PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Note :- Recommendations for approval include a standard time limit condition as Condition No.1,
unless otherwise stated.
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20080256 - Demolition of summerhouse and erection of
replacement detached single-storey residential annexe (retrospective); Umgeni
Coast Road for Lady B Rathcaven
Target Date :11 Apr 2008
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Environment Agency Flood Zone Type 2
Environment Agency Flood Zone Type 3
Residential
Selected Small Village
Conservation Area
Tree Preservation Order
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20050101 - (Full Planning Permission) - Extension to summerhouse
Refused, 06 Apr 2005
20050687 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of extension to summerhouse
Approved, 13 Jul 2005
20061041 - (Full Planning Permission) - Extension to summerhouse to provide annexe
Approved, 22 Aug 2006
20070922 - (Full Planning Permission) - Demolition of summerhouse and erection of
annexe
Refused, 17 Sep 2007
THE APPLICATION
Is for the demolition of summerhouse and erection of replacement detached singlestorey residential annexe.
The approximate measurements of the proposed annexe are 7m x 4.3m for the sitting
room to the centre of the building, 4.8m x 3.3m for the bedroom and bathroom to the
east, and 3.3m x 3.8m for the kitchen to the west. The central part of the proposed
annexe would measure approximately 3.7m to the ridge and the smaller elements to
the east and west would measure approximately 3.4m in height to the ridge.
The materials proposed are brick, flint, clay pantile and timber.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application was deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Awaiting comments.
REPRESENTATIONS
Five letters of objection have been received raising the following points:
1. New application for a permanent residence.
4
2. Inappropriate.
3. Unsuitable and contravenes Policy 42 in the Local Plan.
4. A grossly oversized building such as is proposed would be an eyesore and
dominate the landscape from afar.
5. Out of keeping with the neighbourhood.
6. Would set a precedent for other buildings and development in gardens in the Hilltop
area of Cley.
7. Access is likely to become a major problem as it is highly likely that Hilltop Road
would be used for car parking and access gained through a breach in the flint wall.
8. The proposed new building would adversely affect the well being and quality of life
for the occupiers of 1 Old Hall Farm Barns, and would be overbearing and affect their
privacy.
9. Concerns over proposed chimney and bell tower in close proximity to neighbouring
properties.
10. Bell tower seems overly ostentatious and grandiose for a suburban back garden.
11. Object to the possibility that the bell would make a loud noise close to 1 Old Hall
Farm Barns.
12. Would devalue property.
13. Proposal contrary to North Norfolk Design Guide specifically sections 3.26, 3.32
and 3.33.
14. No vehicular access to the proposed new residential bungalow, this affects
emergency services that may be need by an elderly person.
15. Plans do not show the dwelling to the south.
16. Proposal would present an even more garish intrusion on the view from the Coast
Road.
17. The use of the annexe should be restricted to purposes ancillary to the residential
use of the main building and not allow commercial use.
18. Relationship of 1 Old Hall Farm Barns to application site not explained in previous
permission 20061041 which could have affected decision as no site visit took place.
A Design and Access Statement has been submitted by the agent with the planning
application and Section 1 regarding the background to the application explains that the
summerhouse was demolished as the building contractors' Health and Safety Officer
decided that the two remaining walls that were to be retained were unsafe. A copy of
Section 1 of the Statement is attached as Appendix 2
A letter has been received from the agent in response to the Committee's suggestion
to enter into negotiations with the applicant regarding the siting and design of the
annexe. The agent has advised that the Committee's suggestion is wholly
unacceptable to the applicant, and that she requires the location to ensure the annexe
will not be flooded, the summerhouse has been in this position for a great many years
and is an established feature in the landscape, and that such a suggestion was not
advanced by the this Committee when it authorised the conversion of the
summerhouse to an annexe. The request by Committee is regarded as being
inconsistent and unreasonable.
CONSULTATIONS
Building Control Manager - Building Control already has an application for this
proposal which can be amended to suit. No other comments.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - No objection. I would
reiterate however, the need to condition a landscaping scheme with any approval.
County Council (Highways) - You will be aware of the Highway comments in relation to
the previous application on this site for provision of an annexe (20070922 and
5
20061041). As this present application is for a very similar proposal (albeit new build)
again no objection is raised subject to a condition restricting the use of the proposal to
ancillary to the existing uses of Umgeni only.
Environmental Health - No adverse 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 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).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy SS2: 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 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).
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development in the residential policy area.
2. Impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
3. Impact on neighbouring properties.
4. Landscaping.
5. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
The Committee may recall that this application was deferred at the meeting on 27
March 2008 in order to establish if the applicant was prepared to enter into
negotiations to revise the siting and design of the annexe by moving it closer to and
creating a better relationship with the main dwelling known as Umgeni.
6
The Committee will be aware of the planning history in relation to this site, as detailed
above, and in particular its refusal of planning application reference 20070922 for the
demolition of summerhouse and erection of annexe on 17 September 2007. That
application was refused on the grounds that the proposed development would have an
overbearing and poor relationship with the neighbouring property to the south, resulting
in an unacceptable loss of amenity to that property. Furthermore, by reason of its siting
and height it would fail to preserve or enhance the appearance or character of the
Conservation Area. It is also considered that the development would be tantamount to
the creation of a new dwelling by reason of its size and the extent of accommodation
proposed. The siting of a dwelling in this location would constitute an unacceptable
form of tandem development because of its poor relationship with the existing frontage
property known as "Umgeni".
The applicant lodged an appeal against this decision on 5 December 2007. The
applicant is also appealing against the Enforcement Notice which was served under
delegated powers by the Head of Planning and Building Control. The applicant has
requested a public inquiry, which will take place on 5 August 2008.
Prior to the submission of application reference 20070922 the previous planning
applications in relation to the summerhouse all related to extensions of it in order to
create additional ancillary accommodation to the main dwelling. In August 2006 the
Committee gave delegated authority to approve application 20061041 to extend the
summerhouse to provide an annexe, subject to the deletion of a chimney on the rear
elevation and a condition restricting occupation of the summerhouse for purposes
incidental to the residential use of Umgeni.
However, since application 20061041 was approved the original summerhouse
building has been demolished. A new building is sought in its place under the current
planning application. As the Committee will be aware following a previous site visit, the
new building has been constructed up to eaves level, but further work has ceased
pending determination of this application.
The proposal gives rise to some difficult planning considerations. Without a building to
convert, consideration should be given as to whether a replacement building in this
location would comply with Local Plan policies. Although there is no Local Plan policy
specifically relating to annexes there is a general requirement under Policy 13 that
proposals should be appropriate in terms of layout, scale, bulk, visual impact and
relationship to nearby properties.
Conventionally, applicants for annexes are encouraged to locate them either as an
extension to the main dwelling or adjoining it, since such a layout reinforces the
function of dependency between the annexe and the main dwelling. A layout involving
an annexe detached from the main dwelling by a significant distance would tend to
imply a sense of independence of use and function, particularly where, as in this case,
the proposal incorporates all the facilities required for independent living. In this case,
however, the use of the proposed building as an independent dwelling would not be
acceptable because it would lack suitable independent access and privacy and would
have a poor relationship with both Umgeni and neighbouring properties.
On the other hand there are material considerations to take into account in that the
new building proposed under the current application is located in the same position as
that approved under planning reference 20061041. The size of the building is no
different from that agreed as a non-material amendment, which also allowed the east
7
wing of the building to be constructed slightly further to the north and away from the
southern boundary wall.
Planning application reference 20061041 established the principle of the use of the
then summerhouse as annexe accommodation ancillary to that of the main dwelling.
Whilst the original building has been demolished and an entirely new building is being
constructed it is in the same location and is of the same size and design, apart from
two openings on the southern elevation of the bedroom and bathroom wing, as that
approved under planning application 20061041. Since the building would not look
significantly different from that previously approved, it is considered on balance to be
acceptable.
In particular, it is considered that the general form of the building would not detract
from the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, nor is it considered that
the proposal would have a significantly detrimental impact upon the appearance of the
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Owing to the change in ground levels between the site and the land to the south the
existing boundary wall would screen any views out of the windows proposed in the
southern elevation of the new building. The roof of the new building would be visible
from the neighbouring property to the south of the site, which is approximately 13m
from the boundary with the application site, but this distance complies with the District
Council's basic amenity criteria as set out in the Design Guide. Whilst the proposed
building is on significantly higher ground than the properties that front the Coast Road
it is at least 45m from these residential properties, approximately 10m from the
dwelling to the south-east and some 30m from the dwelling to the south-west, which
are all in compliance with the basic amenity criteria. Therefore, it is not considered that
the privacy or amenities of the neighbouring dwellings would be significantly adversely
affected by the proposal, thus meeting the requirements of Policy 13.
Whilst the current application does not involve the felling of any trees the
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager has been consulted in view of the
history relating to the site and previous planning applications that have included the
removal of trees subject to Tree Preservation Orders. No objections have been raised
apart from the request for a landscaping condition on any approval.
The Committee will note that the Highway Authority is not raising an objection subject
to an appropriate condition restricting the use of the building as ancillary to the main
dwelling.
Notwithstanding the planning complexities posed by the development and the agent's
comments that the applicant is not prepared to negotiate, it is considered that, on
balance, the proposal would be generally in accordance with Development Plan policy.
RECOMMENDATION:Approve subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions including restricting
the use of the new building for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the
main dwelling known as Umgeni and preventing it from being used as a separate
dwelling house or for commercial use.
2) The development to which this permission relates shall be undertaken in strict
accordance with the submitted and approved plans, drawings and specifications,
unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
8
3) The annexe hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than for
purposes incidental to the residential use of the dwelling known as Umgeni and shall
not be used as a separate dwelling or holiday accommodation.
4) Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a landscaping
scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The scheme shall indicate the species, number and size of new trees and shrubs at
the time of their planting.
The scheme shall also include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the
land, with details of any to be retained (which shall include details of species and
canopy spread), together with measures for their protection during the course of
development.
The scheme as approved shall be carried out not later than the next available planting
season following the commencement of development or such further period as the
Local Planning Authority may allow in writing.
5) Before the development is started samples of the proposed roof material shall be
submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development
shall then be constructed in full accordance with the approved details.
6) Prior to the erection of the bell tower and bell, details of the materials to be used in
its construction shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The development shall be constructed in full accordance with the approved
details.
REASONS:2) To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the expressed
intentions of the applicant and to ensure the satisfactory development of the site, in
accordance with Policy 13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
3) In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy 13 of the adopted North
Norfolk Local Plan.
4) To protect and enhance the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policy
13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
5) In order for the Local Planning Authority to be satisfied that the materials to be used
will be visually appropriate for the approved development and its surroundings, in
accordance with Policy 13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
6) In order for the Local Planning Authority to be satisfied that the materials to be used
will be visually appropriate for the approved development and its surroundings, and to
prevent noise disturbance to adjoining properties in accordance with Policies 13 and
17 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
EDGEFIELD - 20080579 - Erection of one two-storey dwelling and one singlestorey dwelling; Jordans Yard Norwich Road for Cockertons
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :30 May 2008
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Outline Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of High Landscape Value
Countryside
Residential
Selected Small Village
Conservation Area
THE APPLICATION
9
Is seeking the erection of one two-storey dwelling and one single-storey dwelling.
Access and layout are for determination at this stage.
Amended plans have been received altering the siting of both the proposed dwellings
and retaining the use of the existing access to serve the two-storey dwelling fronting
the Norwich Road. A tree survey has also been submitted.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Perry-Warnes having regard to the following planning
issue:
Impact on neighbouring dwellings.
PARISH COUNCIL
Object on the following grounds:1. It was felt that the proposed erections together with the existing cottage was an over
development of the site.
2. The house fronting Norwich Road was too close to the road.
3. Two mature trees will have to be felled to accommodate dwellings.
4. The proposed dwellings are too close to the boundary.
Comments awaited on amended plan.
REPRESENTATIONS
One letter of objection has been received from a local resident raising the following
points:1. Loss of privacy.
2. Loss of light.
3. Removal of trees.
4. Impact upon hedgerow.
5. Concerns over water run off and drainage as proposed dwelling would be on higher
ground than neighbouring property to the east.
6. Concerns over impact upon eastern boundary wall.
7. No mains drainage.
8. Increase in traffic.
9. Loss of hedgerow.
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - Awaiting
comments.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Awaiting comments.
County Council (Highways) - Comments on original proposal: No objections subject to
the imposition of appropriate conditions including access specification, removal of
permitted development rights for the erection of gates, visibility splays and car parking.
Comments awaited on amended plan.
English Heritage - 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.
10
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 21: Area of High Landscape Value (promotes conservation and enhancement,
prevents developments which would be significantly detrimental to appearance and
character).
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).
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 EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Acceptability of the proposal in residential policy area.
2. Impact on neighbouring dwellings.
3. Impact on Conservation Area and Area of High Landscape Value.
4. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the residential policy area of the Selected Small Village of
Edgefield where individual and small groups of dwellings (up to four) are considered to
be acceptable in principle providing they enhance the character of the village.
The site is also located in the village Conservation Area and Area of High Landscape
Value.
The site consists of the garden area to the dwelling known as Jordan's Yard. Part of
the garden fronts the Norwich Road to the north east of Jordan's Yard where the
existing vehicular access is located. The remainder of the site is located to the south of
Jordan's Yard fronting Peck's Lane.
11
There is a mixture of single-storey and two-storey properties of different styles in the
immediate area on plots of varying sizes. It is therefore considered that the erection of
two dwellings on the site would not be out of keeping with the form and character of
the area.
The plans originally submitted with the application were not considered acceptable due
to the poor layout and relationship of both the proposed dwellings with the adjacent
neighbouring dwellings, and proposed driveway.
The plans have been amended and the siting of the proposed two-storey dwelling
fronting Norwich Road has been revised by setting the dwelling further back into the
site and retaining the existing access to serve this proposed dwelling only. A tree
survey has also been provided indicating the retention of an Ash tree and Yew tree
which were previously shown to be removed. Subject to no objections from the
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager to the amendments described it is
considered that this aspect of the proposal would enhance the character of the village
and the Conservation Area and would not have a significant detrimental impact upon
the appearance of the Area of High Landscape Value.
However, the proposed re-siting of the single-storey dwelling to the south is still not
considered acceptable, as the building is still considered to be too large for the plot
and would have a poor relationship to the neighbouring dwelling to the east known as
'Fourways'. Further discussions regarding this part of the application are currently
taking place with the agent and the Committee will be updated regarding this matter at
the meeting.
The Committee will note that this is an outline application only with all matters reserved
apart from layout and access. However, subject to the dwellings being appropriately
designed and careful consideration given to the position of windows it is anticipated
that the both of the dwellings could comply with the Council's basic amenity criteria.
An ample garden area would be retained for the existing property and appropriate car
parking in accordance with the Council's car parking standards provided.
Subject to receiving a satisfactory amended plan regarding the size and siting of the
single-storey dwelling, no objections from the Conservation, Design and Landscape
Manager, and no objections following the re-advertisement and re-consultation with the
Parish Council, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable and would
accord with Development Plan policy.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to approve subject to the receipt of a satisfactory amended
plan regarding the size and siting of the single-storey dwelling, no objections
from the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager, and no objections
following the re-advertisement and re-consultation with the Parish Council and
the imposition of appropriate conditions.
FAKENHAM - 20080666 - Erection of 15m high wind turbine; Fakenham High
School Field Lane for Fakenham High School and College
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :18 Jun 2008
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Full Planning Permission)
12
CONSTRAINTS
Open Land Area
THE APPLICATION
Is for the erection of a 15m high wind turbine located directly to the south of the school
buildings.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Fleming having regard to the following planning issue:
Impact upon the residential amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings.
TOWN COUNCIL
Strongly object to this application. The turbine should not be erected in a
predominantly residential area. It will be highly intrusive and the noise will disturb
residents.
REPRESENTATIONS
Four letters of objection have been received raising the following points:1. Visual impact.
2. Noise impact.
3. Health issues.
4. Sited too close to housing.
5. Will obstruct views.
6. Intrusive.
7. Infringement on human rights if can not site in garden without humming noise of a
large turbine.
8. Would not have objected if turbine was sited to the north of the school near Barr
Lane.
CONSULTATIONS
Environmental Health - Noise levels are predicted of 65 dba @ 20 m/s. I have a
concern that background noise levels will be increased in the area along with WHO
noise night time guidance being breached. I therefore require more detailed noise
results from the applicant on the effects that will be experienced by neighbours. I would
also like clarification on what the maximum speed the turbine can operate at with the
associated resultant dba.
Comments on additional information submitted by applicant: Has concerns over night
time noise levels from the turbine. A night time background noise survey is required
before further comments can be made. From desk calculations, it has been calculated
that the closest property is 121m away from the mast. Maximum noise levels
experienced at the properties are likely to be approximately 44dba which is above the
World Health Organisation (WHO) guidance for night time background levels for
affecting sleep. It is acknowledged that during higher wind speeds, background noise
levels will be higher. Flickering should not cause a problem with small scale turbines.
From the experience we have with other turbines within the District, we have no
records of any adverse health effects. Once we receive the night time background
noise survey we will be able to give a formal response.
Further comments awaited.
National Air Traffic Services (NATS) - The proposed development has been examined
from a technical safeguarding aspect and does not conflict with our safeguarding
13
criteria. According, NARS (En Route) Public Limited Company (NERL) has no
safeguarding objection to the proposal.
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 8: Open Land Areas (protected against general development - reserved for
leisure/recreation purposes).
Policy 17: Control of Noise (aims to protect public amenity from noise generating
developments) (prevents sensitive developments near to noisy environments).
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 SS 4: Environment (strategic approach to environmental issues).
Policy EN 7: Renewable energy (specifies criteria for renewable energy proposals).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Acceptability of proposal in open land policy area.
2. Impact upon occupiers of neighbouring dwellings.
APPRAISAL
The site of the proposed turbine is located within the school grounds adjacent to a
school building in an Open Land Area as designated in the Local Plan, where uses that
are open in character and serve education, leisure or nature conservation purposes
will be retained and encouraged.
The applicant has confirmed that the proposed turbine is intended to help educate the
students regarding environmental issues Therefore it is considered that the proposed
turbine is acceptable in this location.
There are residential properties to the east, west and south of the site approximately
120m away. The school playing field is located between the dwellings and siting of the
proposed turbine.
The proposed turbine would be approximately 120m from the nearest dwelling. The
Committee will note the comments of the Environmental Protection Officer. Further
information is currently awaited in respect of night time background noise. Subject to
no objections from the Environmental Protection Officer in respect of that additional
information it is considered that the proposed turbine would not have a significant
detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring
dwellings.
14
Whilst the site is located within a developed area and it would be close to existing
school buildings, it would be approximately 120m away from the residential properties
that adjoin the school field to the east, west and south. In accordance with Policy 99 of
the Local Plan it is not considered that the proposal would have a significant
detrimental impact on the appearance or character of the area. Furthermore it is not
considered that there would be any significant detrimental impact on the transport
network.
Therefore, subject to no objections from outstanding consultees it is considered that
the proposal accords with Development Plan policy.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to approve, subject to no objections from outstanding
consultees, including the Environmental Health Officer, and imposition of
appropriate conditions.
FIELD DALLING - 20080695 - Demolition of outbuilding; 32 Langham Road for
Norfolk Archaeological Trust
Target Date :25 Jun 2008
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Alteration to Listed Building)
CONSTRAINTS
Archaeological Site
Residential
Selected Small Village
Conservation Area
Listed Building Grade II
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20080414 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Demolition of single-storey extension and
erection of one-and-a-half-storey dwelling
Approved, 09 May 2008
THE APPLICATION
Is for the demolition of a lean-to outbuilding attached to southern elevation of Grade II
listed dwelling, in order to facilitate the erection of a dwelling approved under planning
application reference 20080414.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Brettle having regard to the following planning issue:
The impact of the proposal on the character of the listed building
PARISH COUNCIL
Object.
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - As there
is little merit in the lean-to outbuilding Conservation and Design have no objection to
the demolition of the structure. However, should the application be approved a
condition should be imposed regarding sympathetic repair using like for like materials if
15
any damage occurs to the listed building during the demolition of the lean-to. Advice
should be sought from Conservation and Design regarding this matter.
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology - The proposed development affects a Grade II listed
cottage. The proposed works involve the demolition of an extension to the building. If
planning permission is granted, we therefore ask that this be subject to a condition for
a programme of archaeological works in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance
16: Archaeological and Planning. A condition regarding the implementation of a
programme of historic building recording in accordance with a written scheme of
investigation is required.
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 37: Alterations and Extensions to Listed Buildings (prevents proposals which
would be detrimental to character).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
MAIN ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Impact on character of listed building.
APPRAISAL
In May 2008 planning permission 20080414 was granted for the demolition of singlestorey extension and erection of one-and-a-half-storey dwelling at 32 Langham Road.
This listed building consent application is for the demolition of the single-storey
extension referred to in the planning application. In order for the approved dwelling to
be constructed in the position shown on the approved plan this lean-to addition would
need to be removed.
The Committee will note that the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager has
raised no objection subject to the imposition of an appropriate condition. In addition to
this, if approved, it is considered that an advisory note to the applicant could be added
to any approval advising that the listed building consent is for the demolition of the
outbuilding only and does not allow for any other works or alterations to the listed
building internally or externally to the fabric of the building and that the applicant
should contact the Council’s Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager to discuss
any other works or alterations to the dwelling as listed building consent may be
required.
16
It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable and accords with Local Plan
policy.
RECOMMENDATION:- APPROVE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:2) Any damage that has occurred to the fabric of the listed building during the
demolition of the lean-to outbuilding shall be repaired in a sympathetic manner using
like for like materials as seen on the historic structure such as hand made bricks, lime
mortars and flint details of which are to be submitted to and agreed in writing with the
Local Planning Authority prior to any repair works being carried out.
3) Any external pointing shall be carried out using a lime mortar mix which contains no
Portland cement to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
4) No development shall take place within the site until the applicant has secured the
implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written
scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by
the Local Planning Authority. In this instance the programme of historic building
recording will comprise a photographic survey of the structure by a qualified buildings
archaeologist for which a brief can be obtained from Norfolk Landscape Archaeology,
Union House, Gressenhall, Dereham. NR20 4DR, tel: 01326 869275.
REASONS:2) In order to preserve the character and appearance of the listed building, in
accordance with Policy 37 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
3) In order to preserve the character and appearance of the listed building, in
accordance with Policy 37 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
4) In order to preserve the character and appearance of the building, in accordance
with Policy 37 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
HEMPSTEAD - 20080578 - Erection of a pair of semi-detached two-storey
dwellings; 1 Lodge Cottages The Street for Mr and Mrs Fell
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :30 May 2008
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Outline Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of High Landscape Value
Archaeological Site
Residential
Selected Small Village
Conservation Area
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
19801893 - Proposed erection of 1 dwelling
Refused, 15 Dec 1980
Appeal Dismissed, 27 Apr 1981
20071042 - (Full Planning Permission) - Formation of vehicular access
Approved, 23 Aug 2007
THE APPLICATION
Is seeking the erection of a pair of semi-detached two-storey dwellings. All matters
reserved, apart from access and layout.
17
Amended plans have been submitted clarifying the position of the proposed
boundaries on the site, two car parking spaces for each of the existing and proposed
dwellings and a tree survey.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Perry-Warnes having regard to the following planning
issue:
Impact on the street scene.
PARISH COUNCIL
No objection. The Parish Council did comment that maybe a single-storey and one
dwelling would be preferable.
REPRESENTATIONS
Six letters of objection have been received from local residents raising the following
points:1. Against provisions of new Development Plan for North Norfolk which is about to be
ratified.
2. Highway Authority requirements will destroy the well established hedge.
3. Out of scale and inappropriate to the existing setting.
4. Would lead to significant denigration of the green and open nature of the centre of
the village.
5. No facilities.
6. Loss of trees and hedgerow.
7. Parking will take up about one third of the site area.
8. Highway safety.
9. Fears that they will be used as holiday homes and not affordable homes for local
people.
10. Affect local spring across site.
11. Would not preserve or enhance the character of the village.
12. Not in line with current or future policy on such villages.
13. The proposed development is undesirable in principle.
14. Would constitute unnecessary and inappropriate infilling and suburbanisation of
this small village.
15. The proposed development would constitute an unmistakeable example of the kind
of development leading to the erosion of village character identified in the Landscape
Character Assessment for NNDC LDF.
16. Would clearly erode the open character of the village by building over and closing
off a substantial part of the large garden which itself contributes to the character of this
part of the village.
A letter, amended plans and a tree survey have been received from the agent. The
agents letter confirms that all the western hedgerow trees numbered 8 - 12 on the tree
survey are to be retained.
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - Although
an attractive piece of garden land the site in question does not provide valuable open
space within the street scene. Nor does it offer important views into and out of
Hempstead's Conservation Area. As a result, there can be no sustainable
Conservation and Design objections to the principle of developing this site.
In terms of the matters to be considered as part of this outline application, the access
point itself does not give rise to any Conservation and Design concerns. However, it is
hoped that it will not result in the complete removal of the roadside hedge which would
soften any development and help bed it into this part of the village.
18
Layout wise the proposed footprint of the proposed dwellings appears generally
acceptable. A pair of cottages like those shown on the indicative elevations should sit
comfortably alongside Wayside to the north.
Should the application be approved, conditions relating to facing materials, windows
and landscaping (to include site frontage) are requested.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Feel that as a result of
the development the verdant character of Hempstead will be diminished. The
application site is currently enclosed from the street by a mixed species hedge and
small grass bank; this has a backdrop of mature apple trees, silver birch, willow and
holly, typical of a well kept garden in a rural village setting. The development will
involve the removal of seven of the trees from the site, those most visible from the
public highway including a semi-mature silver birch (tree 5 on plan B) as well as a
significant proportion of the hedge. It has been acknowledged however, that a previous
planning permission has permitted the removal of the hedge to accommodate a new
access into the site.
Due to the visible nature of the trees they have been assessed regarding their
suitability for retention and protection. It is felt, however, that the trees do not have
significant longevity of amenity value for retention in the long term but the contribution
the trees made to the setting should not be understated.
Based on these observations, I feel that the justification for retaining the trees is limited
and therefore do not object to the application, however I would stress the requirement
for a comprehensive landscaping scheme to accompany the Reserved Matters
application, specifying replacement and additional planting to mitigate the loss of the
hedge and trees on the site, this way the character of the village may be preserved in
the long term.
County Council (Highways) - On the basis that the existing access is stopped up I have
no objections to the proposal subject to appropriate conditions.
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology - The proposed development lies in the historic core
of the settlement of Hempstead close to the medieval parish church. In view of this
there is potential that buried archaeological remains of medieval date are present at
the development site.
If planning permission is granted we therefore ask that his be subject to a condition for
a programme of archaeological work in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance 16:
Archaeology and Planning.
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 6: Residential Areas (areas primarily for residential purposes).
19
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required for
new development).
Policy 21: Area of High Landscape Value (promotes conservation and enhancement,
prevents developments which would be significantly detrimental to appearance and
character).
Policy 42: Development in Conservation Areas (developments should preserve or
enhance character).
Policy 45: Archaeology (requires archaeological evaluation in appropriate cases).
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).
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 EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Acceptability of development in residential area.
2. Impact upon appearance and character of Conservation Area.
3. Impact on neighbouring dwellings.
4. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the residential policy area of the Selected Small Village of
Hempstead where individual and small groups of dwellings (up to four) are considered
to be acceptable in principle providing they enhance the character of the village.
The site consists of part of the garden to 1 Lodge Cottages and all of the garden to 2
and 3 Lodge Cottages.
There is a variety in the type and style of properties, and size of plots along The Street
ranging from rows of terrace dwellings, to detached and semi-detached dwellings in
brick, flint and painted render. The northern part of the village is characterised
principally by terraces and semi-detached houses running parallel with The Street.
Although the garden is attractive, in terms of the physical characteristics of the
Conservation Area the gap is not considered to be significant. It is considered that to
allow the proposed development by a pair of dwellings of appropriate scale and design
would enhance the sense of enclosure of this part of the village and thus enhance its
appearance.
The Committee will note that the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager is not
raising an objection to the application on conservation and design or landscape
grounds. It is therefore considered that the proposal would have a positive impact on
the appearance and character of the Conservation Area, subject to careful design and
appropriate detailing and planting.
20
Whilst this is an outline application, with only the layout and access to be agreed at this
stage, indicative plans of the proposed dwellings have been submitted with the
application. They show that the proposed dwellings could be designed with blank
gables in the north and south elevations. This would comply with the Council's basic
amenity criteria, and subject to appropriately designed dwellings it is not considered
that the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact on the privacy or
amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings.
It is considered that the layout of the proposed dwellings would allow for both the
proposed dwellings to have a small front garden and rear gardens of a depth that
would comply with the Council’s basic amenity criteria on the recommended depth of
rear gardens. 1 Lodge Cottages would retain a large garden area to the south west,
and 2 and 3 Lodge Cottages would both retain a small garden area approximately 9m
in depth. It is not therefore considered that the proposal would detract from the privacy
and amenities of the occupiers of the existing dwellings to the south.
The Committee will note from the Planning History section of this report that there is an
extant permission for the creation of a new vehicular access for 2 Lodge Cottages, on
the land which forms part of this application site.
No objections have been raised by the County Council Highway Authority subject to
the imposition of appropriate conditions.
It is therefore considered that the proposal would accord with Development Plan
policy.
RECOMMENDATION:- APPROVE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:2) These reserved matters shall relate to the appearance, landscaping and scale of the
proposed development and this condition shall apply notwithstanding any indications
as to these matters which have been given in the current application.
3) This permission is granted in accordance with the amended plans received by the
Local Planning Authority on 12 May 2008, unless otherwise first agreed in writing by
the Local Planning Authority.
4) Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the vehicular
access shall be constructed in accordance with the Norfolk County Council residential
access construction specification for the first 5m into the site as measured back from
the near edge of the adjacent carriageway.
5) Vehicular and pedestrian access to and egress from the adjoining highway shall be
limited to the access shown on the approved site plan submitted in support of the
planning application only. Any other access or egress shall be permanently closed,
and the highway verge shall be reinstated in accordance with a detailed scheme to be
agreed with the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority,
concurrently with the bringing into use of the new access.
6) Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted a visibility splay
measuring 25m to the south by 2m by 30m to the north shall be provided to each side
of the access where it meets the highway. Such splays shall thereafter be maintained
free from any obstruction exceeding 0.6m above the level of the adjacent highway
carriageway.
7) Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the proposed
access, on-site parking and turning area shall be laid out, demarcated, levelled,
surfaced and drained in accordance with the approved plan. They shall be retained
thereafter for those specific uses.
8) In association with the requirements of Condition number 2, a scheme for
landscaping and site treatment to include grass seeding, planting of new trees and
21
shrubs, specification of materials for fences, walls and hard surfaces, and the
proposed maintenance of amenity areas, shall be submitted to and approved as part of
the application for reserved matters.
The scheme shall also include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the
land, and details of any to be retained (which shall include details of species and
canopy spread), together with measures for their protection during the course of
development.
The scheme as approved shall be carried out not later than the next available planting
season following the commencement of development or such further period as the
Local Planning Authority may allow in writing.
9) No tree, shrub or hedgerow which is indicated on the approved plan to be retained
shall be topped, lopped, uprooted, felled or in any other way destroyed, within ten
years of the date of this permission, without the prior consent of the Local Planning
Authority in writing.
10) Before the development hereby permitted is begun, all the existing trees identified
on the approved plan to be retained shall be protected from damage during the course
of the development by means of protective fencing in accordance with the details
specified in BS5837 2005 'Trees in Relation to Construction' to the satisfaction of the
Local Planning Authority.
The protective fencing shall be maintained during the period of construction works on
the site to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Within the fenced area(s) no
soil, fuel, chemicals or materials shall be stored, temporary buildings erected plant or
vehicles parked or fires lit.
11) No development shall take place within the site until the applicants, or their agents
or successors in title have:
a) secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological evaluation in
accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has first been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority;
b) submitted the results of the archaeological evaluation to the Local Planning
Authority; and
c) secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological mitigatory work in
accordance with a second written scheme of investigation which has first been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASONS:2) The application is submitted in outline form only and the details required are
pursuant to the provisions of Article 3(1) to the Town and Country Planning (General
Development Procedure) Order 1995 and the Town and Country Planning (General
Development Procedure) (Amendment) (England) Order 2006.
3) To ensure the satisfactory layout and appearance of the development in accordance
with Policy 13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
4) To ensure satisfactory access into the site, in accordance with Policy 147 of the
adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
5) To ensure safe access to the site in accordance with Policy 147 of the adopted
North Norfolk Local Plan.
6) To ensure safe access to the site in accordance with Policy 147 of the adopted
North Norfolk Local Plan.
7) To ensure the permanent availability of the parking and manoeuvring area, in the
interests of highway safety, and in accordance with Policy 147 of the adopted North
Norfolk Local Plan.
8) To protect and enhance the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policy
13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
9) To protect and enhance the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policy
13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
22
10) In order to protect trees on the site, in accordance with the requirements of Policy
13 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
11) In the interests of recording and preserving items of archaeological interest, in
accordance with Policy 45 of the adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
HINDOLVESTON - 20080752 - Erection of single-storey garden room extension;
plot 3, 43 The Street for Mr R Eggleton
Target Date :08 Jul 2008
Case Officer :Mr G Linder
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
Selected Small village
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20041484 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Erection of three dwellings
Approved, 15 Oct 2004
20070643 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of three detached dwellings and
associated garaging
Approved, 24 May 2007
20071286 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of dwelling (revised design to
dwelling on plot 3)
Approved, 17 Oct 2007
20080079 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of car port
Approved, 11 Mar 2008
THE APPLICATION
Seeks the erection of a garden room, having a total floor area of 15sq.m, to the
eastern elevation of the dwelling. The extension would be constructed of facing bricks
to match existing under a pitched pantile roof with a ridge height of 5m. The north
elevation would have a triple French door whilst to the south elevation there would be
a double French door with two roof lights above.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Combe having regard to the following planning issue:
Relationship with the neighbouring property.
PARISH COUNCIL
Objects to the application on the following grounds (summarised):1. At the time permission was granted for the erection of the three dwellings the owner
voluntarily moved the footprint of dwelling on Plot 3 4.5m further to the west due to the
concerns of the owner of the neighbouring property to the east. The erection of a
garden room in the location proposed would again move the footprint of the dwelling
closer to the neighbouring property.
2. There have been several planning applications on this site the most recent for a car
port to the western elevation. Rather than this incremental development of the site the
Parish Council considers that all extensions should have been shown on the original
application and that the latest proposal would significantly increase the overall footprint
of the dwelling.
REPRESENTATIONS
23
One letter of objection has been received from the owners of neighbouring property to
the east, Garden House, which raises the following concerns (summarised):1. The proposed extension means that the dwelling to Plot 3 will not be in accordance
with the approved plans in terms of its overall scale and massing now that its footprint
will be increasing, resulting in an excessively large property on the site.
2. The proposed extension will mean that the dwelling is now 4.5 m closer to our
property than previously negotiated with the owner.
3. The French doors of the proposed garden room extension will have an adverse
impact on the amenities, privacy and enjoyment of our property and therefore fails to
accord with the North Norfolk Design Guide.
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 6: Residential Areas (areas primarily for residential purposes).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required for
new development).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development.
2. Impact of development on neighbouring property.
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the development boundary for Hindolveston where in
principle there would be no objection to an extension to the existing dwelling subject to
it comply with the requirements of Policy 13 of the North Norfolk Local Plan and the
North Norfolk Design Guide.
The garden room would be situated towards the northern corner of the eastern
elevation of the dwelling and would be approximately 3.5m from the 1.8m high close
boarded fence which runs the length of the eastern boundary. Beyond this is a
hedgerow some 3m in height, which is within the applicant's ownership. As a result the
total separation distance between the proposed extension and the neighbour's
boundary would be in the region of 5.5m. Whilst an extension in this location would
result in the loss of some garden area to the existing dwelling give the size of the plot it
would maintain an amenity area to the eastern side of the property in the region of 8m
in width by 17m in depth.
There would be no windows to the eastern elevation of the garden room facing directly
towards the neighbouring property. However there could be oblique views from the
double French doors to the south elevation, but any possible overlooking of Garden
24
House would be mitigated by the close boarded fence to the eastern boundary and the
hedgerow beyond.
Given the relatively modest scale of the proposed extension it is not considered that it
would have any significant impact on the neighbouring property, in terms of loss of light
or overbearing impact.
It is therefore considered that the proposed extension would not adversely affect the
amenities of neighbouring properties, but would accord with Development Plan policy
and the North Norfolk Design Guide.
RECOMMENDATION:- APPROVE
HOLT - 20071747 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; Public Conveniences Church
Street for North Norfolk District Council
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :03 Jan 2008
Case Officer :Mr M Gannon
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Town Centre
Conservation Area
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20071076 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of two semi-detached three-storey
dwellings
Withdrawn, 08 Nov 2007
THE APPLICATION
Demolition of detached single-storey purpose-built public convenience and erection of
detached three-bedroom dwelling with attached single garage. The proposals envisage
the widening of the existing pedestrian access by the demolition of a 1.8m length of
flint wall at the site frontage.
Amended plans received incorporating revised design.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
TOWN COUNCIL
Objects most strongly to the amended application. This is a non-residential street,
within a Conservation Area with adjacent listed buildings. Such a proposal is
overdevelopment. There would be traffic difficulties with this proposal (to which the
highways officer may be unfamiliar). The entrance to the proposed dwelling is where
funeral and wedding cars wait and local deliveries for the library take place. The
proposal would result in the loss of a fine wall.
REPRESENTATIONS
Letters received in respect of the originally submitted scheme:16 letters/emails from local residents and businesses and further letters from Holt and
District Chamber of Commerce and the Holt Society each raising some or all of the
following objections (summarised):1. Church Street is not a residential area.
25
2. If site is to be redeveloped it should be for business use or an amenity for the benefit
of visitors to the town.
3. Proposals will exacerbate traffic/parking problems.
4. Inappropriate position for new dwelling at entrance to churchyard.
5. Removal of part of important flint boundary wall.
6. Detract from character/appearance of this part of the Conservation Area.
7. Poorly designed house with little in common with its surroundings.
8. Overdevelopment of site with inadequate amenity space and potential overlooking of
neighbouring property.
9. Church Street serves significantly more properties than the applicant's agent implies
(including a recently approved extension to the school car park).
10. Loss of trees.
11. Loss of public convenience.
12. Awkward relationship to approved bungalow to rear/north.
13. Danger to pedestrians from traffic generated by the proposed development.
14. Loss of an attractive public building.
15. Main library building is early 19th century of high quality. Proposed building will
detract from its setting.
16. Surrounding buildings are not all 'of domestic scale'.
17. Public conveniences should be retained and enhanced for the benefit of the town.
18. This formerly private site came into public ownership for the sole purpose of the
provision of a public convenience for the town.
19. Better use for the site would be a tourist information centre/museum with
replacement public toilets.
20. Applicant's agent has under estimated the actual traffic movements in Church
Street associated with the church, school, businesses and dwellings.
21. No need for new dwelling at this location.
22. Future residents of the proposed dwelling would suffer inconvenience from the
current problems arising from traffic and parking in Church Street in association with
weddings/funerals, Sunday and daily services and concerts at the church.
23. Bell ringing could cause disturbance to future residents.
24. The site lies on the route of the Great Fire of Holt of 1708.
25. Public toilets are needed at this end of the town.
In addition to the above individual letters a petition was received containing 430
signatures objecting to the proposals on the basis that the site should be retained for
the benefit of the town including the provision of public toilets.
One email in support of the original proposals was received (summarised):Support proposals to remove public toilets little used in the past by visitors/shoppers.
Letters received in respect of the revised scheme:19 letters of objection from local residents and businesses and Holt and District
Chamber of Commerce raising some or all of the following matters (summarised):1. Detract from the appearance of the locality.
2. Increased traffic.
3. Proposed building wholly lacking in architectural merit and inappropriate in this
important location close to the church.
4. Single-storey development would be better subject to the provision of adequate
space.
5. Loss of important boundary wall (contemporary with the Georgian library building to
the west) - possibly the finest flint wall in Holt.
6. Loss of trees worthy of Tree Preservation Order.
7. Public Conveniences should be retained for the benefit of the town.
8. Site should be developed for community use/museum/Tourist Information Centre.
26
9. Church Street is not a residential location.
10. Occupiers of the proposed dwelling will suffer inconvenience from the high level of
traffic using Church Street in connection with the school, church and businesses.
11. Ringing of the church bells may cause nuisance to occupiers of the new dwelling.
12. The site should be sold to the Town Council to give Holt residents more of a say in
its eventual use.
13. Revised design has no more to commend it than the original scheme. Increased
mass will have a greater impact on the neighbouring property.
14. Proposals fail to satisfy the Council's basic amenity criterion regarding garden size.
15. The formation of the vehicular access will result in 'an accident waiting to happen'
given the high level of traffic using Church Street.
16. Proposals fail to enhance the form and character of the Conservation Area.
17. Proposed building too close to wall.
18. Two-storey development is out of keeping.
19. Loss of important trees.
20. Development of site is undemocratic.
21. Site should be developed for business use.
22. Site should be sold to Holt Town Council.
23. Trees on site frontage are likely to provide summer roost sites for bats.
24. Development of site is restricted by covenant.
25. Any financial gain shall be directed for the sole use of Holt.
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) Comments in respect of amended proposals: The proposed development would not
have a detrimental impact on the character and setting of the Holt Conservation Area.
The design could be described as 'conventional'. Should the application be approved I
would prefer to see an alternative solution to the front door and its 'colonnade'. This is
not a Georgian property. Impose standard conditions requiring the prior approval of
external materials.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Do not object to the
above application, but have the following comments and recommendations to make:The site lies within the Conservation Area of Holt, adjacent to the entrance to the
church and Gresham's playing fields. The eastern part of Church Street is
characterised by mature trees, mainly sycamore, forming a gateway to the church and
the playing fields, the church itself has an avenue of Limes. Within the site and on the
site boundary are a number of trees of a mix of species, notably sycamore, ash and
leylandii. Bordering the west of the site is a privet hedge (which is within the library
boundary) and on the east of the site is a bank with a mixture of scrub and
mature/semi-mature trees.
The proposed development would result in the loss of young ash, a semi-mature
sycamore and the leylandii trees. Two sycamores on the bank (which have grown in
close proximity to each other) to the south-east of the site are to be retained.
It is important to retain the character of Church Street and this part of Holt, therefore it
is imperative that we protect and retain the large sycamores to the front of the site.
These trees have immense public amenity and would be worthy of a Tree Preservation
Order, however as these trees are not under threat of removal it would not be
expedient to serve an Order in this instance. Although the other sycamore and ash
(which are to be removed) add some value in terms of density of the tree canopy on
the site, their contribution to the group of trees is not of such significance to warrant
protecting in the long term. The sycamore is situated to the north of the retained
sycamores making it difficult to define the tree individually from the Church Street
direction, and although it is visible from the north the remaining canopy of the other
sycamores will mitigate the impact of its removal. The loss of the ash tree is
27
regrettable, but the form of the tree has been somewhat suppressed by the dominant
sycamores and nearby leylandii resulting in a reduced canopy. The view of the tree is
partially hidden by buildings along Church Street, coming from a westerly direction,
and would be completely screened from the north by the proposed dwelling.
To ensure that the character of the area remains intact and in line with Policy 42 of the
Local Plan, I would recommend that a number of conditions are placed on any
permission given to protect the trees both during and after the development. In addition
it is highly probable that bats (a European Protected Species) may use the trees on the
site for shelter or protection, therefore the applicant should be advised of their
responsibilities under the Conservation 9natural habitats, &c) Regulations 1994 (as
amended) and a note attached to the decision notice.
County Council (Highways) - Comments in respect of amended proposals: As with the
earlier application on this site for two dwellings I have no objection to the granting of
permission. Impose standard conditions regarding access and provision of on-site
parking.
Environmental Health - Comments in respect of amended proposals: No objection.
Impose standard condition requiring submission of refuse storage details and note
advising potential for the site to be contaminated in view of historical use.
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 2: Small Towns (potential for growth subject to compatibility with existing
character).
Policy 7: Town and Large Village Centres (broad range of development/uses
encouraged).
Policy 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).
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 SS 9: Holt (identifies strategic development requirements).
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
28
1. Suitability of location for residential development.
2. Impact on the appearance and character of the Conservation Area.
3. Impact on amenities of adjoining properties.
4. Highway safety and traffic issues.
APPRAISAL
This application was deferred at the last meeting of the Committee for a site visit.
The site lies within the town centre as designated in the Local Plan. In policy terms
there is no objection to the proposed redevelopment of this site for residential
purposes given that the development does not result in the loss of retail floorspace and
given also that the erection of a single dwelling would cause no harm to the prime retail
function of Holt Town Centre (Policy 7).
The existing building on the site is of no special interest or significance. Accordingly
there can be no objection in principle to its demolition providing the redevelopment of
the site can be seen to preserve or enhance the appearance and character of this part
of the Conservation Area. The amended proposals would result in a building which is
not inappropriate in terms of its scale and design. The proposed use of lime render for
the external walls and red clay pantiles for the roof is considered suitable for this
location as are the general scale and design. The Conservation, Design and
Landscape Manager's reservations concerning the proposed front door and colonnade
could be addressed with a suitable condition requiring the prior submission and
approval of precise details prior to construction.
The amended proposals would result in a satisfactory relationship with all surrounding
properties. Concern has been expressed regarding the impact of this development on
the approved single-storey dwelling to the rear (north) of the site. Whilst the proposed
building would clearly have some impact this side the distances are not considered to
be unreasonable and it should also be noted that only one small window is proposed in
the facing wall of the proposed building at first floor, this serving a bathroom. In any
case the distance between facing windows would exceed the Local Plan basic amenity
criteria. A condition requiring the window to be fitted with obscured glass would ensure
that there is no overlooking or loss of privacy.
The Highway Authority has no objection to the proposal.
The amended proposals conform with Development Plan policy and the application is
therefore recommended for approval.
RECOMMENDATION:Approve subject to appropriate conditions.
HOLT - 20080499 - Conversion and extension to provide six units of holiday
accommodation; The Tithe Barn Letheringsett Hill for Indigo Touchwood Limited
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :23 May 2008
Case Officer :Mr G Lyon
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of High Landscape Value
Archaeological Site
29
Corridor of Movement
Countryside
Listed Building Grade II
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
19950234 - (Full Planning Permission) - Change of use to B1 - light industrial
Approved, 16 May 1995
19950983 - (Full Planning Permission) - Change of use from industrial to holiday
accommodation
Withdrawn, 20 Nov 1995
19951425 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of extension to provide living
accommodation in association with existing workshop
Approved, 21 Jun 1996
19980317 - (Full Planning Permission) - Continued use of barn for a mixed use of B1,
light industrial and A1, retail
Refused, 05 Jun 1998
Appeal Dismissed, 11 Feb 1999
THE APPLICATION
Seeks permission to convert and extend the buildings to form six units of holiday
accommodation comprising one 3-bed unit, three 2-bed units and two 1-bed units.
Proposals would require addition of new windows. Six car parking spaces are
proposed.
Amended plans have been received concerning size and form of new window
openings.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Baker having regard to the following planning issue:
Prominent building on the approach to Holt from the west.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection.
CONSULTATIONS
Letheringsett Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
Building Control Manager - Original plans concerned about means of escape.
Amended Plans: Awaiting comments.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - No
objection in principle subject to changes to window details, glazing bar patterns and
subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Amended plans satisfactory subject to reduction on size of the three-light windows in
elevations A-A and F-F being reduced to two light. (Applicant has agreed to make
further change.)
County Council (Highways) - Awaiting comments.
Environmental Health - Due to site history there is a potential for contamination
(furniture manufacturers). Recommend appropriate conditions and note to applicant
with any decision notice.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
30
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 5: The Countryside (prevents general development in the countryside with
specific exceptions).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required for
new development).
Policy 29: The Reuse and Adaptation of Buildings in the Countryside (specifies criteria
for converting buildings. Prevents residential conversion unless adjacent to a
settlement boundary).
Policy 37: Alterations and Extensions to Listed Buildings (prevents proposals which
would be detrimental to character).
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).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
Policy EN 9: Biodiversity & geology (requires no adverse impact on designated nature
conservation sites).
Policy EC 2: The re-use of buildings in the Countryside (specifies criteria for converting
buildings for non-residential purposes).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
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 the development.
2. Impact on the form and character of the listed building.
3. Impact on the setting of the listed building.
4. Impact on the form and character of the Conservation Area.
5. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
The site is located in the Countryside policy area within which there is no objection to
the principle of converting existing buildings for holiday use provided that the proposal
complies with relevant saved Local Plan policies.
31
The main building, which is the most prominent element from the A148, is Grade II
listed and the older adjoining buildings are considered to be listed as curtilage
buildings. The site lies within the Glaven Valley Conservation Area.
It is considered that the buildings are soundly built and capable of conversion without
substantial re-building. From the road, the proposed changes to the listed building
would be limited with the exception of a new front door. No new windows, roof lights or
doors are proposed to the elevations facing the road or to the older parts of the
buildings facing the access track. On the private, southern side of the building, two
conservation rooflights and a ground floor window are proposed only. Changes to
other parts of the existing building are designed to improve aesthetic appearance,
whilst complying with Building Regulation requirements. On this basis it is considered
that, with the use of appropriate materials and detailing, the proposal would preserve
both the appearance and character of the listed building as well as preserve the
character and appearance of the Glaven Valley Conservation Area.
In respect of the issue of new build, the existing buildings on site have a total footprint
of approximately 422sq.m. A timber garage is proposed to be demolished (34sq.m)
along with a modern lean-to (24sq.m) and shed (8sq.m) and an element of new build is
proposed in its place to the southern end of the site of some 65sq.m linking with the
existing. As such, the element of new build represents 15% of the original footprint but,
as a result of demolition of existing structures, there would be no net gain in footprint.
On this basis it is considered that the proposal would accord with Policy 29.
In respect of highway safety implications, the applicant has proposed six car parking
spaces, which accords with advice given at pre-application stage. In respect of access
onto the A148 (Corridor of Movement), advice is still awaited from County Council
(Highways) and the Committee will be updated orally.
Subject to no objections from consultees and satisfactory amended plans being
received regarding window sizes and the imposition of appropriate conditions, the
proposal is considered to comply with saved Local Plan Policies.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to approve, subject to no objection from County Council
(Highways), receipt of satisfactorily amended plans in respect of window sizes
and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
HOLT - 20080552 - Alterations to former barn and outbuilding to form dwellings;
The Tithe Barn Letheringsett Hill for Indigo Touchwood Limited
Target Date :28 May 2008
Case Officer :Mr G Lyon
(Alteration to Listed Building)
See 20080499 also on this agenda.
CONSTRAINTS
Area of High Landscape Value
Archaeological Site
Corridor of Movement
Countryside
Conservation Area
32
Listed Building Grade II
THE APPLICATION
Seeks to convert and extend the existing buildings to form six units of holiday
accommodation comprising of one 3-bed unit, three 2-bed units and two 1-bed units.
Amended plans have been received concerning size and form of new window
openings.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Baker having regard to the following planning issue:
Prominent building on the approach to Holt from the west.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection.
CONSULTATIONS
Letheringsett Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - No
objection in principle subject to changes to window details, glazing bar patterns and
subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
Amended plans satisfactory subject to reduction on size of the three-light windows in
elevations A-A and F-F being reduced to two light.
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 37: Alterations and Extensions to Listed Buildings (prevents proposals which
would be detrimental to character).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
MAIN ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Impact on the form and character of the listed building.
APPRAISAL
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager considers that, subject to the
receipt of satisfactory amended plans regarding the sizes of new windows, the
proposal would be considered to preserve the special character and appearance of the
listed building.
33
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to approve, subject to receipt of satisfactorily amended
plans regarding the sizes of new windows and subject to the imposition of
appropriate conditions.
RAYNHAM - 20080506 - Erection of fifty-eight dwellings; RAF West Raynham
Massingham Road West Raynham for Tamarix Investments Limited
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :27 Jun 2008
Case Officer :Mr M Gannon
(Outline Planning Permission)
See also 20080507 below.
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
Open Land Area
Parish Boundary Consultation Area
Selected Small Village
Contaminated Land
THE APPLICATION
The erection of 48 detached, semi-detached and terraced two-storey dwellings and a
two-storey block comprising 10 flats. The proposed dwellings would be spread within
and adjoining the two distinct areas of former MoD housing to the north-east and west
of the former airbase complex.
Access, layout and scale are under consideration at this stage. Vehicular access to all
the proposed units would be achieved by utilising/upgrading the existing road network
within the site. It is proposed that the scale of all new buildings would reflect the
existing buildings
Twenty-three of the proposed units are offered as affordable homes.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
There have been no previous applications on the site but the five other applications
have been submitted in conjunction with this application which give a fuller picture of
the applicant's proposals for the site as a whole:
20080507 - Conversion of hangars to twenty loft style holiday apartments.
20080508 - Change of use of community centre to site office/sales centre and barrack
block 101 as temporary housing for site construction workers.
20080509 - Change of use of former MoD buildings to community centre, creche
health care clinic, aviation museum and church.
20080510 - Use of building 28 as A1 (retail shop).
20080511 - Use of former MoD buildings as squash court and gymnasium.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
34
Objects. This proposal is the largest development in the Parish since RAF West
Raynham was built and it is proposed at a time when the North Norfolk District Council
Local Development Framework is incomplete. Given that there are still 150+ houses to
refurbish and sell/let North Norfolk District Council should defer this proposal until it
can be assessed in relation to the Local Development Framework.
REPRESENTATIONS
Three letters of objection from local residents (summarised):
1. Surrounding road network is inadequate to safely accommodate the traffic
associated with the proposed development both when the houses are built and during
the construction phase.
2. Noise and disturbance to nearby residents arising from increased traffic.
3. A new link road to the A1065 should be constructed at the developer's expense
bypassing existing dwellings.
4. Impact on traffic levels should first be monitored when the existing housing stock is
fully re-occupied.
The applicant has submitted the following information in support of the application:1. Arboricultural Survey and Assessment.
2. Habitat and Protected Species Survey and Report.
3. Flood Risk Assessment.
4. Community Involvement Statement.
5. Historical and Site Development Study.
6. Land Contamination Assessment.
7. Lighting/Light Pollution Statement.
8. Open Space Statement.
9. Utilities Statement.
10. Transport Statement.
These documents are available for inspection in the Planning Office.
The applicant's 'Mission Statement and General Ethos' is appended to the Agenda
(see Appendix 3).
CONSULTATIONS
East Rudham Parish Council - Object. East Rudham Parish Council considered all the
applications together as the Parish Council's concerns are for the impact
developments at RAF West Raynham will have on the residents of East Rudham. East
Rudham Parish Council is very concerned that the road from the airbase to East
Rudham is designated as a heavy/light traffic route. East Rudham is currently
experiencing high and difficult traffic movements through the parish. Any significant
increase in traffic movements would be intolerable. East Rudham Parish Council
considers that a comprehensive traffic survey needs to be carried out to determine the
level of traffic which would converge at the A148 at East Rudham. The Parish Council
is also concerned regarding the support services, e.g. sewerage. The facilities at East
Rudham would be unable to cope with the sewerage outfall created by the
development at West Raynham Airfield.
Great Massingham Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
West Rudham Parish Council - No objection. Subject to review of the transport links.
Residents will not be confined to work on site as in RAF days so much more traffic is
likely on access roads that are little better than country lanes. New building should not
be considered until existing housing stock is sold off. All external lighting to be
focussed downwards.
35
Helhoughton Parish Council - Object. There are very real concerns regarding the
increase in traffic through Helhoughton If consent is granted for the building of 58 new
dwellings as per application 20080506 and the conversion of hangars to loft style
holiday apartments as per application 20080507. Helhoughton Parish Council
considers that the increased traffic through Helhoughton generated by this proposal
would be totally unacceptable.
Little Massingham Parish Council - Object. The Parish objection to this proposal is on
the basis that at present none of the services have been proved effective. There are
numerous houses yet to be sold and with this are the effects on the wider community.
How will all these houses be served as far as schooling? All local schools are full. The
traffic is a major issue especially as when it was an RAF base most worked on site and
so had no need to commute. Such a large community must be fully planned prior to
any new build going ahead and the existing infrastructure must be seen to work first.
Weasenham St Peter Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
Anglian Water - Awaiting comments.
Breckland District Council - The submission version of the North Norfolk Local
Development Framework Core Strategy identifies former RAF West Raynham in the
Economy policies as a location for economic re-use provided such re-use is on the
Technical Areas. The North Norfolk Local Development Framework recognises that a
careful balance needs to be struck between the need to take a positive approach to the
re-use of these areas and the fact that in wider sustainability terms they are poorly
located in terms of accessibility to services and facilities.
The provision of 58 new 'infill' housing units within the existing residential areas is not
of a scale to directly concern Breckland. In principle the proposal for new housing is
contrary to national policy set out in PPS1, PPS3, PPS7, PPG13, regional policy and
North Norfolk's emerging Local Development Framework policy, all of which seek to
direct new housing provision to sustainable locations (market towns and local service
centres) and where there is an identified need. The re-use of existing housing stock
would have met the small localised need and any additional housing is likely to
exacerbate unsustainable travel patterns, including traffic through Weasenham
(identified in the Transport Statement as a 'major route to the site').
The proposal to provide a new community centre, recreation facilities and a retail shop
will provide new facilities reasonably close to Breckland communities such as
Weasenham and Wellingham where there is currently a paucity of service provision.
In principle Breckland Council raises an objection to the residential element of this
proposal in terms of the unsustainable location and potential impact on Breckland
Communities identified as being on a 'major transport route' to the site.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - Awaiting Comments.
County Council (Highways) - The Mission Statement and Preamble talks about an
opportunity to re-create a sustainable village community. I consider that it is premature
to be looking at individual applications before a master plan for the site is produced
showing how that will be done. Is the scale of what is being proposed really
sustainable? Ideally a development large enough to sustain a primary school should
be developed. If a new village is to be formed here the question is what is the best and
most sustainable way to do that. New housing should be matched by new employment
opportunities. I am concerned that we will end up with a commuter village in the
countryside. Traffic and transport issues are clearly going to be important and
decisions need to be made in the light of how the whole site will be redeveloped not on
a piecemeal basis.
36
It is recognised that this site must have generated traffic when the base was in use and
that there are a significant number of building assets on the site that could be reused.
However, there has been no meaningful assessment of the former traffic and transport
situation at the site in the lead up to the site being closed to establish a realistic traffic
base from the site in its recent past and an understanding of the traffic and transport
solutions in place at that time. The applicant's Transport Statement is not accepted.
Access for construction traffic will be a major issue with this site. The route out to the
A148 at East Rudham is apparently the route formally used by the RAF. This route
should be properly surveyed to look at its suitability as a construction traffic route and
identify any necessary improvements such as passing bays on stretches of road that
are less than 5.5m wide. There will be a need for a legal agreement to be in place to
address the issue of extra-ordinary wear and tear caused by construction traffic and for
all construction traffic to use only this route to the site.
The refurbishment of the existing housing will lead to the County Council as Education
Authority having to fund bussing for Primary and Secondary pupils to local schools.
According to the application preamble (page 2) there are 128 married quarters and 44
officers quarters houses extant on the site. This total of 172 houses is estimated to
bring forward this many children:
Age 5-11: 43.69, Age 11-16: 24.08, Age 16-18: 4.82
Planning permission is being sought for an additional 58 dwellings, comprising 10
multi-bed flats and 48 multi-bed houses, equating to 53 family houses, which are
estimated to bring forward this many children:
Age 5-11: 13.46, Age 11-16: 7.42, Age 16-18: 1.48
The County will therefore have to lay on two new schools services to get children to
the local primary school in Raynham and Secondary school pupils to Fakenham. The
children from the new housing will be able to be accommodated on the buses for the
existing housing so the new housing will not give rise to additional buses being
needed.
I recommend a holding highway objection until a proper Transport Assessment has
been carried out to support all the applications. I will, of course, be willing to discuss
the scope of this document with the developer to avoid abortive or unnecessary work
being undertaken.
County Council (Planning) Education: There is sufficient space at local schools to absorb the likely number of
children which the development will bring forward. Accordingly the County Council's
Children's Services Department will not be seeking developer contributions on this
occasion.
Fire Service: Norfolk Fire Services have indicated that the proposed development will
require the following infrastructure, depending on whether there are plans for the site
to be served by mains water. Either 3 hydrants or a charged static water tank (or
similar to the satisfaction of fire and rescue authority) will have to be provided by the
developer. If hydrants are to be provided these will have to be installed during
construction to the satisfaction of Norfolk Fire Service and at no cost. The hydrants
could be delivered through a planning condition.
Library Provision: Additional stock will be required to increase the capacity of the
service. A developer contribution of £3,480 (ie £60 per dwelling) will be sought payable
in one lump sum on occupation of the tenth dwelling.
Environment: There may be a requirement for landscaping and future maintenance of
planted areas on highway land. Where there are mature trees, hedges or other
vegetation bounding the site and these are growing on land to be adopted as part of
the highway, a commuted sum will be required to cover their future maintenance.
Environment Agency (Comments summarised):
37
Flood Risk: Applicant's Flood Risk Assessment is insufficient in considering flood risk.
Further information is requested in this respect. Further comments will be submitted
pending receipt of the enhanced FRA.
Groundwater and Contaminated Land: The information provided indicates the possible
presence of a fuel storage tank, oil/lubricant/inflammable storage/workshop,
transformer and a possibly backfilled marl pit on or adjacent to the proposed
development site 'B' and a possibly filled marl pit on development site 'C'. As these
uses of the site may have caused contamination that poses a risk to controlled waters
the Environment Agency will object to the application unless conditions are imposed,
a) requiring the submission of a scheme to identify contaminants and assess the risks
to all potential receptors and propose any necessary remedial measures, b) the
carrying out of and verification of recommended works, c) provision of a long term
monitoring and maintenance plan and d) cessation of development if contamination not
previously identified is found to be present on the site pending further discussion with
the Local planning Authority.
Water Quality: No objection to the reuse of the existing sewage treatment works,
subject to further consideration of the requirement for nutrient removal. A discharge
consent will be needed.
Environmental Health - No objection. Notwithstanding the general information
submitted with the application a condition should be imposed requiring an investigation
and assessment into the presence of possible contaminants affecting the site and the
subsequent implementation of any necessary measures arising from the report.
Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council - The application does not present any
concerns for the Borough of Kings Lynn and West Norfolk.
Planning Policy Manager - 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 5: The Countryside (prevents general development in the countryside with
specific exceptions).
Policy 6: Residential Areas (areas primarily for residential purposes).
Policy 8: Open Land Areas (protected against general development - reserved for
leisure/recreation purposes).
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).
38
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
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).
Policy EN 4: Design (specifies criteria that proposals should have regard to, including
the North Norfolk Design Guide and sustainable construction).
Policy EC 4: Redundant defence establishments (specifies criteria for development at
redundant defence establishments).
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).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Conflict with Development Plan Policy.
2. Adequacy of the surrounding highway network to accommodate additional traffic.
APPRAISAL
This application was deferred at the last meeting to await outstanding consultation
replies and enable the applicants to respond to the comments received.
West Raynham Airbase is designated in the Local Plan as a Selected Small Village.
The Local Plan identifies two residential areas within the settlement. These comprise
the former officers' quarters (44 dwellings) and the former married quarters (128
dwellings). These two areas are quite separate and distinct. The married quarters
comprise a fairly tight-knit development of two-storey semi-detached and terraced
houses while the officers' quarters comprise a more loose-knit development of
detached and semi-detached two-storey houses. The applicant's intention is to
renovate all of the existing housing stock. This process has already commenced.
Under Local Plan policy it would be acceptable to build individual dwellings or small
groups of dwellings within the existing residential areas designated as residential in the
Local Plan. Any larger proposals would have to include affordable units for those in
excess of four. It is accepted that had this been a 'traditional' settlement there could
have been incremental development over the years resulting in a substantial increase
in the total number of dwellings. It is only the closure of the airbase and subsequent
retention of the site in MoD ownership that has prevented this from happening.
Prior to submission of the planning application discussions took place between officers
and the applicant (without prejudice) to establish the total number of infill plots that
could potentially have been developed over the years within the designated
development boundary and in compliance with Local Plan policies. This theoretical
exercise resulted in the number of dwellings currently proposed. However, in
producing the layout now proposed this number of units is proposed to be sited more
logically to reflect the character of existing development and this has placed 29 of the
units outside (but adjacent to) the village development boundary. The proposals also
envisage 15 new dwellings on land identified in the Local Plan as Open Land Area.
The current proposals are clearly contrary to Local Plan policy. Firstly the number of
units exceeds the Local Plan definition of a small group of houses. Secondly, twentynine of the proposed dwellings fall outside the development boundary within the
Countryside policy area. Thirdly, fifteen of the proposed new dwellings would be built
on land identified in the Local Plan as Open Land Areas. Therefore there is a case for
39
refusal on policy grounds. However, it is accepted that 58 dwellings (in small groups)
could have been provided within the Selected Small Village in accordance with policy.
If the number of dwellings had been provided over time in groups of up to four there
would have been no requirement for affordable housing. Neither would the
infrastructure enhancements and community facilities now being offered have been
achievable. Furthermore the current proposals provide the opportunity for a more
spacious and better quality of development than would have been achievable within
the confines of the Selected Small Village boundary.
The applicant's acquisition and control of the entire site does present a unique
opportunity to create a sustainable community within the confines of the former
airbase. Within the many redundant buildings on the site opportunities exist to
introduce future community and employment opportunities and Members will note that
current proposals for some of these buildings are put forward in the current planning
applications. In addition the applicants have now submitted a plan indicating
preferred/suggested uses for the majority of buildings on the site in addition to those
subject of the current planning applications. This would provide for a mix of
commercial/employment uses for which further planning applications will need to be
submitted in due course. Given the size and number of useable buildings on the
airbase it is considered that the applicant's proposals to expand the resident
population deserve serious consideration.
The applicant's intention is to create a sustainable village community environment.
Linked with an eco-friendly programme of refurbishment it is also proposed to
incorporate the following measures:
1. Reconstruction of the private sewage treatment plant.
2. Repair and improvement to private borehole for water provision.
3. Rainwater recycling.
4. Improvements to electricity infrastructure including private generation.
5. Biomass electricity and central heating plant (subject to planning permission) for
electricity generation and community heating in existing buildings.
6. Incorporation of all possible insulation procedures.
7. Solar heat and possible ground source heat systems where appropriate.
8. Advanced waste recycling.
9. Upgrading of existing environmental layout to give security and privacy.
In association with this application the applicant is offering to enter into a Section 106
Obligation in respect of the following measures:
1. Provision of 23 affordable homes under the auspices of a registered social landlord
within an agreed timetable linked to the release of the new market housing.
2. Designation of protected zones of open space.
3. Provision of community centre and creche when 50% of the existing housing stock
has been re-occupied.
4. Provision of a shop within 6 to 9 months.
5. Covenant not to develop any further infill plots within the designated village
settlement boundaries.
6. Provision of the gymnasium, squash and tennis courts within an agreed timetable.
Further discussions are taking place between the applicant and County Council
Highways with a view to establishing precisely what would be required of the
developers to overcome the highway objection. Members will be updated at the
meeting as to progress regarding the matter. It is clear from a number of the
consultation responses that the highway issues are of considerable importance in this
case. Subject to the outcome of these discussions and the resolution of all outstanding
technical issues it is considered that the potential benefits arising from the overall
40
proposals for the former airbase may justify consideration as a departure from
Development Plan policy.
Any further responses received will be reported at the meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:The Committee will be updated at the meeting.
RAYNHAM - 20080507 - Conversion of hangers to twenty loft style holiday
apartments; RAF West Raynham Massingham Road West Raynham for Tamarix
Investments Limited
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :27 Jun 2008
Case Officer :Mr M Gannon
(Full Planning Permission)
See also 20080506 above.
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside
Contaminated Land
THE APPLICATION
Change of use and conversion of four large similar aircraft hangars to create 20
holiday apartments. The four buildings are of steel frame/concrete construction with
glazed panels in the main front/rear walls and sliding doors in the side elevations. Each
of the buildings has a footprint of approx. 91m x 57m. The application seeks
permission for change of use only. No details have been submitted but the applicant's
Design and Access Statement outlines the concept of the creation of an "airpark"
enabling individuals to use the airstrip for their own aircraft coupled with the
opportunity of having their own rented apartment for a limited duration. The self
contained apartments would be created within the vast roof spaces, with south facing
balconies overlooking the proposed short runway.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Objects. The proposal is residential in nature yet it lies in the "technical" area of the
former airbase (see Core Strategy Policy EC4) and not in the area identified as
residential.
REPRESENTATIONS
Three letters of objection from nearby resident (summarised):
1. Concern regarding the adequacy of the local road network to accommodate
additional traffic.
2. Possible fire risk if it proposed to create living accommodation above aircraft storage
areas.
3. Noise associated with aircraft movements.
4. Risk to RAF aircraft who still carry out low level flights in the area.
5. New link road should be constructed at the developer's expense to the A1065
bypassing existing dwellings.
41
CONSULTATIONS
East Rudham Parish Council - Object. East Rudham Parish Council considered all the
applications together as the Parish Council's concerns are for the impact
developments at RAF West Raynham will have on the residents of East Rudham. East
Rudham Parish Council are very concerned that the road from the airbase to East
Rudham is designated as a heavy/light traffic route. East Rudham is currently
experiencing high and difficult traffic movements through the parish. Any significant
increase in traffic movements would be intolerable. East Rudham Parish Council
considers that a comprehensive traffic survey needs to be carried out to determine the
level of traffic which would converge at the A148 at East Rudham. The Parish Council
is also concerned regarding the support services, eg sewerage. The facilities at East
Rudham would be unable to cope with the sewerage outfall created by the
development at West Raynham Airfield.
Great Massingham Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
Weasenham St Peter Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
West Rudham Parish Council - No objection. Need not obvious; Should not develop
into a "holiday village". All external lighting to be focussed downwards
Helhoughton Parish Council - Object. There are very real concerns regarding the
increase in traffic through Helhoughton if consent is granted for the building of 58 new
dwellings as per application 20080506 and the conversion of hangars to loft style
holiday apartments as per application 20080507. Helhoughton Parish Council
considers that the increased traffic through Helhoughton generated by this proposal
would be totally unacceptable.
Little Massingham Parish Council - Object. Is this a viable option? The Parish Council
feel that the area needs affordable housing not holiday homes. There are still unsold
holiday barns close by at Woodfarm, Helhoughton unsold for two years so why have
more in this area?
Anglian Water - Awaiting comments.
Breckland District Council - The submission version of the North Norfolk LDF Core
Strategy identifies former RAF West Raynham in the Economy policies as a location
for economic re-use provided such re-use is on the Technical Areas. The North Norfolk
LDF recognises that a careful balance needs to be struck between the need to take a
positive approach to the re-use of these areas and the fact that in wider sustainability
terms they are poorly located in terms of accessibility to services and facilities.
Conservation, Design and Landscape (Landscape) - Awaiting comments.
County Council (Highways) - The Mission Statement and Preamble talks about an
opportunity to re-create a sustainable village community. I consider that it is premature
to be looking at individual applications before a master plan for the site is produced
showing how that will be done. Is the scale of what is being proposed really
sustainable? Ideally a development large enough to sustain a primary school should
be developed. If a new village is to be formed here the question is what is the best and
most sustainable way to do that. New housing should be matched by new employment
opportunities. I am concerned that we will end up with a commuter village in the
countryside. Traffic and transport issues are clearly going to be important and
decisions need to be made in the light of how the whole site will be redeveloped not on
a piecemeal basis.
42
It is recognised that this site must have generated traffic when the base was in use and
that there are a significant number of building assets on the site that could be reused.
However, there has been no meaningful assessment of the former traffic and transport
situation at the site in the lead up to the site being closed to establish a realistic traffic
base from the site in its recent past and an understanding of the traffic and transport
solutions in place at that time. The applicant's Transport Statement is not accepted.
Access for construction traffic will be a major issue with this site. The route out to the
A148 at East Rudham is apparently the route formally used by the RAF. This route
should be properly surveyed to look at its suitability as a construction traffic route and
identify any necessary improvements such as passing bays on stretches of road that
are less than 5.5m wide. There will be a need for a legal agreement to be in place to
address the issue of extra-ordinary wear and tear caused by construction traffic and for
all construction traffic to use only this route to access the site.
In themselves the loft style holiday apartments are unlikely to cause significant
problems post construction. However, they will eat into the base traffic level and that
impact needs to be assessed and addressed.
Environment Agency - Standard advice regarding the provision of private sewage
treatment plants and surface water disposal
Environmental Health - No objection in principle. has some concerns over the noise
aspect of aeroplanes arriving and taxiing under the apartments in respect of both noise
and hours of use. If possible would like further details or to agree some of these issues
before approval. If this is not possible then would need to look at conditions around
hours of use, insulation and noise control. Also has concerns over the storage of
hazardous material, fuel etc, in and out of the aeroplanes which would be stored below
the residential apartments.
Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council - the application does not present any
concerns for the Borough of Kings Lynn and West Norfolk
Planning Obligations Co Ordinator - Fire Service: Norfolk Fire Services have indicated
that the proposed development will require the following infrastructure, depending on
whether there are plans for the site to be served by mains water. Either 3 hydrants or a
charged static water tank (or similar to the satisfaction of fire and rescue authority) will
have to be provided by the developer. If hydrants are to be provided these will have to
be installed during construction to the satisfaction of Norfolk Fire Service and at no
cost. The hydrants could be delivered through a planning condition.
Environment: There may be a requirement for landscaping and future maintenance of
planted areas on highway land. Where there are mature trees, hedges or other
vegetation bounding the site and these are growing on land to be adopted as part of
the highway, a commuter sum will be required to cover their future maintenance.
No contribution will be sought in respect of Education and Library Provision in this
instance.
Fire Officer - No objections as visually there will probably be no real difference.
However, we would like to maintain our consultation with Building Control when more
detailed plans are submitted. Due to volatile nature of aviation fuel we will be very
interested in the proposed fire engineering solutions proposed with mixed use hangars
with sleeping accommodation above the parked aircraft within the buildings.
Building Control Manager - No comment.
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology - The proposed development affects military airfield
buildings of pre-Second World War date. Military airfield buildings of this period are
43
disappearing from the County as a result of development and have been identified as a
priority in the regional research frameworks for archaeology.
If planning permission is granted, we therefore ask that a condition requiring a
programme of archaeological works in accordance with PPS16 be imposed.
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 5: The Countryside (prevents general development in the countryside with
specific exceptions).
Policy 29: The Reuse and Adaptation of Buildings in the Countryside (specifies criteria
for converting buildings. Prevents residential conversion unless adjacent to a
settlement boundary).
Policy 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 SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy EC 4: Redundant defence establishments (specifies criteria for development at
redundant defence establishments).
Policy HO 9: Re-use of rural buildings as dwellings (specifies criteria for converting
buildings to dwellings).
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 10: Holiday and seasonal occupancy conditions (specifies the conditions to
be attached to new unserviced holiday accommodation).
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. Appropriateness of use of buildings
2. Adequacy of the surrounding highway network to accommodate additional traffic.
APPRAISAL
This application was deferred at the last meeting to enable further consultation of the
environmental health and safety issues arising from the development.
44
The application relates to four large structures arranged in a crescent at the south
eastern edge of the developed part of the former airbase. The buildings are the largest
remaining structures on the airbase and are a prominent feature in the landscape.
The buildings are situated in the Countryside policy area as designated in the Local
Plan. Conversion to holiday accommodation is in broad compliance with Local Plan
Policy 5 (recreation/tourism). However, given the countryside location the proposed
change of use has to be considered with particular reference to Local Plan Policy 29.
The buildings appear to be in generally sound condition. The applicant's Design and
Access Statement suggests that the change of use could be achieved with no
significant alteration to the external appearance other than the introduction of roof
glazing and opening up of the existing glazed areas on the elevations facing the
runways. In this respect it is accepted that the proposed change of use could preserve
the appearance and character of these interesting buildings in compliance with the
physical requirements of Local Plan Policy 29. In any case, if the eventual detailed
proposals result in material alterations to the external appearance of the buildings
these would have to be the subject of a further application for planning permission.
Notwithstanding the unusual nature of these buildings their proposed re-use for holiday
purposes accords with Development Plan policy in broad terms.
The applicants are in discussion with County Council Highways. Broadly, the
applicants have stated a willingness to fund improvements to the surrounding road
network in association with the various development proposals for the site. Members
will be updated as to the progress of these discussions at the meeting.
With regard to the environmental health issues further information has been sought
from the applicants' agent. Members will, however, note that neither the Building
Control Manager nor the Fire Officer has raised objections to the development in
principle.
Subject to the resolution of the concerns raised by County Council Highways and
subject to no new grounds of objection being received the application is recommended
for approval.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to approve subject to no new grounds of objection from
outstanding consultees and prior resolution of the concerns raised by County
Council Highways regarding the impact of the proposals on the surrounding
highway network, and to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
RYBURGH - 20080619 - Change of use from office/storage to ten residential
dwellings, one residential flat and A1 (post office/store); The Granary Station
Road Great Ryburgh for Michael McNamara Associates
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :04 Jul 2008
Case Officer :Mr G Lyon
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of High Landscape Value
Archaeological Site
Residential
45
Railway Proposal
Selected Small Village
Village Employment
Wensum Valley Project
Contaminated Land
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20070637 - (Full Planning Permission) - Change of use from office to four residential
units
Withdrawn, 31 May 2007
20071266 - (Full Planning Permission) - Change of use from B1/B2 (business/general
industrial) to A1/A3 (shop and store/restaurant)
Withdrawn, 12 Oct 2007
THE APPLICATION
Seeks to convert the granary building and change its use to create 10 residential
dwellings (8 two-storey and 2 single-storey), one flat and an A1 (post office/store).
Access would be taken from Station Road via the existing Maltings access with parking
for 15 cars at the northern end. Gardens for the proposed units would be on the
eastern side ranging in depth from approximately 3.5m to 10m.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Support.
REPRESENTATIONS
Nine letters of support have been received. Summary of comments:1. Applicant has sought in vain to find commercial users for the property.
2. These proposals represent a practical way forward.
3. The village shop is going to close and this proposal will help fill the void.
4. Will provide valuable affordable and starter homes for young people.
5. A Community Interest Company, Ryburgh Community Enterprise CIC, has been
incorporated to run the shop and post office. (incorporation number: 06563430 registered 11 April 2008).
6. The owner of the Granary will gift the shop premises to the company and has
agreed to let the village buy the first unit of housing for less than the market value to
provide extra space. The additional space will allow the company to establish more
than just a shop but a tea room and maybe a doctor's surgery.
7. This is a real opportunity for Great Ryburgh to take a step forward to sustain the
village for the future.
8. The shop will be of great benefit to those who do not have a car.
9. Grants have been received for the project.
10. If the application fails, the impact on Great Ryburgh will be huge.
Applicants' Design and Access Statement attached at Appendix 4
Letter from applicants in response to Committee's deferral of application at last
meeting attached as Appendix 5
CONSULTATIONS
Anglian Water - Awaiting comments.
46
County Council (Transportation) - Expresses concerns over cotrol of the private access
road, visibility at its junction with Station Road and lack of customers roadside
footpath. Full comments attached at Appendix 6
Environmental Health - Recommend conditions regarding control of noise (from
adjacent Crisp Maltings), contamination assessment (if digging up ground for water
pipes etc) and lighting condition.
Planning Policy Manager - Awaiting comments.
Strategic Housing - There is a substantial need for affordable housing across the
district, a Strategic Housing Market Assessment undertaken by Fordham Research
identifies a need for in excess of 900 affordable dwellings per year. There are at
present 267 applicants currently on the Council's Common Housing Register who have
indicated a preference for Great Ryburgh.
Policies 4 and 58
Under the above policies 'in selected small villages development proposals for more
than four dwellings may be permitted provided that all the excess dwellings are for
affordable housing'.
The proposals are for the conversion of the existing office and storage buildings
resulting in the creation of eleven residential units plus a Post Office/Store. Therefore
under Policy 58, the maximum of four will be permitted for sale on the open market
with seven dwellings being affordable. The applicant has included for 5 of the units to
be affordable. However, the above Local Plan policies have been in existence for a
number of years and the cost of the requirement for the full quota of affordable housing
may be prohibitive to the re-development. The applicant has provided no supporting
financial information to support a reduction in the amount of affordable housing
required under the above policies.
In conclusion Strategic Housing supports this application subject to the applicant
meeting the Council's affordable housing requirement in terms of quota, affordability
and mix.
A Section 106 Agreement will be required for all affordable housing contributions made
under Policies 58. The Section 106 Agreement will be completed prior to the issuing of
outline or full planning consent (whichever is first). This agreement will include
provisions to ensure:
the agreement is a local land charge;
the amount, type and mix of the affordable housing;
in instances of on-site provision the applicant will covenant to transfer completed
affordable housing units built to an agreed standard and at an agreed cost to a
Registered Social Landlord which requires no grant subsidy and whereby the
Registered Social Landlord will be able to charge social rent levels or an affordable
level of shared equity for low cost home ownership;
that the dwellings are occupied initially, and in perpetuity, only by those in housing
need;
phasing of dwelling provision.
Economic and Tourism Development Manager - 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.
47
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 10: Village Employment Areas (reserved for small-scale business, industrial,
storage purposes).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required for
new development).
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 58: Affordable Housing in Selected Small Villages (developments of over four
dwellings should be made up of affordable housing provision, subject to genuine local
needs).
Policy 73: Development in Village Employment Areas (specifies criteria for
development appropriate for such areas, in terms of uses, size, type and
environmental impacts).
Policy 132: Fakenham to Norwich Disused Railway Trackbed (safeguards against
prejudicial development).
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).
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 HO 1: Dwelling mix and type (specifies type and mix of dwellings for new
housing developments).
Policy HO 3: Affordable housing in the Countryside (specifies the exceptional
circumstances under which affordable housing developments will be allowed in the
Countryside policy area).
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 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).
Policy CT 7: Safeguarding land for sustainable transport uses (safeguards railway land
against prejudicial development).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of the development.
2. Affordable housing.
48
3. Impact on the amenity of adjacent residential properties.
4. Impact on character of the existing building.
5. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
Determination of this application was deferred at the last meeting to allow discussions
with the agent regarding the level of affordable housing, to await consultation
responses and to seek the views of the Economic and Tourism Development Manager
in respect of demand for business and storage uses.
The application site is within a village employment area where B1, B2 and B8 uses are
normally considered acceptable, whilst the introduction or intensification of nonemployment generating uses will not be permitted. As such, the proposed
development would be contrary to the saved policy in the North Norfolk Local Plan and
should only be permitted where there are material circumstances to justify a departure
from adopted policy.
The applicant's supporting information indicates the history of lettings and marketing
which suggests that there are difficulties in both finding and retaining suitable
commercial occupiers and the income generation is therefore limited. The applicant
therefore considers that the submitted scheme is the only option left for the building.
Further consideration will be given to this matter when the comments of County
Council (Planning), the Economic and Tourism Development Manager and the
Planning Policy Manager have been received.
Notwithstanding the fundamental policy objection to a housing scheme within a village
employment area, the proposal includes a significant proportion of affordable housing,
which is a material consideration which could outweigh the policy conflict. In Selected
Small Villages development proposals for more than four dwellings may be permitted
provided that all the excess dwellings are for affordable housing.
The number of affordable dwellings must not exceed the total need for such housing in
the civil parish in which the development proposal is situated and its adjoining civil
parishes.
The number of affordable units falls two short of the number expected for a scheme of
eleven dwellings in a selected small village. There is therefore a requirement for the
applicant to justify why seven affordable units cannot be provided and, if they cannot
provide the necessary number this should be backed up by supporting evidence. The
applicant has been asked to provide further justification to support the application.
Officers are giving further consideration as to whether it would be possible in principle
to secure the affordable housing requirements by means of a condition rather than
through Section 106. Members will be updated on this issue.
A significant proportion of the dwellings proposed would have garden depths that fall
well short of those recommended by the basic amenity criteria. Only units 4-8 meet the
minimum distance of 10m, with Unit 10 having the shallowest depth of 3.5m. The
shallow garden depths and close proximity of a neighbouring property to the east,
known as 'The Dehn' means that many of the units and particularly the flat above the
shop and houses 1 to 3, would not comply with the minimum window-to-window
distances required by the basic amenity criteria, particularly given the number of
windows present on the western elevation of the adjacent property. As such, careful
consideration should be given to the internal layout of the building to ensure that the
49
best relationship is created. The applicant also is being requested to confirm details of
boundary treatments to private gardens.
The application proposes a number of changes to the external appearance, some of
which would be less than sympathetic to the character of the building. The applicant
has been asked to consider this and make necessary amendments. Committee will be
updated.
The application currently has a number of shortcomings in respect of highway matters.
In summary there are a number of significant outstanding matters and Members will be
updated orally at the meeting.
RECOMMENDATION: Committee will be updated orally.
SHERINGHAM - 20080550 - Erection of dwelling and erection of garage and new
vehicular access to serve 23 Holt Road; The Studio 23 Holt Road for Mr and Mrs
Graham-Cameron
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :28 May 2008
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Outline Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20080163 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Erection of dwelling and erection of garage
to serve 23 Holt Road
Withdrawn, 02 Apr 2008
THE APPLICATION
Seeks the erection of a dwelling and garage and new vehicular access to serve 23 Holt
Road. All matters apart from access are reserved at this stage.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Nelson having regard to the following planning issues:
1. Impact on highway safety.
2. Impact on the established form and character of the area.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection.
REPRESENTATIONS
Four letters of objection have been received from local residents raising the following
points:1. Infill dwellings would destroy the character of Uplands Park.
2. Would create a precedent.
3. Highway safety.
4. Increase in traffic.
5. Overdevelopment.
6. Loss of light.
50
7. Overshadowing.
8. Loss of privacy.
9. Overlooking.
10. Impact upon trees.
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - No objection, subject to the imposition of conditions,
including appropriate access construction for the first 4.5m into the site as measured
back from the near edge of the adjacent carriageway, laying out and retention of on
site parking for both existing and proposed dwellings.
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 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).
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 SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
Policy SS 12: Sheringham (identifies strategic development requirements).
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 CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Acceptability of development in residential policy area.
2. Impact on neighbouring dwellings.
3. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
This application follows the withdrawal of planning application reference 20080163
seeking the erection of a dwelling and a garage to serve 23 Holt Road, following
concerns over the size of the proposed plot which was not considered to be of an
adequate size to accommodate satisfactorily a dwelling and associated parking,
51
turning and garden area without detriment to the privacy and amenities of the
neighbouring properties and appearance of the area.
The site measures approximately 23m by 26m. The applicants' own property is located
to the west. There is a two-storey dwelling to the east, and a chalet style property to
the north whose rear garden is adjacent to the application site.
The site is located within the residential policy area of Sheringham where residential
development is considered to be acceptable in principle providing it accords with other
relevant policies in the Local Plan.
The current application involves a plot of increased width from approximately 16.5m to
approximately 23m. It is considered that this would be sufficient to allow an
appropriately designed dwelling and associated parking, turning and garden area to be
satisfactorily accommodated on the site without significant detriment to the privacy and
amenities of the surrounding neighbouring dwellings or to the appearance of the area.
The position of the dwelling shown on the submitted plan is indicative only and upon
the submission of a reserved matters application, further consideration would need to
be given regarding the layout, scale and appearance of the proposed dwelling.
The Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposed new access to serve
23 Holt Road, subject to appropriate conditions. It is considered that a garage in the
position shown to serve 23 Holt Road would be acceptable.
It is therefore considered that the proposal is acceptable and accords with Local Plan
policy.
RECOMMENDATION:- APPROVE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:2) These reserved matters shall relate to the appearance, landscaping, layout and
scale of the proposed development including the garage for No.23 Holt Road and this
condition shall apply notwithstanding any indication as to these matters which have
been given in the current application.
3) Prior to the commencement of the dwelling hereby permitted the new vehicular
access serving 23 Holt Road shall be constructed in accordance with the Norfolk
County Council residential access construction specification for the first 4.5m into the
site as measured back from the near edge of the adjacent carriageway.
4) Prior to the commencement of the dwelling hereby permitted the proposed on site
parking area for 23 Holt Road shall be laid out, demarcated, levelled and surfaced in
accordance with the approved plan. It shall be retained thereafter for that specific use.
5) Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the proposed onsite parking area shall be laid out, demarcated, levelled, surfaced and drained in
accordance with the approved plan. It shall be retained thereafter for those specific
uses.
REASONS:2) The application is submitted in outline form only and the details required are
pursuant to the provisions of Article 3(1) to the Town and Country Planning (General
Development Procedure) Order 1995 and the Town and Country Planning (General
Development Procedure) (Amendment) (England) Order 2006.
3) To ensure satisfactory access into the site, in accordance with Policy 147 of the
adopted North Norfolk Local Plan.
52
4) To ensure the permanent availability of the parking and manoeuvring area, in the
interests of highway safety, and in accordance with Policy 147 of the adopted North
Norfolk Local Plan.
5) To ensure the permanent availability of the parking and manoeuvring area, in the
interests of highway safety, and in accordance with Policy 147 of the adopted North
Norfolk Local Plan.
UPPER SHERINGHAM - 20080473 - Erection of two-storey linked dwelling and
single-storey rear extensions (including to existing dwelling); 3 Blowlands Lane
for Mr and Mrs A Smith and Mr I Ash
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :20 May 2008
Case Officer :Mr M Gannon
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Residential
Selected Small Village
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20031067 - (Full Planning Permission) - Demolition of garage and erection of twostorey dwelling
Approved, 17 Sep 2003
THE APPLICATION
Erection of two-storey dwelling to side of semi-detached house and single-storey
extension to rear of existing house linking with new dwelling. Externally the
development would be finished in a mix of red brick, painted render and red clay
pantile to match the existing house. The proposals envisage the provision of two
parking spaces for the existing and proposed dwellings in the respective front gardens.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Object. The proposed development would be grossly out of character with the
surrounding ex-local authority and Council owned properties and is an
overdevelopment of this small site. The Council felt that the making of a closed terrace
was not in keeping with the area and detracted from the preservation area which
closely borders this development.
CONSULTATIONS
Sheringham Town Council - Objection on the grounds of overdevelopment of the site
and out of keeping with surrounding properties.
County Council (Highways) - I understand that planning permission was granted
previously by your Authority contrary to the advice from the Highway Authority;
consequently as this proposal is for the same layout I can confirm that I have no
comments to make on this planning application.
Environmental Health - Append standard note regarding the possibility that the site
could be contaminated due to its history.
53
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 6: Residential Areas (areas primarily for residential purposes).
Policy 13: Design and Setting of Development (specifies design principles required for
new development).
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 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 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).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Visual impact in Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
2. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
This application was deferred at the last meeting to enable Members to visit the site.
The site lies within the Selected Small Village boundary on land designated as
residential in the Local Plan. Accordingly the erection of a dwelling is acceptable under
current policy subject to enhancement of the form and character of the village.
Furthermore the site benefits from a current planning permission for the erection of a
dwelling (application reference 20031067) which remains capable of implementation.
The current proposals differ from the approved scheme in two respects. Firstly, a first
floor is now proposed above the approved single-storey projection at the rear providing
a third bedroom for the new dwelling. Secondly, a single-storey element is now
proposed linking the existing and proposed properties at the rear. This would provide a
small study/bedroom for the proposed dwelling and a new kitchen/dining room for the
existing dwelling. Although linked at the rear the proposed dwelling would still appear
detached from the street owing to the retention of the metre gap as previously
approved between the main buildings.
54
Notwithstanding the increased volume of the development relative to the approved
scheme, the garden depth would remain unchanged. At 10.5m this still complies with
the relevant basic amenity criterion in the Design Guide.
The impact of the current proposals within the wider area would be little different from
the approved scheme. It is not considered that there would be any harm to the
appearance of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty given the infill nature of the
development within an established developed frontage.
Parking arrangements would be identical to those permitted under 20031067.
The proposal would not conflict with Development Plan policy and is recommended for
approval.
RECOMMENDATION:Approve subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
UPPER SHERINGHAM - 20080492 - Erection of detached two-storey dwelling;
land at The Green The Street for John Ashton's Children's Settlement
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :22 May 2008
Case Officer :Mr G Lyon
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Archaeological Site
Residential
Selected Small Village
Conservation Area
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20030593 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of two-storey extension and
conservatory
Refused, 12 May 2003
20030974 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of two-storey extension and
conservatory
Approved, 20 Nov 2003
20051834 - (Full Planning Permission) - Conversion of public house to two dwellings
and erection of detached two-storey dwelling
Refused, 11 Apr 2006
20071615 - (Full Planning Permission) - Conversion of former public house to two
dwellings, demolition of outbuildings and erection of two-storey dwelling
Undetermined
THE APPLICATION
Erection of a detached two-storey two bedroom property to the rear of the former Red
Lion public house. The dwelling would be 6.7m wide with a maximum depth of 6.2m.
The dwelling would have a height to eaves of 4.5m and a height to ridge of 6.7m.
Entrance to the detached property would be on the eastern side with a rear amenity
area to the west surrounded by a new 1.25m high brick and flint wall.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
55
Deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
No objection subject to completion of a Section 106 Agreement.
REPRESENTATIONS
See applicant's Design and Access Statement at Appendix 7
Letter on behalf of applicants in response to Committee’s request attached as
Appendix 8
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - No
objection subject to imposition of appropriate conditions.
County Council (Highways) - Object until suitable place received in respect of location
of proposed parking.
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology - Request condition in respect of a programme of
archaeological work.
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 42: Development in Conservation Areas (developments should preserve or
enhance character).
Policy 87: Country Pubs (only allows change of use to other purposes if there is
another public house nearby or retention is proven to be unviable).
Policy 153: Car Parking Standards (specifies parking requirements for different use
classes within different Local Plan policy areas).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
Policy SS2: 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 EN 6: Sustainable construction and energy efficiency (specifies sustainability
and energy efficiency requirements for new developments).
56
Policy EN 8: Protecting and enhancing the historic environment (prevents insensitive
development and specifies requirements relating to designated assets and other
valuable buildings).
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/compliance with Local Plan Policy 87 - Country Pubs.
2. Impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
3. Impact on the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
4. Residential amenity.
5. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
The application was deferred at the meeting on 24 April 2008 to ask the applicants to
reconsider their decision not to enter into a Section 106 Agreement.
Given that the site of the proposed detached dwelling lies within the development
boundary of Upper Sheringham, the principle of residential development is acceptable
subject to enhancement of the character of the village.
Upper Sheringham lies entirely within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
within which the prime planning consideration is the conservation and enhancement of
the beauty of the area. Given the fact that the proposal would be viewed against the
backdrop of existing development, it is not considered that the proposal would have a
significantly detrimental impact on the AONB.
Subject to conditions relating to finish and detailing, the proposals are considered to
comply with the requirements of Local Plan Policy 42, in preserving the appearance of
the Conservation Area.
Members will recall that an earlier application on this site, including conversion of the
former Red Lion to two dwellings, was considered by Committee on 31 January 2008
when it was resolved to approve the application subject to appropriate conditions and
subject to a Section 106 Agreement to:1. Ensure that no works are commenced on the conversion of the public house to two
dwellings until a contract for Usher's Barn is let.
2. To prevent occupation of the detached dwelling at the rear until a contract for
Usher's Barn is let.
3. To prevent occupation of the two units in the former public house until the works to
Usher's Barn have been substantially completed in accordance with planning
permission 20070735 and the replacement public house and ancillary development is
in operation.
The current application is for the same detached dwelling which formed part of that
application. Therefore it has already been agreed by Committee that the siting, design,
external appearance and relationship with adjacent development are acceptable. The
application would enable the plot to be developed independently of the conversion of
the public house.
The Section 106 Agreement was required because it was considered that, in the worst
case scenario and without proper safeguards, Upper Sheringham could be left without
a public house. The applicants have planning permission to convert nearby Usher's
Barn in the village to a public house.
57
It is considered that, subject to no objections from outstanding consultees, the
imposition of appropriate conditions, the proposed detached dwelling would comply
with adopted Local Plan Policies.
Further advice will be given orally to the Committee concerning the Section 106
Agreement in the light of the agent’s letter.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to the Head of Planning and Building Control to approve,
subject to no objections from County Council (Highways) following a receipt of
suitably amended plan and subject to further consideration of the issue
concerning a possible Section 106 Agreement to prevent occupation of the
detached dwelling at the rear until a contract for Usher's Barn has been let and
subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions.
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20080467 - Alterations to barn and removal of
condition 2 of planning permission 20021709 to enable full residential
occupancy; The Merchant House 48 High Street for Ms S Keynejad
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :20 May 2008
Case Officer :Mr M Gannon
(Full Planning Permission)
See also 20080468 below.
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
Conservation Area
Listed Building Grade II
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
19931158 - (Full Planning Permission) - Modification of outbuilding and incorporation
into the original residence via a conservatory/footway to form additional living
accommodation
Approved, 10 Jan 1994
20021709 - (Full Planning Permission) - Change of use of annexe to holiday unit
Approved, 24 Jan 2003
20071360 - (Full Planning Permission) - Alterations to barn and removal of condition 2
of planning permission 20021709 to enable full residential occupancy
Refused, 29 Oct 2007
THE APPLICATION
Part demolition and conversion of detached two-storey holiday unit to two-bed
permanent dwelling. One off-street parking space is to be provided for existing and
proposed dwellings with a parking and turning area between the two buildings served
from the existing vehicular access from High Street.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Trett having regard to the following planning issues:
1. Appropriateness of use of building in residential area.
2. Impact on appearance of locality.
TOWN COUNCIL
58
No objection/no comment.
REPRESENTATIONS
2 letters from the owners of adjoining and nearby properties (summarised):1. Current use generates noise from slamming of car doors and engine revving.
Problems do not arise when only one car is parked on the premises.
2. Vehicular access is very tight. Damage to the neighbouring property has occurred in
the past due to careless driving.
3. Concerned that damage may occur to the shared underground drainage system
beneath the driveway/parking area.
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - These
proposals address issues raised in the refusal of an earlier application. The application
was refused on the grounds of insufficient amenity space and lack of privacy.
The barn to the rear is listed by virtue of being within the curtilage of the main listed
building and clearly had a subordinate function to the main building.
Listed Building consent was granted at this time for demolition of part of the brick and
flint barn in order to provide some amenity space devoted to the barn. From a
Conservation and Design point of view it was disappointing to see loss of fabric and
original character of a historic building for the sake of amenity space, but on balance it
was considered that the proposals had little detrimental effect on the main listed
property or the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
This revised application attempts to address the issues of lack of amenity space and
privacy. One of the ways this is achieved is to propose demolition of even more of the
historic fabric of the barn. 25% of the northern end of the barn is to be removed in
order to increase the private external space given over to this dwelling. In conservation
terms the principle of loss of so much of a historic building at the expense of creating
amenity space cannot now be supported even if removal of a lesser degree of the
historic fabric was reluctantly given previous approval.
Other inclusions in this application are a 1.8m high brick wall and lower set of railings
dividing the amenity space of the two dwellings. This will unfortunately further divide
the already cramped original courtyard between the two dwellings and cast shadow
onto the amenity space to the east of the barn.
Parking will be addressed by Highways but from a Conservation perspective the
enclosed limited space for parking between two listed buildings is not satisfactory and
has a negative effect on the street scene of the Conservation Area.
If the only way of achieving the necessary amenity space for two separate dwellings is
to demolish even more historic fabric in order to reduce the size of the barn and further
subdivide the courtyard, it would indicate that this proposal is not suitable for the
limited size of the site and for these reasons this application is recommended for
refusal.
County Council (Highways) - No objection in the light of the previous planning
permission for holiday use.
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 and an individual who has objected.
However, having considered the likely impact and the general interest of the public,
59
refusal of the application for the reasons 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 36: Change of Use of Listed Buildings (acceptable where existing uses cannot
secure buildings survival and where special character will be safeguarded).
Policy 37: Alterations and Extensions to Listed Buildings (prevents proposals which
would be detrimental to character).
Policy 42: Development in Conservation Areas (developments should preserve or
enhance character).
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Submission Document):
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. Appropriateness of use for existing building.
2. Relationship between existing and proposed dwellings and the standard of amenity
to be provided for each.
3. Impact upon appearance and character of Conservation Area and listed building.
APPRAISAL
The site lies within a residential area as designated in the Local Plan. It also lies within
the designated Conservation Area. The Merchant House is a Grade II listed building
and the outbuilding subject of this application is listed by reason of its association with
the principal building.
Planning permission was granted in January 2003 for the change of use of this building
from ancillary residential accommodation to a holiday unit. A planning application last
year seeking permission to lift the holiday occupancy restriction and enable permanent
residential use was refused for reasons relating to the lack of adequate amenity space
for existing and proposed dwellings and the lack of privacy resulting from the close
proximity of the two buildings (20071360).
The parking arrangement is as previously approved when permission was given for the
holiday unit.
The current proposals have been designed to address the previous refusal. In order to
increase the garden space it is now proposed to demolish approximately 25% of the
existing outbuilding. A high boundary wall is now proposed between the two parking
spaces and further planting is proposed to restrict the view between facing windows.
However, these modifications would not fully resolve previous concerns. The proposals
envisage a distance of 10m between the primary windows in the east facing wall of the
proposed dwelling and a secondary window in the facing wall of the existing house.
Although this falls 8m short of the relevant Local Plan basic amenity criterion it is
accepted that the proposed boundary wall would reduce the likelihood for overlooking
and loss of privacy. However, neither the existing nor the proposed dwelling would
benefit from a 10m rear garden. Even with the extent of demolition now proposed the
60
new dwelling would benefit from a garden measuring only 6m x 6.5m. The existing
house would be left with a smaller area (discounting that part of the curtilage to be
taken up by the parking space). Whilst this sub-standard arrangement might be
reasonably expected to meet the needs of a dwelling and holiday unit it is still not
considered that the space available is sufficient to meet the reasonable needs of the
occupiers of two permanent dwellings.
Members will also note the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager's objection
to the substantial degree of demolition now proposed.
The proposal is therefore contrary to adopted Development Plan policies.
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 13: Design and Setting of Development
Policy 36: Change of Use of Listed Buildings
Policy 37: Alterations and Extensions to Listed Buildings
Policy 42: Development in Conservation Areas
The proposed development conflicts with the objectives of the above policies in that
the site is of insufficient size to provide adequate useable private amenity space for the
reasonable needs of the occupiers of both the proposed and existing dwellings.
Furthermore the proposed partial demolition of the holiday unit to create a garden area
for the proposed dwelling would detract from the character of the building itself and the
appearance and character of this part of the designated Conservation Area.
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20080468 - Alterations to barn and dwelling to facilitate
use as two separate dwellings; The Merchant House 48 High Street for Ms S
Keynejad
Target Date :20 May 2008
Case Officer :Mr M Gannon
(Alteration to Listed Building)
See also 20080467 above.
CONSTRAINTS
Residential
Conservation Area
Listed Building Grade II
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20071361 - (Alteration to Listed Building) - Demolition of part of barn and dwelling to
facilitate use as two separate dwellings
Approved, 26 Oct 2007
THE APPLICATION
Demolition of northern gable-end wall and approximately 25% of the existing building
and the construction of a new chamfered gable-end wall to facilitate conversion of
61
building into a two-bedroom dwelling and the provision of an enlarged garden area and
revised parking/turning arrangement.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Trett having regard to the following planning issue:
Impact on appearance of locality.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection/no comment.
CONSULTATIONS
Conservation Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - These
proposals address issues raised in the refusal of an earlier application. The application
was refused on the grounds of insufficient amenity space and lack of privacy.
The barn to the rear is listed by virtue of being within the curtilage of the main listed
building and clearly had a subordinate function to the main building.
Listed Building consent was granted at this time for demolition of part of the brick and
flint barn in order to provide some amenity space devoted to the barn. From a
Conservation and Design point of view it was disappointing to see loss of fabric and
original character of a historic building for the sake of amenity space, but on balance it
was considered that the proposals had little detrimental effect on the main listed
property or the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
This revised application attempts to address the issues of lack of amenity space and
privacy. One of the ways this is achieved is to propose demolition of even more of the
historic fabric of the barn. 25% of the northern end of the barn is to be removed in
order to increase the private external space given over to this dwelling. In conservation
terms the principle of loss of so much of a historic building at the expense of creating
amenity space cannot now be supported even if removal of a lesser degree of the
historic fabric was reluctantly given previous approval.
If the only way of achieving the necessary amenity space for two separate dwellings is
to demolish even more historic fabric in order to reduce the size of the barn and further
subdivide the courtyard, it would indicate that this proposal is not suitable for the
limited size of the site and for these reasons this application is recommended for
refusal.
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 and an individual who has objected.
However, having considered the likely impact and the general interest of the public,
refusal of the application for the reasons 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 37: Alterations and Extensions to Listed Buildings (prevents proposals which
would be detrimental to character).
MAIN ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
62
Impact on character of listed building.
APPRAISAL
This application arises from the refusal last year of planning permission for the
conversion of this building into a permanent dwelling. One of the reasons for refusal
related to the inadequacy of the proposed garden areas. The current application seeks
consent for an amended scheme which would provide a larger garden for the proposed
dwelling by demolishing a larger part of the existing building. Listed Building Consent
for a lesser degree of demolition and the removal of a single-storey projection at the
rear of the main house was granted under application 20071361.
The Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager is now recommending refusal on
the grounds that too much of the historic building (listed through its association with the
main building) would be lost with no real justification and to the detriment of its
character.
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 37: Alterations and Extensions to Listed Buildings
The proposal would result in the loss of a significant section of an interesting
curtilage building to the detriment of its character contrary to the objectives of
the above policy.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
BEESTON REGIS - 20080613 - Increase ridge height and installation of dormer
window to provide habitable accommodation in roofspace; Heath Cottage
Roman Camp West Runton for Mr C Clark
(Full Planning Permission)
BINHAM - 20080672 - Installation of telecommunications antenna; Arqiva
Transmitting Station Old Airfield The Street Cockthorpe for Arqiva
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - 20080529 - Erection of rear dormer extension; 34 Morston Road for
Mrs J Prior
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - 20080580 - Erection of raised roof to garage (amendment to
previous permission reference 20071860); 22 Kingsway for Mr N E Buckingham
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - 20080621 - Erection of garage/store; Old Barn Ruberry Hill
Saxlingham Road for Mr and Mrs Ellingham
(Full Planning Permission)
BRININGHAM - 20080569 - Erection of single-storey front extension; 2 Mill Lane
for Mr P Edwards
63
(Full Planning Permission)
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20080545 - Conversion of stables to artist's studio; The
Shieling Holt Road for Ms S Whittley and Ms R Lockwood
(Full Planning Permission)
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20080591 - Alterations to cart shed to provide additional
habitable accommodation; The Old Stable Old Hall Farm Barns Coast Road for
Mr and Mrs P O'Hare
(Full Planning Permission)
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20080640 - Installation of replacement split-level patio; 3
Old Hall Farm Barns Coast Road for Mr and Mrs Scott
(Alteration to Listed Building)
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20080658 - Erection of front porch; Hole Cottage Coast
Road for Mr and Mrs Browne
(Full Planning Permission)
CORPUSTY - 20080491 - Conversion of barn to one unit of holiday
accommodation; Hill Farm Briston Road Saxthorpe for Mr J W Perry-Warnes
(Full Planning Permission)
CORPUSTY - 20080518 - Erection of single-storey side extension, rear verandah
and detached outbuilding; 29 Irmingland Road for Mr and Mrs Askham
(Full Planning Permission)
EAST AND WEST BECKHAM - 20080538 - Erection of two-storey side extension
and front porch; 2 Hall Farm Cottages Church Road West Beckham for Mr and
Mrs Demarais
(Full Planning Permission)
EDGEFIELD - 20080599 - Erection of single-storey rear extensions; The Three
Pigs Norwich Road for Mr I Wilson
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20080464 - Erection of conservatory; 4 Elizabeth Avenue for Mr
and Mrs Webster
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20080527 - Construction of three dormer windows to facilitate
conversion of roofspace to habitable accommodation; 6b Swan Street for Mr M
Axten
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20080559 - Variation of condition 5 of planning permission
20070836 to allow revised parking arrangements; 3 Barons Close for Mr D
Grocott and Mr J Murfit
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20080612 - Erection of first floor extension; 21 Gwyn Crescent for
Mr S Clare
(Full Planning Permission)
64
FAKENHAM - 20080630 - Change of use from B1 (offices) to beauty salon; Stable
Studios Oxborough Lane for W J Aldiss Limited
(Full Planning Permission)
FULMODESTON - 20080505 - Conversion and extension of outbuilding to
provide ancillary accommodation and erection of walls to enclose swimming
pool; Wood Farm The Street Barney for Mr D T H Astley
(Full Planning Permission)
HIGH KELLING - 20080620 - Alterations to front elevation of garage to facilitate
conversion to habitable accommodation; Flintstones Warren Farm Barns Warren
Road for Mr and Mrs L Harris
(Full Planning Permission)
HIGH KELLING - 20080646 - Erection of storage building; Holt Rugby Football
Club Bridge Road for Holt Rugby Football Club
(Full Planning Permission)
HINDRINGHAM - 20080611 - Alterations to outbuilding to provide garden
room/study; 75 and 77 The Street for Mr and Mrs A Jones
(Alteration to Listed Building)
HOLT - 20080600 - Erection of single-storey extension to kitchen store; 2
Byfords Court Shirehall Plain for Mr I Wilson
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - 20080622 - Erection of two-storey side extension; 68 Hempstead Road
for Mr and Mrs Clare
(Full Planning Permission)
KELLING - 20080568 - Removal of conservatory and erection of single-storey
extension; The Old Rectory Holt Road for Mr and Mrs J Player
(Full Planning Permission)
LETHERINGSETT - 20080652 - Erection of dormer extension; The Old Stables
Thornage Road for Mrs B Wallace
(Full Planning Permission)
LITTLE BARNINGHAM - 20080547 - Erection of first floor/two-storey side
extension and replacement single-storey rear extension; 1 Chapel Yard The
Street for Mr and Mrs C Graham
(Full Planning Permission)
LITTLE SNORING - 20080590 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 16 Manor
Close for Mrs S Salmon
(Full Planning Permission)
PLUMSTEAD - 20080475 - Conversion of agricultural building to one unit of
holiday accommodation; Green Farm The Green for Mr R Keasley
(Full Planning Permission)
RYBURGH - 20080495 - Erection of garages; land rear of Crown House
Fakenham Road Great Ryburgh for Reynolds Building Contractor
(Full Planning Permission)
65
RYBURGH - 20080645 - Erection of single-storey rear extensions; 1 and 2
Westwood Cottages Westwood Lane Great Ryburgh for Mr T R E Cook
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20071897 - Erection of three flats and car ports; 15 South Street
for Mr and Mrs A Stevens
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20080541 - Erection of double garage; 6 Morris Street for Mr J R
Leatherland
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20080542 - Installation of two roof windows to west elevation;
plots 4 and 5, 20 Cromer Road for F W Smith Builders Limited
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20080572 - Erection of replacement conservatory; Roselawn 12
St Nicholas Place for Mr Austin
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20080627 - Erection of first floor extension; 29 Cromer Road for
Mr K Welch
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20080632 - Erection of rear conservatory; 2 James Close for Mrs
Patterson
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20080659 - Extension of look-out space into existing porch area;
Lifeguard Station The Promenade for Royal National Lifeboat Institution
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20080279 - Erection of single-storey
accommodation in roofspace; 4 Abbey Road for Mr M Roberts
(Full Planning Permission)
dwelling
with
SHERINGHAM - 20080465 - Installation of 15m wind turbine; Sheringham High
School and 6th Form Centre Holt Road for Sheringham High School and 6th
Form Centre
(Full Planning Permission)
STODY - 20080471 - Erection of front boundary wall and gates and timber deck;
Poplar Cottage The Green Hunworth for Mr and Mrs Waites
(Full Planning Permission)
SUSTEAD - 20071515 - Siting of mobile home for agricultural purposes; Manor
House Farm New Road Bessingham for Mr I Clarke
(Full Planning Permission)
SUSTEAD - 20080451 - Alterations and refurbishment, including installation of
replacment window and sky light; 3 Hall Farm Cottages Cromer Road Metton for
The National Trust
(Alteration to Listed Building)
66
SUSTEAD - 20080457 - Continued use of site as builder's store and erection of
two-storey extension; Waterworks Cromer Road Metton for R J Bacon Builders
(Full Planning Permission)
SUSTEAD - 20080546 - Erection of two-storey extension; Forge Cottage The
Street for Mr and Mrs D Burton-Pye
(Full Planning Permission)
SUSTEAD - 20080670 - Siting of LPG storage tank; 3 Hall Farm Cottages Cromer
Road Metton for The National Trust
(Full Planning Permission)
UPPER SHERINGHAM - 20080574 - Revised access; Blowlands Sheringham
Road for Mr A Buckingham
(Full Planning Permission)
UPPER SHERINGHAM - 20080575 - Erection of garage; Blowlands Sheringham
Road for Mr A Buckingham
(Full Planning Permission)
WARHAM - 20080597 - Internal alterations and refurbishment (including new
windows and door); Little Turners The Street for Mr and Mrs M Foulds
(Alteration to Listed Building)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20071771 - Erection of pavilion to provide smoking
facility; War Memorial Institute Theatre Road for Wells War Memorial Club
(Full Planning Permission)
WEYBOURNE - 20071911 - Erection of garage with room above; Abbey
Farmhouse The Street for Mr W Smith
(Full Planning Permission)
WEYBOURNE - 20080570 - Removal of conservatory and erection of singlestorey rear extension; Wellsway Holt Road for Mr and Mrs S Payne
(Full Planning Permission)
WIGHTON - 20080616 - Erection of first floor extensions; Water Hall Mill Lane for
Mr and Mrs B Hopkins
(Full Planning Permission)
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
EDGEFIELD - 20080626 - Erection of two-storey dwelling and garage; Vine
Cottage The Green for Mr J Goldney
(Full Planning Permission)
HEMPSTEAD - 20080618 - Erection of first floor extension; Westward Ho The
Street for Mr and Mrs P Sanders
(Full Planning Permission)
HIGH KELLING - 20080571 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; Cherry Garth
Cromer Road for Mr P M Plummer
(Outline Planning Permission)
67
STIFFKEY - 20071107 - Construction of first floor doorway and external
staircase; Red Lion 44 Wells Road for Stiffkey Red Lion Limited
(Full Planning Permission)
STIFFKEY - 20080481 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; land opposite Stiffkey
Lamp Shop Wells Road for Mr M K Belsten and Mr D L Mann
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20061288 - Erection of first floor rear extension and
conversion of roofspace to two residential units; Premises rear of The Old Mill
Maryland for Mr and Mrs Ward
(Full Planning Permission)
WOOD NORTON - 20071379 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; The Old Fire
Station Foulsham Airfield Foulsham Road for Thomas and Money Haulage
(Full Planning Permission)
APPEALS SECTION
NEW APPEALS
BRISTON - 20071468 - Retention of storage shed; Emery Wood Craymere Road
for Ms P Rowan
INFORMAL HEARING
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20071932 - Erection of two-storey dwelling; site rear of
18 Church Street for Mr J Starns
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
BODHAM - 01/013/DEV6/06/001 - Change of use of agricultural land for the siting
of caravans for residential purposes.; land off Hart Lane for Mr R Drake
INFORMAL HEARING 12 Aug 2008
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - 01/019/DEV6/07/004 - Breach of condition 2 of planning
permission 20061041 for extension to summerhouse; Umgeni Coast Road for
Lady Rathcavan
PUBLIC INQUIRY
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20070922 - Demolition of summerhouse and erection of
annexe; Umgeni Coast Road for Lady Rathcavan
PUBLIC INQUIRY 05 Aug 2008
HOLKHAM - 20071596 - Conversion of farm office to residential accommodation
for estate worker; Farm Office Longlands for Holkham Estate
INFORMAL HEARING 19 Aug 2008
SHERINGHAM (NORTH WARD) - 20030991 - Demolition of buildings, including
dwellings, and erection of A1 retail foodstore with associated access, car
parking, servicing and landscaping; land at Cromer Road for Tesco Stores
Limited
68
PUBLIC INQUIRY 01 Jul 2008
SHERINGHAM (NORTH WARD) - 20070217 - Demolition of buildings, including
dwellings, and erection of A1 retail foodstore with associated access, car
parking and servicing and provision of footpath link to Station Road; land at
Cromer Road for Tesco Stores Limited
PUBLIC INQUIRY 01 Jul 2008
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
BODHAM - 20080036 - Continued display of direction signs; Entrance to Gypsies
Lane, off Cromer Road for Crayford & Abbs Ltd
BRINTON - 20071113 - Erection of first floor extension and attached garage;
Grove House Holt Road for Mr and Mrs Taylor
BRINTON - 20071572 - Alterations to first floor extension (lowering of parapet);
Grove House Holt Road for Mr and Mrs Taylor
BRISTON - 20071304 - Erection of dwelling; New Hall Farm Mill Road for Mrs N
Smith
SITE VISIT :- 09 Jun 2008
FAKENHAM (NORTH WARD) - 20071369 - Erection of single-storey rear
extension; Field View Residential Home 43 Hayes Lane for Imperial Care Homes
FAKENHAM (SOUTH WARD) - 20070673 - Erection of three two-storey dwellings;
24 Holt Road for Mr J Doughty
SITE VISIT :- 09 Jun 2008
HIGH KELLING - 20070983 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; Cherry Garth
Cromer Road for Mr P M Plummer
RAYNHAM - 20071725 - Demolition of single-storey extension and erection of
two-storey rear extension; 5 The Drove for Mr D Elfleet
WOOD NORTON - 20071441 - Use of land for siting 5 touring caravans and
erection of single-storey warden's dwelling; Four Acre Farm Holt Road for Mr
and Mrs LJ Palmer
APPEAL DECISIONS
HINDOLVESTON - 20070789 - Erection of two-storey dwelling and garage;
Homely Acre 61 The Street for Mr and Mrs D Self
APPEAL DECISION :- DISMISSED
69