type
of prison.
Sustainability Issues
The application is accompanied by a Sustainability Statement and a Renewable
Energy and Energy Conservation Report. The comments of the Planning Policy
Manager (above) refers to and concurs with the measures being proposed as part of
the development. The outstanding issue relates to the emerging Core Strategy
requirement to provide 10% renewable energy. Because of the particular constraints
(physical and security related) associated with a prison the only possible option to
provide this would be the installation of a wind turbine. Practically this could not be
within the area of the application site. Furthermore such a proposal would need to be
the subject of technical assessment as well as separate planning permission. The
applicants have nevertheless indicated a willingness to pursue this option and are
understood to be preparing an undertaking subject to Section 106 of the Town and
Country Planning Act in respect of it.
Conclusions
As stated above, this report is being presented to Members at a relatively early stage
and because certain key consultation responses are yet to be received. The
applicants have recently made further submissions (Appendix 5), which Officers are
addressing. No recommendation is therefore being made at this stage. However in
principle it is considered that the site represents a potentially acceptable location for
this prison proposal subject to issues relating to highways, trees, local amenity and
renewable energy measures being adequately addressed.
RECOMMENDATION:Members will be updated orally at the meeting.
9.
SOUTHREPPS - 20080556 - Erection of four two-storey dwellings; Honeysuckle
Cottage Long Lane for Mr M Hardingham
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :28 May 2008
Case Officer :Mrs T Armitage
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Residential
Conservation Area
Development Control Committee (East)
32
30 June 2008
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20071811 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Erection of three dwellings
Withdrawn, 14 Jan 2008
THE APPLICATION
Erection of four two-storey dwellings. One point of access is proposed from Long
Lane. A pair of semi-detached properties is shown fronting Long Lane with two
detached dwellings to the rear.
Amended plans submitted indicating elevational changes and re-siting of the pair of
semis and the detached dwelling to the rear.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Strongly object:1. Overdevelopment.
2. Lack of garden space.
3. Scale and design would fail to enhance the character of the village.
4. Access. Long lane is a narrow 'quiet lane'.
5. Light pollution.
6. Building line.
REPRESENTATIONS
Six letters of objection received:1. Loss of privacy.
2. Overshadowing.
3. Loss of trees and hedgerow.
4. Access.
5. Increase in traffic.
6. Parking.
One letter of support:
1. Visual enhancement.
2. Brownfield site.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - No objection subject to conditions.
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.
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.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
Development Control Committee (East)
33
30 June 2008
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 42: Development in Conservation Areas (developments should preserve or
enhance character).
Policy 147: New Accesses (developments which would endanger highway safety not
permitted).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Design and form of development.
2. Impact on character and appearance of Conservation Area.
3. Impact on adjacent residents.
4. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
This application was deferred at the last meeting for a site visit.
The application site (0.15ha) forms part of land associated with The Cottage, a
detached residential property with an adjoining barn. The site is L-shaped with a
frontage onto Long Lane. The site lies within the settlement boundary of Southrepps,
a Selected Small Village. 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 also lies
within the village Conservation Area and within the AONB designation (which
includes the whole of Southrepps).
The proposed four dwellings represent a density equivalent to 26 dwellings/ha. The
scheme seeks best use of the depth of the site (47m) by proposing both frontage
development (a pair of semi-detached properties) and two detached dwellings to the
rear. All four properties would be served by a new single point of access onto Long
Lane and two parking spaces have been indicated for each property (four in an open
'cart shed' garage). The Highway Authority has raised no objection to the application.
The proposed pair of semi-detached properties facing Long Lane is indicated in line
with The Cottage, but forward of the adjacent dwellings to the south. In terms of
appearance, the pair of semi-detached properties would have a traditional vernacular
cottage-style design and would enhance the appearance and character of the street
scene.
The two properties proposed to the rear would be sited in a courtyard-type
arrangement reflecting the character of The Cottage and adjacent barn. Both
properties would have a cottage appearance and traditional building materials are
proposed.
All four properties have on site parking and access to private amenity space.
Amended plans indicate private garden lengths consistent with Design Guide
recommendations ranging in depth from a minimum 9m to 17m. Given the siting of
the proposed properties and the relative location of adjacent properties, it is
considered that the development would not result in any adverse impact on amenity
levels.
Development Control Committee (East)
34
30 June 2008
The amended scheme is considered compliant with relevant policies of the
Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:Approval subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions, including
landscaping, access and restricted permitted development rights.
10
SWANTON ABBOTT - 20080783 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; land
adjacent The Conifers Cross Road for Mr R G J Wallace
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :14 Jul 2008
Case Officer :Mrs T Armitage
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
Selected Small Village
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20080124 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of single-storey dwelling
Refused, 13 Mar 2008
THE APPLICATION
Erection of a single-storey dwelling.
Supplementary information has been submitted regarding foul sewage disposal.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Planning and Building Control following previous refusal by
the Committee of a similar proposal.
PARISH COUNCIL
Awaiting comments.
REPRESENTATIONS
Two letters of objection received (summarised):1. Living rooms overlooking adjacent properties.
2. Intrusive.
3. Detrimental to family life.
4. Overdevelopment/cramming of village.
5. Drainage.
6. Highway safety.
7. Loss of trees.
A supporting letter from the applicant's agent is attached as Appendix 6.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - Awaiting comments.
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.
Development Control Committee (East)
35
30 June 2008
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.
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) (development should be compatible with character).
Policy 6: Residential Areas (areas primarily for residential purposes).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required
for new development).
Policy 147: New Accesses (developments which would endanger highway safety not
permitted).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development.
2. Siting and design.
3. Highway safety.
4. Drainage.
APPRAISAL
This application is identical to an earlier application (20080124) refused by the
Committee on 13 March 2006.
The application site comprises part of the garden area to the side and rear of
'Conifers', a single-storey dwelling. The property lies within the settlement boundary
of Swanton Abbott, identified as a selected village in the North Norfolk Local Plan. In
such locations the principle of small scale development is acceptable subject to
proposals enhancing the character of the village and complying with more detailed
assessment criteria.
The proposed dwelling would be situated to the rear of the existing bungalow
accessed via an existing driveway which would be shared by both properties. The
driveway is indicated as being a minimum of 2.8m from the boundary with the
adjacent property 'Corofin', a two-storey house. Vehicles associated with the
proposed dwelling would pass between the 'Conifers' and 'Corofin', but given the
spacing and the opportunity for landscaping it is not considered that there would be
any significant detriment to the amenities of either dwelling.
The proposed dwelling would be single-storey and comparable in scale to the
existing bungalow. This part of the village is characterised by a mix of property types
and as such in this respect the proposal would not appear out of place. Development
along Cross Road predominantly has a road frontage and in this instance the
proposed dwelling would be set back to the rear of the property behind the
established building line. However, this is a substantial garden plot and the proposed
dwelling would not detract from the character of the area.
The garden boundaries are currently dominated by a mix of close-board fencing and
shrub planting. The proposed dwelling has been designed with the proximity of these
boundaries in mind with windows predominantly orientated to the west with outlook
across the proposed private garden to the property. Given this and the single-storey
scale of the property issues of loss of privacy/overlooking would be largely mitigated.
Both the existing property and the proposed dwelling meet Design Guide standards
in relation to garden spaces and parking.
Development Control Committee (East)
36
30 June 2008
Cross Road is a narrow village lane with limited visibility where it meets The Street
and Long Common Lane. The Highway Authority has previously expressed concerns
over a more comprehensive redevelopment of this site given these constraints.
However, on the basis of the proposed scale of this application for one dwelling the
Authority in its response to the previous application 20080124) stated that a refusal
on highway safety grounds would be difficult to sustain.
Information has been submitted regarding foul sewage disposal which would be via a
package treatment plant, with discharge to a positive drainage system. The
Environment Agency has issued a Consent to Discharge in respect of the proposal.
On the basis of the above it is considered the proposal complies with the relevant
policies of the Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to approve, subject to expiry of the site notice (and no new
grounds of objection being received) and subject to conditions relating to
materials, landscaping, restricted permitted development rights and access.
11.
THORPE MARKET - 20080796 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; land at Sandpit
Lane for Mr and Mrs A A Wayte
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :15 Jul 2008
Case Officer :Miss C Ketteringham
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
Selected Small Village
Conservation Area
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
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
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
20070796 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of two-storey dwelling
Refused, 09 Jul 2007
Development Control Committee (East)
37
30 June 2008
20071163 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of two-storey dwelling
Withdrawn, 01 Aug 2007
20080049 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of two-storey dwelling
Approved, 13 May 2008
THE APPLICATION
Erection of a two-bedroom house with attached car port (as amended).
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Planning and Building Control in view of Committee's
decision in the light of highway objections received in respect of similar development
on an adjoining site.
PARISH COUNCIL
No objection.
REPRESENTATIONS
Three letters of representation objections on grounds of:1. Overlooking.
2. Poor condition of Sandy Lane.
3. Highway safety.
4. Overdevelopment.
5. Poor foul drainage in Thorpe Market.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - Awaiting comments.
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.
Further consideration of this issue will be given at the meeting.
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) (development should be compatible with character).
Policy 6: Residential Areas (areas primarily for residential purposes).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required
for new development).
Policy 42: Development in Conservation Areas (developments should preserve or
enhance character).
Policy 147: New Accesses (developments which would endanger highway safety not
permitted).
Policy 153: Car Parking Standards (specifies parking requirements for different use
classes within different Local Plan policy areas).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of the development.
2. Conservation Area impact.
3. Highway safety.
Development Control Committee (East)
38
30 June 2008
APPRAISAL
The application site lies within the village development boundary, and the Thorpe
Market Conservation Area. In this area new houses may be permitted providing they
do not adversely affect residential amenities or highway safety, and the development
preserves or enhances the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
The site is formed from the sub-division of a disused cottage garden. Although the
plot is relatively narrow, the proposal for a small two bedroom cottage, with a more
than adequate rear garden of 13m, is not excessive. The minimal profile of the roof
would mitigate against any negative impact upon the cottages to the east. The
cottage style design combined with the traditional flint construction is considered to
represent an enhancement to the area.
The Committee will be aware of the adjacent site that was granted permission
(20080049) earlier this year despite a strong objection from the Highway Authority
relating to the poor visibility of the junction of Sandy Lane with Cromer Road.
The proposal provides two parking spaces one in the car port with another in the
driveway. There is inadequate room for an on-site turning area, but this is not
considered to be an essential requirement in this location. If approved, it would be
prudent to impose a condition to retain the road boundary side of the car port open,
to ensure maximum visibility for the access.
In conclusion, it is considered that the proposed development would accord with
Development Plan policy subject to the views of the Highway Authority.
RECOMMENDATION:To be reported following receipt of comments from the Highway Authority.
12.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
BACTON - 20080719 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 2 St. Andrews
Close for Mr N Lee
(Full Planning Permission)
COLBY - 20080544 - Erection of single-storey front extension, two-storey side
extension and alterations to bay extension; Grange House Long Lane for Ms R
Crampton and Mr E Lancaster
(Full Planning Permission)
FELMINGHAM - 20080651 - Erection of two-storey side extension and front
porch; 2 Ruggs Hall Cottage Bradmoor Road for Mr and Mrs Herring
(Full Planning Permission)
HANWORTH - 20080624 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; The
Homestead The Common for Drs Fleming
(Full Planning Permission)
HAPPISBURGH - 20080657 - Erection of front extension; 3 Ships View
Archibald Road Walcott for Mr R Teece
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (East)
39
30 June 2008
HICKLING - 20080689 - Construction of pitched roof over entrance lobby and
dormer window to facilitate conversion of roofspace to studio; Timber Gables
Hill Common for Mr S Mann
(Full Planning Permission)
HORNING - 20080643 - Erection of link extension and conversion of garage to
provide annexe; The Focsle Mill Loke for Mr and Mrs Muir
(Full Planning Permission)
HORNING - 20080655 - Erection of single-storey front extension and
replacement side and rear extensions; 27 The Avenue for Mr P Bowman
(Full Planning Permission)
HOVETON - 20080549 - Installation of telecommunications antennae; Arqiva
Transmitting Station Belaugh Road for Arqiva
(Full Planning Permission)
HOVETON - 20080563 - Erection of replacement garage with first floor
accommodation and single-storey link extension; Langley Cottage Horning
Road for Mr J Simpkins
(Full Planning Permission)
HOVETON - 20080615 - Demolition of building; Hoveton Old Hall Stone Lane
Ashmanhaugh for Mr M Woodfine
(Alteration to Listed Building)
HOVETON - 20080661 - Display of non-illuminated projecting sign; Roys of
Wroxham Stalham Road for Norwich & Peterborough Building Society
(Non-illuminated Advertisement)
MUNDESLEY - 20080601 - Installation of roof window; 19 High Street for Mrs S
Rendle
(Full Planning Permission)
NORTH WALSHAM - 20080531 - Construction of four second-floor flats and
single-storey store; 4 St Nicholas Court Vicarage Street for P and N
Developments Limited
(Full Planning Permission)
NORTH WALSHAM - 20080562 - Erection of single-storey rear extension and
dormer windows to facilitate conversion of roofspace to habitable
accommodation; 9 Lime Tree Road for Mr B O'Toole
(Full Planning Permission)
NORTH WALSHAM - 20080650 - Removal of internal wall; The Smith and
Pinching Group 29-30 Market Place for The Smith and Pinching Group
(Alteration to Listed Building)
NORTH WALSHAM - 20080674 - Erection of rear conservatory; 29 Bradfield
Road for Mr Goodwin
(Full Planning Permission)
OVERSTRAND - 20080557 - Retention of railings at a reduced height of 60cm
and retention of gates; 5 Pauls Lane for Mr K P Rudman
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (East)
40
30 June 2008
OVERSTRAND - 20080604 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; adjacent 19 High
Street for Mr and Mrs J Laidlow
(Full Planning Permission)
POTTER HEIGHAM - 20080688 - Erection of conservatory/porch and detached
garage; adjacent Cringles Station Road for Mr M Monk
(Full Planning Permission)
ROUGHTON - 20080625 - Erection of chimney and first floor balcony;
Ridgeview Barn Church Loke for Mr J B Votier
(Full Planning Permission)
RUNTON - 20080523 - Change of use from school/residential to school; St.
Andrews Lower Common East Runton for Mr K M Monaghan and Ms G M Baker
(Full Planning Permission)
RUNTON - 20080586 - Retention of bike shed and replacement garage; Timneys
126 Cromer Road West Runton for Mr P Rose
(Full Planning Permission)
SOUTHREPPS - 20080361 - Extension and conversion of barn to provide
ancillary residential accommodation; Hill House Pit Street for Mr and Mrs R
Newall
(Full Planning Permission)
SOUTHREPPS - 20080573 - Erection of side conservatory; Five Acres Warren
Road for Mr and Mrs Rayner
(Full Planning Permission)
SOUTHREPPS - 20080585 - Erection of replacement rear extension; 11 High
Street for Mr and Mrs J Richardson
(Full Planning Permission)
SOUTHREPPS - 20080642 - Retention of residential caravan; Greenways
Thorpe Road for Southrepps Development Limited
(Full Planning Permission)
SUFFIELD - 20080634 - Erection of agricultural storage building; Hall Farm
Rectory Road for Hall Farm Suffield Limited
(Full Planning Permission)
SWAFIELD - 20080594 - Change of use of barn to one unit of holiday
accommodation and stables to garage/store; Beeches Farm Knapton Road for
R C and L V Catling
(Full Planning Permission)
THORPE MARKET - 20080316 - Conversion of agricultural buildings to twelve
units of holiday accommodation; Hall Farm Barns Station Road for Norfolk
County Council
(Full Planning Permission)
TRUNCH - 20080379 - Erection of single-storey dwelling and garage; Fleet
Cottage Brewery Road for Mr Dowling
(Planning Permission; Reserved Matters)
Development Control Committee (East)
41
30 June 2008
TRUNCH - 20080609 - Up-grading of dwelling including re-alignment of gable
wall; Tudor Cottage Front Street for Mr and Mrs P Berkeley
(Full Planning Permission)
TRUNCH - 20080610 - Reconstruction of gable end wall, installation of
replacement windows and removal of paint finishes to walls; Tudor Cottage
Front Street for Mr and Mrs P Berkeley
(Alteration to Listed Building)
TUNSTEAD - 20080629 - Erection of two-storey side extension, rear
conservatory and front porch; Homefield Anchor Street for Mr G Burrows and
Miss A Goodenough
(Full Planning Permission)
WORSTEAD - 20080605 - Construction of dormer windows; The Ollands
Swanns Yard for Mrs S Smith
(Full Planning Permission)
13.
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
BACTON - 20080641 - Erection of four two-storey dwellings; Holme Cottage
Coast Road for Mr A Shepherd
(Outline Planning Permission)
RUNTON - 20080478 - Demolition of dwelling and erection of three singlestorey dwellings and garages; Newlyn Broomhill East Runton for Mrs M Durier
(Outline Planning Permission)
RUNTON - 20080587 - Retention of caravan for personal storage and continued
use of agricultural land as garden; Timneys 126 Cromer Road West Runton for
Mr P Rose
(Full Planning Permission)
APPEALS SECTION
14.
NEW APPEALS
MUNDESLEY - 20071338 - Demolition of single-storey dwelling and stables and
erection of eight two-storey dwellings; 17 Marina Road for Mrs P Smith
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS
WORSTEAD - 20080029 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; land rear of 30 and
32 Honing Row for Worstead Farms Limited
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS
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 01 Jul 2008
Development Control Committee (East)
42
30 June 2008
NORTH WALSHAM (WEST WARD) - 20071136 - Residential development; land
at former Marricks Wire Ropes Cromer Road for Norfolk Homes Limited
PUBLIC INQUIRY 01 Jul 2008
SWANTON ABBOTT - 20070243 - Erection of 4 terraced dwellings; land
adjacent former Weavers Arms Aylsham Road for Horning Properties
INFORMAL HEARING 24 Jun 2008
SWANTON ABBOTT - 20071469 - Erection of three detached houses; land
adjacent to Ex Weavers Arms Aylsham Road for Horning Properties
INFORMAL HEARING 24 Jun 2008
16.
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
BACTON - 20071293 - Erection of two single-storey dwellings; land at Sea Holly
Kimberley Road for Mr S Norman
SITE VISIT :- 23 Jun 2008
CROMER (SUFFIELD PARK WARD) - 20071320 - Removal of condition 2 of
planning permission reference 20050527; Fletcher Hospital Roughton Road for
Mr S A Sheikh
MUNDESLEY - 20071149 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; land at 20
Beckmeadow Way for Mr and Mrs D Spinks
MUNDESLEY - 20071272 - Erection of two single-storey dwellings; 39-41
Cromer Road for Mr and Mrs Briggs/Mr and Mrs Roberts
NORTH WALSHAM (EAST WARD) - 20071806 - Erection of attached two-storey
dwelling; 1 Woodbine Close for Miss J Dyble
OVERSTRAND - 20071879 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; land at 3 Cromer
Road for Mr and Mr P Eden
SITE VISIT :- 03 Jun 2008
RUNTON (EAST WARD) - 20071542 - Erection of rear dormer window;
Inglewood Bungalow High Street for Mr and Mrs R Brownsell
SUFFIELD - 01/097/DEV6/07/001 - Cooks Farm Rectory Road for D and M
Hickling Properties Ltd
SUFFIELD - 20071381 - Conversion of barns to six units of holiday
accommodation; Cooks Farm Rectory Road for D and M Hickling Properties
Limited
Development Control Committee (East)
43
30 June 2008
17.
APPEAL DECISIONS
KNAPTON - 20071727 - Erection of two single-storey dwellings; The Spinney
Mundesley Road for Mr and Mrs Merrill
APPEAL DECISION :- DISMISSED
MUNDESLEY - 01/071/DEV6/07/005 - Authorised enforcement action for
removal of unauthorised flue; 32 High Street for Halit Kol
APPEAL DECISION :- DISMISSED
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
APPEAL DECISION :- DISMISSED
OVERSTRAND - 20071678 - Erection of single-storey dwelling and garage;
Beckhythe Cottage 3 High Street for Mr and Mrs Aylward
APPEAL DECISION :- DISMISSED
SUFFIELD - 01/097/DEV6/07/001-1 - Barn conversions not being carried out in
accordance with plans; Cooks Farm Rectory Road for D and M Hickling
Properties Ltd
APPEAL DECISION :- WITHDRAWN
SUFFIELD - 20071627 - Variations to approved scheme to include new
vehicular access, erection of walls and installation of three LPG vessels with
security fence; Cooks Farm Rectory Road Suffield for D and M Hickling
Properties Ltd
APPEAL DECISION :- WITHDRAWN
Development Control Committee (East)
44
30 June 2008