OFFICERS’ REPORTS TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (WEST) – 12 NOVEMBER 2009
Each report for decision on this Agenda shows the Officer responsible, the recommendation
of the Head of Planning and Building Control and in the case of private business the
paragraph(s) of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 under which it is
considered exempt. None of the reports have financial, legal or policy implications save
where indicated.
PUBLIC BUSINESS – ITEMS FOR DECISION
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Note :- Recommendations for approval include a standard time limit condition as Condition
No.1, unless otherwise stated.
1.
BODHAM - 20090920 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; land off Rectory Road
Lower Bodham for Mr Shrive
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :10 Nov 2009
Case Officer :Mr G Linder
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside Policy Area
THE APPLICATION
Seeks the demolition of a barn in a ruinous condition, which the application suggests
has a floor area of 84sq.m, and the erection of a four bedroom dwelling having a total
floor area of approximately 265sq.m.
The proposed dwelling would be split into two linear elements, the northern half
facing Rectory Lane being two-storey of brick and flint at ground floor with vertically
clad black timber boarding to the upper floor under a reclaimed red Norfolk clay
pantile roof. The southern section of the building would be of single-storey,
constructed of brick and flint finished with a flat roof.
The entrance to the site would be via the existing field access off Pound Lane, a
single track unadopted road leading to Bodham fishing lakes, with parking and
turning within the site for two vehicles.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Perry-Warnes having regard to the following planning
issues:
The fact that the building was originally two dwellings and the scheme as proposed
would tidy up the site.
PARISH COUNCIL
Strongly object on the grounds that it is not an appropriate form of development for
the area and is a breach of planning policy
REPRESENTATIONS
Two letters of objection have been received from local residents which raise the
following concerns (summarised):
1. Development would be contrary to the North Norfolk Core Strategy.
2. Building is not capable or suitable for conversion to residential.
Development Control Committee (West)
1
12 November 2009
3. Outside village boundary.
4. No utility services to site.
5. Access onto blind corner.
6. Not on a site of former residence.
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Objects to the
application on the basis that the proposal would introduce a new urban feature into
the rural agricultural landscape, even if reclaimed materials of brick and flint are
used. The existing barn ruins blend into the landscape and add to the sense of
character and history of the landscape and should be left to decay naturally.
Residential development on this piece of land would change it from a rural context to
a residential/leisure use which would have a negative effect on the landscape
character as identified in the North Norfolk Landscape Character Assessment, and
would therefore be contrary to Policy EN 2 and also Policy SS 2 of the North Norfolk
Core Strategy.
County Council (Highways) - Strongly recommend refusal of the application as the
unadopted Rectory Road is considered to be inadequate to serve an additional
dwelling by reason of its substandard construction, lack of pedestrian facilities and
primarily the restricted visibility at the adjacent junction with the Kelling Road. As a
result the proposal would cause danger and inconvenience to user of the adjoining
public highway.
Sustainability Co-ordinator - No objection subject to the imposition of a condition.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8 : The right to respect for private and family life, and
Article 1 of The First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
It is considered that refusal of this application as recommended may have an impact
on the individual Human Rights of the applicant. However, having considered the
likely impact and the general interest of the public, refusal of the application is
considered to be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
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 EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
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. Principle of development in Countryside location.
2. Highway safety.
Development Control Committee (West)
2
12 November 2009
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the Countryside policy area as defined by the Core Strategy
where policies SS 1, SS 2 and EN 2 are applicable.
Policy SS 1 seeks to direct the majority of new development to defined settlements
within the District, whereas in the Countryside development will be restricted to
particular types which support the rural economy, meets affordable housing needs
and provide renewable energy. Policy SS 2 lists development which it is considered
requires a rural location, including agriculture and forestry. In addition Policy EN 2
requires that development proposals demonstrate that their location, scale, design
and materials protect, conserve and where possible enhance the special qualities
and local distinctiveness of the area. Also relevant is saved North Norfolk Local Plan
Policy 29 which outlines instances where the conversion of buildings in the
Countryside to an alternative use will be permitted. This includes the conversion of
buildings to residential use where the building is adjacent to a settlement boundary.
In addition it also requires that a building is soundly built and suitable for the
proposed use without complete or substantial rebuilding and/or extension.
The site is located in open countryside some 1km south of the main village of
Bodham and forms part of a large arable field bounded by mature hedgerows. At the
present time all that remains of what historic maps suggest was a barn, is a modern
concrete block wall and three sections of brick and flint wall to a height of
approximately 2.5m with much of the ruinous structure being covered in ivy with a
tree growing out of its centre.
The Council’s Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager has indicated that a
new dwelling in this location would change it from a rural context to a
residential/leisure use which would have a negative effect on the landscape
character as identified in the North Norfolk Landscape Character Assessment and
which would therefore be contrary to Policy EN 2 and also Policy SS 2 of the North
Norfolk Core Strategy.
In addition, in terms of the access arrangements, the Highway Authority have raised
a strong objection on highway safety grounds.
It is therefore considered that the scheme as proposed would fail to comply with
Development Plan Policy due to the fact that the site does not adjoin a settlement
boundary, resulting in the erection of a new dwelling in the Countryside policy area,
which would have a negative impact on the wider landscape, and which could have
implications for highway safety.
RECOMMENDATION:Refuse on the following grounds:1)
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal fails to
comply with the Development Plan policy owing to the fact that the site does
not adjoin a defined settlement boundary and would involve the total
demolition of the structure, resulting in the erection of a wholly new
unrestricted dwelling in the Countryside without substantive justification.
2)
The principle of the proposed new dwelling in this location without
substantive justification is considered to be contrary to the core aims of
adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy Policy SS1, which seeks to direct new
residential development to more sustainable locations across the District.
Development Control Committee (West)
3
12 November 2009
3)
The erection of a dwelling in this location would have a negative effect
on the landscape character of the area, as identified in the North Norfolk
Landscape Character Assessment by reason of introducing an urban feature
into the rural agricultural landscape.
4)
In addition, the unadopted Rectory Road serving the site is considered
to be inadequate to serve any additional development by reason of its
substandard construction, lack of pedestrian facilities and primarily restricted
visibility at the adjacent road junction with C308 High Kelling Road. The
proposal, if permitted, would therefore be likely to give rise to conditions
detrimental to highway safety.
5)
Furthermore, inadequate visibility splays are provided at the junction of
the access with the County Highway and this would cause danger and
inconvenience to users of the adjoining public highway.
2.
FAKENHAM - 20090842 - Erection of front boundary wall, retention of pony
shelter and tree house; 163 Holt Road for Mr Kendle
Target Date :16 Oct 2009
Case Officer :Miss T Lincoln
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside Policy Area
Residential Area
THE APPLICATION
Is for the erection of a front boundary wall and the retention of both a pony shelter
sited in the front garden and a tree house in the rear garden.
The proposed 1.85m front boundary wall is to replace a hedge of similar height.
The pony shelter is sited in the south-east corner of the front garden. It measures
approximately 2.27m wide by 1.65m deep and 1.53m high. The shelter is sited within
a paddock area measuring 8.4m by 3.8m.
The tree house is positioned in a tree in the north east corner of the rear garden. It is
located 2.5m from ground level. It measures approximately 1.1m wide x 2.3m long
and 1.52m high.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Cordeaux having regard to the following planning issue:
Impact on neighbouring amenity.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection to the wall and tree house but considers it totally inappropriate to have a
stable building in the front garden in a residential area.
REPRESENTATIONS
Three letters of objection received on the following grounds (summarised):
1. Smells from the manure, flies and rats resulting from the pony shelter.
2. Tree house overlooks 165 Holt Road.
3. Concern regarding the safety of the tree house structure.
Development Control Committee (West)
4
12 November 2009
4. Precedent will be set for other structures to be built beyond the building line.
5. Keeping a pony in the front garden is detrimental to the neighbourhood.
6. Welfare of the pony.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - No objection.
Environmental Health – No objection subject to a condition requiring a scheme to be
submitted and approved for the disposal of litter and manure.
Building Control - Advised that Building Regulations approval is not required for the
tree house.
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 Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
Policy EN 2: Protection and enhancement of landscape and settlement character
(specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including the Landscape
Character Assessment).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of the development.
2. Neighbouring amenity.
3. Visual impact.
APPRAISAL
The site lies within the residential policy area where the proposals are acceptable in
principle, subject to their compatibility with residential amenities.
The pony shelter is of a limited height and scale, and is sited in the south-east corner
of the front garden. It is currently screened to the highway by a 1.8 - 2m high hedge.
It is proposed to construct a new front boundary wall 1.85m high. This is considered
sufficient to maintain the screening of the pony shelter to the street scene. As it is not
highly visible in the street scene it is considered that it will have no adverse impact on
the appearance or character of the street.
With regard to neighbouring amenity, Environmental Health has advised that if
manure is managed correctly the likelihood of neighbours being affected by odours,
flies and/or rats should be greatly reduced. As such they have no objection to the
pony shelter subject to conditions requiring approval of a scheme for the disposal of
litter and manure. In addition, given the sufficient boundary screening to the adjacent
neighbouring properties and the limited height and scale of the pony shelter, no
adverse impact is considered to result on the adjacent properties.
Development Control Committee (West)
5
12 November 2009
The neighbouring properties have raised concerns regarding the welfare of the
animal. This is not a matter in which the Planning legislation has any control, it is not
therefore a material planning consideration. Neighbouring residences have been
advised to direct any animal welfare concerns to the relevant organisation (RSPCA).
Whilst the pony shelter is considered to comply with Development Plan policies,
given the nature of the structure, it is considered appropriate in this instance for a
temporary permission for 5 years only.
In respect of the new front boundary wall, there are varied boundary treatments along
the street and as such the proposed wall would have no adverse visual impact. This
is therefore considered to be acceptable in design terms and would comply with
Development Plan policies.
In terms of the tree house, this is sited 2.5m from ground level within the tree in the
north-west corner of the rear garden. The southern and eastern sides of the tree
house are screened with reed panelling. Whilst some overlooking would result
towards the dwellings to the west, it is considered that this would not be significantly
detrimental to the amenities of those dwellings. In terms of visual impact, the tree
house is located in the rear garden of the dwelling and only therefore visible from the
direct neighbouring dwellings and not from public vantage. The tree house is
therefore considered to comply with Policy EN 4 of the adopted Core Strategy but,
given the nature of the structure, it is considered that a five year temporary
permission would be more appropriate in this instance.
Overall, whilst the proposals are considered to comply with Development Plan
Policies, given the nature of the pony shelter and the tree house structures, it is
considered that a temporary period of five years is appropriate. These structures
would therefore be conditioned to be removed on or before that date.
RECOMMENDATION:Approve subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions including a
scheme for the disposal of manure and the removal of the tree house and pony
shelter structures after five years.
3.
HOLT - 20090797 - Erection of single-storey extension to sports and social
complex; Holt Playing Fields Association Kelling Road for Holt Town Council
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :27 Oct 2009
Case Officer :Ms M Hemstock
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Countryside Policy Area
THE APPLICATION
Seeks to erect a single-storey extension to the sports and social complex.
The plans submitted indicate an extension approximately 22.5m in length with a
depth of approximately 7.2m and a ridge height matching that of the existing complex
at 5.2m. Materials proposed include bricks and tiles to match existing.
Development Control Committee (West)
6
12 November 2009
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor High having regard to the following planning issues:
1. Improvements required for the needs of the sports centre.
2. No harmful visual impact.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection.
REPRESENTATIONS
Two letters of objection have been received from local residents on the following
grounds (summarised):
1. Lack of car parking spaces provided.
2. Concern over increased anti-social behaviour and vandalism.
3. Toilet provision.
4. Inadequate flood risk assessment.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) – Awaiting comments.
Norfolk Wildlife Trust - Awaiting comments.
Community Safety Manager - No objections, advisory comments regarding designing
out crime in relation to the proposed extension.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8 : The right to respect for private and family life, and
Article 1 of The First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
It is considered that refusal of this application as recommended may have an impact
on the individual Human Rights of the applicant. However, having considered the
likely impact and the general interest of the public, refusal of the application is
considered to be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy EN 1: Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and The Broads
(prevents developments which would be significantly detrimental to the areas and
their setting).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development.
2. Impact on the character and appearance of the area.
3. Design.
4. Impact on the amenity of adjacent residents.
Development Control Committee (West)
7
12 November 2009
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the Countryside policy area as designated in the adopted
Core Strategy where recreational uses and community services and facilities are
considered to be acceptable in principle. The site is also located within an Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty, where proposals should not detract from the special
qualities of the area.
The application follows pre-application discussions for a similar extension proposal to
that submitted for formal consideration. The informal advice raised concerns over the
linear form of the building and Officer advice suggested a change in the orientation of
the extension to reduce the visual impact of the building.
Whilst the complex is set back a minimum of 34m from the highway, it is set within
open playing fields and the extension would be located on a publicly visible elevation.
Whilst there is no objection in principle to the addition of an extension the overall
length of the extension plus the length of the existing building would measure
approximately 51m (approximately 165ft) in length without a break in the roof line.
Whilst there would be two projecting gables on the north elevation and a
porch/entrance canopy on the southern elevation the continuation of the extension
along the same plane as the main building is undesirable in design terms and would
lead to a unsatisfactory merger of existing and proposed elements. Suggested
design changes have been put forward to the applicant in order to overcome the
concerns raised. These have been rejected and the applicant has asked that the
plans be determined as originally submitted.
In terms of impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), whilst the
length of the building is considered to be excessive it is not considered that the visual
impact of the extension together with original building would have any significant
impact on the wider AONB nor detract from its special qualities.
On balance, whilst there would be no objection in principle to extending the club
house, it is considered that the proposal would significantly conflict with Policy EN 4
of the adopted Core Strategy in terms of design and would result in an unnecessarily
long and continuous linear structure.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated refusal, subject to the comments of outstanding consultees, on the
grounds that the proposed extension would be inappropriate in design terms
by virtue of its length and continuous ridge height resulting in a overall
building of excessive continuous length, the overall design of which would be
contrary to the aims of Policy EN4 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy.
Development Control Committee (West)
8
12 November 2009
4.
SHERINGHAM - 20090861 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; 18 Hadley Road
for Mr Welch
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :19 Oct 2009
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Residential Area
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20020315 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of single-storey annexe
Approved, 12 Apr 2002
20071232 - (Full Planning Permission) - Demolition of single-storey dwelling and
erection of four detached two-storey dwellings
Withdrawn, 10 Oct 2007
20080836 - (Full Planning Permission) - Demolition of bungalow and erection of
three, one-and-a-half-storey dwellings
Refused, 13 Jan 2009
Appeal Dismissed, 12 Oct 2009
THE APPLICATION
Is for the erection of a single-storey dwelling, to the rear of the existing dwelling and
annexe.
The proposed dwelling would share the existing vehicular access with 18 Hadley
Road.
The proposed dwelling is of a contemporary design with a flat roof and curved
external walls to the north, west and south. No windows are proposed in the north or
south elevations. The western elevation would be fully glazed, and the eastern
elevation partially glazed.
The building would be approximately 3m in height, 11m at its widest point and 18m in
length.
The external walls would be coloured render faced with plants, and a sedum roof.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Hannah having regard to the following planning issue:
Access issues in relation to Hadley Road and Common Lane/The Rise
TOWN COUNCIL
Object on the grounds that the ultra modern design is out of keeping with the
surrounding properties.
REPRESENTATIONS
Four letters of objection have been received from local residents raising the following
points:
1. Inappropriate design for surrounding area.
2. Traffic impact unacceptable.
3. Will have a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the area.
4. Highway safety.
5. Site overshadowed by trees for much of the day.
6. Disturbance from driveway running along whole of boundary with neighbouring
dwelling.
Development Control Committee (West)
9
12 November 2009
7. Contrary to Core Strategy Policies HO 7 and EN 4.
8. No parking apart from turntable.
9. Less parking for existing bungalow.
10. Drainage not adequate.
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Object to the
application due to the close proximity of the building to significant amenity trees on
the southern boundary of the plot, and the lack of sufficient information in the
application to determine the effect of the development on the trees.
The semi-mature trees will cast considerable shade on the plot, and although there
are no windows to the southern elevation, the perception of the dwelling would be in
perpetual shade, this would therefore create the desire to remove or reduce the trees
over time.
The trees are in the neighbouring property and have a public amenity value within the
local area, therefore their retention is desirable. It appears that the dwelling would be
within 3 to 4m of the base of the trees therefore likely to be within the root protection
areas. The required foundations for the buildings are likely to cause substantial
damage to the root system of the trees, possibly causing instability and affecting the
long term health of the trees.
County Council (Highways) - Object on the grounds that the unadopted Hadley Road
is inadequate to serve any additional development by reason of its substandard
construction, lack of pedestrian facilities and primarily restricted visibility at adjacent
road junctions with The Rise and Common Lane. The proposal, if permitted, would
be likely to give rise to conditions detrimental to highway safety contrary to
Development Plan Policy CT 5. A full copy of the Highway Authority's comments is
contained in Appendix 1.
Sustainability Co-ordinator - The application partially complies with Policy EN 6. In
order to comply in full with Policy EN 6 planning permission should only be granted
with the Code for Sustainable homes condition attached (Level 2).
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8 : The right to respect for private and family life, and
Article 1 of The First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
It is considered that refusal of this application as recommended may have an impact
on the individual Human Rights of the applicant. However, having considered the
likely impact and the general interest of the public, refusal of the application is
considered to be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
Norfolk Structure Plan (Adopted 29 October 1999 - saved policies):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
Policy HO 7: Making the most efficient use of land (Housing density) (Proposals
should optimise housing density in a manner which protects or enhances the
character of the area).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Development Control Committee (West)
10
12 November 2009
Policy EN 6: Sustainable construction and energy efficiency (specifies sustainability
and energy efficiency requirements for new developments).
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).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development.
2. Design.
3. Impact upon neighbouring dwellings.
4. Trees.
5. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the residential policy area of Sheringham where new
residential development is considered to be acceptable in principle subject to
compliance with relevant Development Plan Policies.
The Committee will be familiar with this site, which was subject of a site visit during
consideration of application 20080836, which was for the demolition of the existing
bungalow and annexe and erection of three one-and-a-half-storey dwellings.
The Committee resolved to refuse that application on the grounds that the unadopted Hadley Road serving the site was “considered to be inadequate to serve any
additional development by reason of its substandard construction, lack of pedestrian
facilities and primarily the restricted visibility available at the adjacent road junctions
with The Rise and Common Lane. The proposal, if permitted, would be likely to give
rise to conditions detrimental to highway safety, in conflict with Core Strategy Policy
CT 5. In addition, it was considered that the erection of three dwellings, as proposed,
would constitute overdevelopment of the site, to the detriment of the character and
appearance of the area, contrary to Policies HO 7 and EN 4 of the adopted North
Norfolk Core Strategy”.
The applicant appealed against the refusal of application 20080836 and a decision
from the Planning Inspectorate has recently been received dismissing the appeal. A
copy of the appeal decision is contained in Appendix 1. It is considered that the
Inspector’s decision to dismiss that appeal is a material consideration in determining
the current application (20090861) particularly given that the reasons for the
dismissal of the appeal are based on highway safety grounds.
With regard to the current application the applicant has reduced the number of new
dwellings on the site by proposing to retain the existing dwelling and attached annexe
and to erect one single-storey dwelling to the rear.
The proposed dwelling is of a contemporary design, which is considered to be
innovative and of high quality, as encouraged in Policy EN 4 of the Core Strategy.
There is a variety of types and styles of dwellings in the immediate area, albeit of
more conventional designs, which use a mixture of different materials. As such, it is
not considered that there is an overriding local distinctiveness.
It is considered that in order for a single dwelling to be positioned to the rear of the
site it requires a specific and individual design to ensure that the scale and massing
relates sympathetically to the surrounding area. For example, a more traditionally
designed dwelling is likely to have a pitched or hipped roof and it is considered that
Development Control Committee (West)
11
12 November 2009
this could appear intrusive and, depending on height, could have an overbearing
impact on the applicant’s own dwelling and that of the neighbouring dwelling to the
east.
The proposed dwelling is not excessive in floor area and its contemporary design and
materials means that it would appear recessive and minimise potential for any
overlooking as the only glazing is to the east and west elevation, and a circular roof
light.
The proposed dwelling would comply with the basic amenity criteria to the south,
west and east, but not to the north with the applicant’s own dwelling. However, the
northern elevation of the proposed dwelling is blank and would be 4m away at its
closest point. It is considered that this would help to retain some privacy for both
properties and would not have a significant detrimental impact on the privacy or
amenities of the occupiers. Whilst there would be glazing in the eastern elevation this
is to the second bedroom and the kitchen. The glazing to the kitchen would be
located at an angle looking over the car turntable. It is not therefore considered that
this would have a significant detrimental impact on the privacy or amenities of the
neighbouring dwelling to the east.
The Committee will note the objection from the Conservation, Design and Landscape
Manager in relation to the trees on the southern boundary of the site.
The Committee will also note the objection of the Highway Authority which is
contained in full in Appendix 1.
Therefore, whilst the contemporary design of the proposed dwelling and its
relationship with surrounding neighbouring dwellings is considered acceptable, there
are considered to be compelling material planning considerations, namely the impact
of the development on adjacent trees together with the highway safety concerns
resulting from the substandard accesses at the junction of Hadley Road and
Common Lane and Hadley Road and The Rise which indicate that the proposal is
contrary to Development Plan Policies and should be refused.
RECOMMENDATION:- REFUSE, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:1) The District Council adopted the North Norfolk Core Strategy on 24 September
2008 for all planning purposes. The following policy statements are considered
relevant to the proposed development:
Policy EN 4: Design
Policy CT 5: The transport impact of new development
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the unadopted Hadley Road serving
the site is of inadequate to serve any additional development by reason of its
substandard construction, lack of pedestrian facilities and primarily the restricted
visibility at adjacent road junctions with The Rise and Common Lane (U10138 and
U10137). The proposal, if permitted, would be likely to give rise to conditions
detrimental to highway safety, contrary to Development Plan Policy CT 5.
In addition, it is considered that the applicant has failed to provide sufficient
information to demonstrate that the proposed dwelling would not have a significant
detrimental impact on the root system and long term health of the trees on the
southern boundary of the site.
Development Control Committee (West)
12
12 November 2009
5.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
BEESTON REGIS - 20090848 - Erection of attached single-storey garden room;
The Two Pines Sheringwood for Mr Perry
(Full Planning Permission)
BEESTON REGIS - 20090849 - Conversion of agricultural buildings to nine
units of holiday accommodation, bunk barn and two craft units, refurbishment
of two dwellings and erection of stables; Hall Farm Cromer Road for Blue Sky
Leisure
(Full Planning Permission)
BEESTON REGIS - 20090937 - Erection of single-storey extension; 3 Priory
Close for Mr Sanders
(Full Planning Permission)
BINHAM - 20090817 - Retention of portable building; Manor Farm Field Dalling
Road for Mr Taylor
(Full Planning Permission)
BINHAM - 20090855 - Removal of condition 4 of planning reference: 19980092
to permit full residential occupation; Pilgrims Barn, Bunkers Hill Field Dalling
Road for Mr Perren
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - 20090859 - Erection of car port with attached shed; 3 The Butts
Saxlingham Road for Mr Wheeler
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - 20090924 - Construction of skateboard ramp; Highfield House 5
Wiveton Road for Miss Langley
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - 20090932 - Construction of pitched roof to side extension; 8
Langham Road for Mr Hellyer
(Full Planning Permission)
BODHAM - 20090927 - Erection of single-storey side extension; 1 Rose Acre for
Mr and Mrs Bolton
(Full Planning Permission)
BRININGHAM - 20090874 - Installation of roof light; 1 Belle Vue Cottages
Dereham Road for Mr Stanton
(Full Planning Permission)
BRINTON - 20090891 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 19 The Street
Sharrington for Simon Le Marquand/ Dawn Fairbrother
(Full Planning Permission)
BRISTON - 20090834 - Alterations to dwelling under construction including
accommodation in roof space; New Bungalow, The Driftway Providence Place
for Mr Shipman and Ms Mason
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (West)
13
12 November 2009
BRISTON - 20090863 - Installation of bow window; The Falcons Hall Street for
Mr Hunt
(Full Planning Permission)
EAST AND WEST BECKHAM - 20090807 - Erection of single-storey rear
extension and detached double garage; The Old Rectory Church Road West
Beckham for Mr Berry
(Full Planning Permission)
EDGEFIELD - 20090867 - Erection of single-storey side extension; Street
Farmhouse Ramsgate Street for Mr Seymour
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20090703 - Use of land for siting storage containers and portable
buildings; land at Wymans Way for Anglo Scottish (Southern) Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20090877 - Erection of first floor side extension; 27 Sculthorpe
Road for Mr Scoles
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20090945 - Erection of rear extension; 14 Fisher Road for Mr and
Mrs Cornwall
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20090827 - Erection of two dwellings; land adjacent Copper
Beech Lodge Heath Lane for Millwood Developments Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
FULMODESTON - 20090816 - Retention of extended vehicle maintenance
building; Thursford Depot Melton Road Thursford for Mr Taylor
(Full Planning Permission)
FULMODESTON - 20090942 - Erection of agricultural storage building; Astley
Farms, Grange Farm offices The Street Barney for Mr Hepworth Smith
(Full Planning Permission)
GRESHAM - 20090762 - Erection of two-storey side extension; 1a Watermill
Close Lower Gresham for Mr and Mrs Wright
(Full Planning Permission)
GRESHAM - 20090843 - Retention of garage/store with raised roof
incorporating velux windows and gable window and variation of condition 4 of
planning reference: 20061224 to permit 2m strip of meadow on boundary; Little
House Barningham Road for Mr Taylor
(Full Planning Permission)
GUNTHORPE - 20090851 - Alterations to outbuilding to provide residential
annexe; Keys, 1 Swanton Road for Mr Everitt
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - 20071876 - Change of use and alterations from residential to bed and
breakfast accommodation; 2 Byford Court and Hidden Talents 6 Shirehall Plain
for Mr I Wilson
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (West)
14
12 November 2009
HOLT - 20090864 - Change of use from A1 (retail) to residential; 16 Albert Street
for Mr Heathfield
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - 20090865 - Blocking up of linking doorway and internal alterations; 15
Chapel Yard and 16 Albert Street for Mr Heathfield
(Alteration to Listed Building)
ITTERINGHAM - 20090911 - Erection of replacement single-storey rear
extension and alterations to workshop; Mere Farm House Matlaske Road
Mannington for Mr and Mrs Harris
(Full Planning Permission)
ITTERINGHAM - 20090912 - Demolition of lean-to extension and erection of
replacement extension and alterations to outbuilding; Mere Farm House
Matlaske Road Mannington for Mr and Mrs Harris
(Alteration to Listed Building)
KELLING - 20090853 - Erection of cattle shelters; land at Pinfold Lane, off
Salthouse Road for Mr Gray
(Full Planning Permission)
LANGHAM - 20090850 - Erection of single-storey dwelling (revised design
incorporating rear extension); land adjacent Rowan Cottage Hollow Lane for
Isis Builders Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
LITTLE BARNINGHAM - 20090640 - Erection of agricultural storage building;
Green Farm The Green for Mr Daniels
(Full Planning Permission)
LITTLE SNORING - 20090845 - Continued siting of storage container, erection
of cat run and increase in fence height; Green Man Public House Holt Road for
Mrs Leyland
(Full Planning Permission)
RYBURGH - 20090933 - Erection of side conservatory; Stone House 48 Station
Road Great Ryburgh for Mr and Mrs Waldron
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20090830 - Installation of shopfront, ATM, plant machinery,
satellite dish and rear ventilation louvres; 40 High Street for Sainsbury Stores
Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20090846 - Display of illuminated front and rear nonilluminated fascia signs and two poster panels; 40 High Street for Sainsbury
Stores Ltd
(Illuminated Advertisement)
SHERINGHAM - 20090880 - Erection of two-storey rear extension; 16 Priory
Road for Mr and Mrs Burton
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (West)
15
12 November 2009
SHERINGHAM - 20090903 - Erection of single-storey side extension; 56 Cooper
Road for Mr Dawson
(Full Planning Permission)
STIBBARD - 20090754 - Erection of gamekeeper's store and workshop;
Keepers Cottage Sennowe Park Stibbard Guist for Mr Cook
(Full Planning Permission)
STIFFKEY - 20090913 - Erection of one-and-a-half-storey side extension; 9
Bridge Street for Mr Sowrey
(Full Planning Permission)
STIFFKEY - 20090914 - Erection of side extension; 9 Bridge Street for Mr
Sowrey
(Alteration to Listed Building)
THURNING - 20090904 - Construction of manege; Field End Cottage Saxthorpe
Road for Mrs Turner
(Full Planning Permission)
THURNING - 20090921 - Change of use of agricultural building to domestic
storage and insertion of rooflight; The Old Granary Rookery Farm Saxthorpe
Road for Mr Duffill
(Full Planning Permission)
THURNING - 20090922 - Installation of rooflights; The Old Granary Rookery
Farm Saxthorpe Road for Mr Duffill
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090821 - Erection of single-storey rear extension
and insertion of four patio doors and sidelight; 50 Mill Road for Mr and Mrs
Reynolds
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090833 - Erection of single-storey rear extension
and insertion of four patio doors and sidelight; 50 Mill Road for Mr and Mrs
Reynolds
(Alteration to Listed Building)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090895 - Alterations to garage/store to provide
ancillary residential accommodation; 35 Staithe Street for Staithe
Developments
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090896 - Alterations to garage/outbuildings to form
annex accommodation; 35 Staithe Street for Staithe Developments
(Alteration to Listed Building)
WEYBOURNE - 20090866 - Retention of summer house; Jericho House Station
Road for Mr Perkins
(Full Planning Permission)
WEYBOURNE - 20090889 - Erection of side extension and attached garage; 39
Pine Walk for Mr Game
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (West)
16
12 November 2009
WIVETON - 20081688 - Construction of dormer windows and external staircase to facilitate conversion of first floor flat to guest bedrooms; The Wiveton
Bell Blakeney Road for Wiveton Bell Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
WOOD NORTON - 20090968 - Erection of single-storey extension; The Old
Rectory Rectory Road for Ms S Oliver
(Full Planning Permission)
6.
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
EDGEFIELD - 20090822 - Erection of two-storey side extension and singlestorey front extension; 1 Wood Farm Cottages Plumstead Road for Mr
Massingham
(Full Planning Permission)
APPEALS SECTION
7.
NEW APPEALS
FAKENHAM - 20090214 - Erection of one and a half storey side extension; 73
Norwich Road for Mrs Rose
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS
HOLT - 20090053 - Use of land for siting of Victorian gallopers; North Norfolk
Railway, Holt Station Cromer Road High Kelling for Miss Jones
INFORMAL HEARING
8.
PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
No items.
9.
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
FAKENHAM - 20081510 - Residential development; land north of Parker Drive
for New Hall Properties
LANGHAM - 20090197 - Part retention and erection of 2 metres high boundary
fence; Langham Lodge Cockthorpe Road for Mr Blackwell
RYBURGH - 20090171 - Removal of condition 3 of planning permission:
20050494 to enable annexe to be occupied as separate dwelling unit; 29 Station
Road for Mrs Buxton
WARHAM - 20081310 - Erection of two dwellings; adjacent The Reading Room
The Street for Holkham Estate
Development Control Committee (West)
17
12 November 2009
10.
APPEAL DECISIONS
SHERINGHAM - 20080836 - Demolition of bungalow and erection of three, oneand-a-half-storey dwellings; 18 Hadley Road Sheringham for Mr K Welch
APPEAL DECISION :- DISMISSED
Development Control Committee (West)
18
12 November 2009