OFFICERS’ REPORTS TO
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (WEST) – 28 MAY 2009
Each report for decision on this Agenda shows the Officer responsible, the recommendation
of the Head of Planning and Building Control and in the case of private business the
paragraph(s) of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 under which it is
considered exempt. None of the reports have financial, legal or policy implications save
where indicated.
PUBLIC BUSINESS – ITEMS FOR DECISION
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Note :- Recommendations for approval include a standard time limit condition as Condition
No.1, unless otherwise stated.
1.
CLEY-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090288 - Installation of first and second floor
windows and balconies; 1 Beau Rivage for Mr Johnson-Watts
Target Date :21 May 2009
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Undeveloped Coast
Environment Agency Flood Zone
Countryside Policy Area
Conservation Area
Special Area of Conservation
THE APPLICATION
Is for the installation of first and second floor windows and balconies on the northwest elevation of the existing dwelling.
The first floor balcony would be constructed using large timber posts set in the
channel bank, with stainless steel tensile wire guarding to the balcony off a steel
structure support. The 'Juliet' style balcony at second floor would also be constructed
using the stainless steel tensile wire guarding to the balcony off a steel structure
support. The balcony materials would be left to weather naturally.
It is intended for the pebble dash render to be removed on the north-west elevation
and placed with a pigmented lime render. The new external joinery on the north-west
elevation would be a combination of hardwood and powder coated aluminium.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
This application was deferred at a previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Object on the following grounds:
1. The proposed development is not in keeping with the area.
2. Does not integrate into the village vernacular.
3. The location of the property is one of the most visible in the village.
4. The view which includes the above property is the most photographed view taken
in the village.
5. The balcony protrudes over a public footpath.
6. There is some doubt that the owner of the property owns up to the centre of the
river.
Development Control Committee (West)
1
28 May 2009
REPRESENTATIONS
One letter of objection has been received from a local resident raising the following
points:
1. The proposal may be attractive in the right context but is inappropriate in the
context of the terrace as a whole.
2. Out of place and out of keeping.
3. One of the most photographed and reproduced pictures in the country.
CONSULTATIONS
Wiveton Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - The
Beau Rivage terraces are generally in good condition and remain relatively unaltered.
Unquestionably they contribute to the character and appearance of the conservation
area. For these reasons they have been put forward for local listing in the emerging
Cley-next-the-Sea Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan.
From a conservation perspective it is vitally important to maintain the rhythm of the
terrace as this defines their special character. Therefore only minimal changes are
acceptable to the front and rear façade of the property which the proposal takes into
account.
It is clear the proposal for the north façade will reaffirm and introduce a new
connection between the residential properties and the surrounding environment.
Consequently this will also give passive surveillance to the area and give added
character to what is a very plain featureless north façade of the property. The
balcony has a very honest 21st century design which is both functional and
aesthetically pleasing.
It is a shame the applicant did not take this opportunity to remove the existing roof
lights on the east elevation which although on the rear elevation still detract from the
building. It is feared their continued presence might set a precedent for the
neighbouring terraces. With the introduction of the new Juliet style balcony and
glazed door this would negate the need for their continued siting.
On close inspection it is clear the existing original sash windows on the property are
falling into disrepair. It is hoped that this opportunity will be taken to repair the
existing original fenestration. The front and rear façade pebble dash render has
become patchy from differing repairs over the years; there is potential for
improvement here as well.
The demolition of the later addition west porch which is of no architectural quality is
another agreeable aspect of the application. Further clarification is required on what
is to replace the porch. A condition is therefore requested outlining any new door
material and treatment to be used; this should be submitted and agreed in writing.
A second condition is also requested to determine the colour finishes to be used on
the balcony, balcony support posts and lime render.
In conclusion subject to the above conditions Conservation and Design feel the
application will preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the
Conservation Area, therefore recommend the application for approval.
Further comments received as follows:
The Beau Rivage terraces lie within the designated Conservation Area and have
been put forward for local listing in the emerging Cley-next-the-Sea Conservation
Area Appraisal and Management Plan. The wetlands beyond the former quayside
are internationally recognised and designated for their nature conservation value.
They are important for breeding and migratory birds, and have nationally scarce
habitats with important plant assemblages and biodiversity value. It should also be
recognised that the close proximity of the Grade II* Listed Cley Mill means any
intervention on the site will have a bearing on the future appreciation of this important
landmark feature.
Development Control Committee (West)
2
28 May 2009
In terms of the terrace's relationship with its setting and historic context, the façade
facing the marshes currently presents a rather featureless and disjointed elevation
which certainly does not reflect the built or natural splendour of its setting.
The significant views of the site are gained from across the marshes where you can
appreciate the terrace and the Mill's close proximity; this is arguably the single-most
iconic view of Cley which is paramount to preserve and enhance. Clearly there is an
important visual connection between the two structures which has become diluted
over time; the terrace is sited on the position of the former Granary and it could be
feared that any modern intervention might disrupt this link further. However given that
the existing façade offers little in terms of its contribution to the historic link, with its
stark pebble dash render and its poorly detailed windows, any impact will be minimal.
The balcony is to be constructed in light weight materials which will not dominate or
detract from the host building or draw attention from the Mill's landmark status. On
balance when considering the above arguments for and against the proposal
Conservation and Design have no objections.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - No objection.
However, it should be recognised that the open and drained coastal marshes to the
north of the property are a remote and wild landscape and can suffer from light
pollution. The increased fenestration to the gable end wall has the potential to
increase the diffused light into the landscape altering the character of the immediate
surrounding area.
The application protrudes into the Special Area of Conservation (SAC), which are
areas protected under the 'Habitats Regulations'. However, the proposed
development will not have a significant effect on the ecological conservation interests
of the site, therefore will not require an Appropriate Assessment under the
regulations.
Natural England - No objection. It is our view that, either alone or in combination with
other plans or projects, it would not be likely to have a significant effect on the
important interest features of the North Norfolk Coast SPA/SAC/Ramsar site, or any
of the features of special scientific interest of the North Norfolk Coast Site of Special
Scientific Interest (SSSI). The works would not occur on the designated site, and are
unlikely to result in increased disturbance.
The proposal is located within the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
and also the Conservation Area encompassing Blakeney and Cley-next-the-Sea. The
proposal overlooks, and can be seen from the North Norfolk Heritage Coast. We
therefore believe that when determining this application the Council should have
regard to the North Norfolk Local Development Framework Core Strategy and
Development Control Policy EN2: Protection and Enhancement of Landscape and
Settlement Character and the Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8 : The right to respect for private and family life, and
Article 1 of The First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
Development Control Committee (West)
3
28 May 2009
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
Policy HO 8: House extensions and replacement dwellings in the Countryside
(specifies the limits for increases in size and impact on surrounding countryside).
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 3: Undeveloped Coast (prevents unnecessary development and specifies
circumstances where development replacing that threatened by coastal erosion can
be permitted).
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 10: Flood risk (prevents inappropriate development in flood risk areas).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Impact on the Conservation Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
2. Design.
APPRAISAL
The Committee will be familiar with this site following the recent site visit. The site is
located within the Countryside policy area where extensions and alterations to
dwellings are acceptable in principle providing they accord with other relevant
policies in the Core Strategy. In this case the site is also located within the
Conservation Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
The site is located close to the western edge of Cley-next-the-Sea, where the
settlement surrounds the site to the north, east and south and provides a back drop
when viewed from the marshes and coastal paths. The site is not therefore located in
an isolated position.
As the dwelling is an end of terrace overlooking the marshes and is accessed by a
private drive, the north-west elevation where the alterations are proposed cannot be
seen directly from the road. However, the north-west elevation is located in a
prominent position when viewed from the marshes/coastal footpaths and is well
publicised in photographs, primarily due to its close proximity to Cley Mill. In view of
this, further comments have been sought from the Conservation, Design and
Landscape Manager to establish whether the proposal would be likely to have an
adverse impact on the setting and general views of Cley Mill.
There are a number of other properties in Cley-next-the-Sea which have balconies
and are located in prominent positions, including two other first floor balconies on the
rear of neighbouring dwellings to the north east of the site, which are also clearly
visible from the marshes. Therefore, it is not considered that the development
proposed would be unduly out of character with the area.
The neighbouring balconies appear to be constructed solely in timber and have a
'chunky' appearance. However, it is considered that the proposed first floor balcony
and 'Juliet' style balcony for consideration under this application would be more
subtle and recessive in their appearance, due to their design, scale and materials.
Development Control Committee (West)
4
28 May 2009
It is considered that the design of the proposal has a contemporary nautical
appearance, which given its coastal location would be appropriate to the area. The
materials proposed for the balconies are such that it is considered their appearance
would be recessive when viewed from the wider landscape and would not materially
increase the impact of the dwelling on the appearance or character of the area. The
external colour finish to the lime render and the colour of the external joinery on the
north-west elevation would be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority to
further minimise the visual impact of the proposal.
It is considered that given the sympathetic scale and design of the proposal and use
of recessive materials that this proposal would not detract from or be significantly
detrimental to the special qualities of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty or its
setting, or the open coastal character of the Undeveloped Coast.
The Committee will note the comments from the Conservation, Design and
Landscape Manager who has confirmed that it is not considered that the proposal
would have an adverse impact on the setting or general views of the Cley Mill, which
is a listed building. It is considered that the proposal would preserve and enhance
the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
Whilst the site is located within Flood Zone 3 as designated by the Environment
Agency there are not considered to be any flood risk implications as a result of this
development.
Subject to appropriate conditions regarding materials the proposal is considered
acceptable and would accord with Development Plan policy.
RECOMMENDATION:Approve subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions including the
submission of details regarding materials and external colour finishes to
balcony, joinery and lime render.
2.
HOLT - 20090397 - Conversion of stable to two-storey dwelling and erection of
two two-storey dwellings ; rear of, 27 High Street for C T Baker Ltd
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :19 Jun 2009
Case Officer :Miss T Lincoln
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Archaeological Site
Primary Shopping Areas
Town Centres
Conservation Area
Listed Building Grade II
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20090002 - (Full Planning Permission) - Conversion of stable to two-storey dwelling
and erection of two two-storey dwellings
Withdrawn, 04 Mar 2009
Development Control Committee (West)
5
28 May 2009
THE APPLICATION
Is for the conversion of a stable adjacent to the listed building to the north-west to
form a two-bedroom dwelling. The existing offices and storage areas would be
demolished and two x two-bedroom dwellings built on the same footprint. Small
courtyard gardens for each dwelling are proposed.
Pedestrian access would be taken from a private track off the highway with no
vehicular parking provision.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Managing Director of applicant company is a Member of the Council.
TOWN COUNCIL
Awaiting comments.
CONSULTATIONS
Building Control Manager - The means of escape is reliant on access to adjoining
land via ground floor gates to units 2 and 3 and first floor unit 3. Rights of way must
be established to confirm acceptability of this. First floor bedrooms to unit one will
require means of escape windows. Further information is awaited from the applicant
in respect of this.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Conservation and Design) - Awaiting
comments.
County Council (Highways) - Would be against any proposal to intensify the vehicular
use of the access that serves these buildings. The application form indicates that no
vehicular parking provision is to be provided with 6 no cycle parking spaces only
being allocated on site. It is acknowledged that providing on site vehicular parking
would be extremely difficult to provide for the 3 proposed dwellings. Given the town
centre location and subject to the cycle parking being detailed and conditioned to
prevent vehicular use, I have no objection to the proposal.
Environmental Health - Have noted that a bin store has been included on the plans
but that this does not appear to allow sufficient space for 'twin' waste and recycling
bins for each property. The officer has advised they would provide further comment
in respect of the bin storage area and access for refuse collection following a site
inspection. Further comments therefore awaited.
Sustainability Co-ordinator - Awaiting comments.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8 : The right to respect for private and family life, and
Article 1 of The First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
Development Control Committee (West)
6
28 May 2009
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy SS 9: Holt (identifies strategic development requirements).
Policy HO 1: Dwelling mix and type (specifies type and mix of dwellings for new
housing developments).
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).
Policy CT 5: The transport impact of new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Impact on highway safety.
2. Parking.
3. Residential amenity.
4. Impact on the adjacent listed building and Conservation Area.
APPRAISAL
This application follows the withdrawal of application 20090002, a similar scheme to
that currently proposed.
Concerns were raised with the agent following withdrawal of the previous application
on a number of issues including overdevelopment; overlooking into unit three;
formation of the front courtyard to unit one in respect of how this is to be formed and
whether this would be appropriate; lack of onsite parking; Building Control's concerns
with the means of escape; and the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager's
comments in respect of the positioning of windows to the north elevation of unit three
and the formation of the front courtyard.
The majority of concerns raised about the proposal remain unaddressed. Further
information has been requested in respect of these issues and is awaited.
In terms of the principle of the development, the site lies within the designated town
centre, primary shopping area and Conservation Area. The principle of new
residential development is considered to be acceptable in this location under Policy
SS 5 of the adopted North Norfolk Core Strategy, subject to satisfactory compliance
with other relevant Development Plan policies.
The compact form of the proposal is broadly in keeping with the form and character
of this part of Holt with its close-knit development. The scale and massing of the
proposed buildings generally relate sympathetically to the surrounding buildings but
further comments regarding design and visual appearance/impact of the proposal in
the Conservation Area are awaited from the Conservation, Design and Landscape
Manager.
Development Control Committee (West)
7
28 May 2009
In respect of residential amenity issues, whilst the close relationship between the
proposed dwellings would replicate other similar situations within the town the first
floor bedroom window to unit two would create an unacceptable degree of
overlooking into the private garden area to unit three to the south east. This element
of the proposal would therefore have a detrimental impact on the amenities of the
proposed dwelling to the south east and is therefore contrary to the aims of Policy EN
4.
In addition, in respect of the layout, ground floor gates to the rear walls of courtyards
to units 2 and 3 have been indicated for means of escape. The Building Control
Manager has advised that, given the means of escape for these two gates and a first
floor window to unit 3 is reliant on access to adjoining land, further information in
respect of the rights of way needs to be submitted to confirm acceptability of this
arrangement. Additional information in this respect is awaited from the applicant.
In terms of the provision of outdoor amenity space, small courtyard-style gardens
would be allocated for each of the three dwellings although the applicant has not
indicated how this would be provided for unit 1 without causing detriment to the
amenity of the other units and, in any event, the amenity space provision does not
comply with the Design Guide standards. Whilst location within a Conservation Area
can, in some circumstances, justify the relaxation of standards where the character of
the area would be preserved or enhanced, in this instance it is considered that the
lack of amenity space manifests itself as a direct result of overdevelopment of the
site.
In respect of the impact on the adjacent listed building, comments are awaited from
the Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager. However given that the existing
stable adjoining the listed building is to be retained and converted to form a dwelling,
it is considered that no adverse impact on the fabric or character of the listed building
is likely to result.
Policy CT 6 requires compliance with the Council's car parking standards other than
in exceptional circumstances where this may be varied in accessible locations or in
order to enhance the character of town centre Conservation Areas. Further details
have been requested from the applicant in respect of the above and are awaited.
In terms of sustainable construction and energy efficiency, the new-build elements of
the proposal would comply with Policy EN 6 subject to them being built to meet a two
star rating under the Code for Sustainable Homes. Comments are still awaited in
respect of the building to be converted.
In respect of the dwelling mix and type, all proposed dwellings would have two
bedrooms and unit three would have an internal floor area of 70sqm. The proposal
therefore complies with Policy HO 1.
In summary, it is considered that the development proposed would amount to
overdevelopment of the site and would result in an unacceptable impact on the
residential amenity of the occupiers of unit three regarding overlooking and a lack of
amenity space, contrary to Policy EN 4 of the adopted Core Strategy.
Whether additional reasons for refusal are recommended will depend on the
response of outstanding consultees in respect of sustainability, conservation and
design issues and whether satisfactory responses are received from the agent in
respect of car parking and design.
Development Control Committee (West)
8
28 May 2009
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated refusal on the grounds that the proposal would amount to
overdevelopment of the site and would result in an unacceptable impact on the
residential amenity of the occupiers of unit three, together with any additional
reasons raised by outstanding consultees and in the event of unsatisfactory
responses concerning design and parking issues.
3.
SHERINGHAM - 20090203 - Erection of two semi-detached two-storey
dwellings; Garage Court Lawson Way for Flagship Housing Group
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :26 May 2009
Case Officer :Mr G Linder
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Residential Area
THE APPLICATION
Seeks the erection of two, semi-detached two-storey affordable units, on land
currently occupied by eleven lock-up garages and a concrete hardstanding which
together have a total site area of 560sq.m.
Each dwelling would be a two bedroom four person house with a gross internal floor
area of 75sq.m with each property having two car parking spaces to the frontage of
the development, with private rear gardens approximately 10m in depth.
The dwellings would be constructed of brick under concrete pantile roofs.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
Required by the Head of Planning and Building Control in view of concerns regarding
the lack of car parking within the Lawson Way development.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection subject to the installation of opaque glass in first floor windows on the
south elevation.
REPRESENTATIONS
Twenty seven letters of objection have been received from local residents which
raise the following concerns (summarised):
1. Would increase current car parking problems especially at weekends.
2. Existing residents have to park their vehicles on the grass verges.
3. The additional dwellings would only exacerbate the existing car parking problems.
4. Existing residents would have nowhere to park.
5. The existing off-road car parking falls far short of the current recommendations.
6. Money would be better spent resolving existing car parking problems.
7. The adjoining playing field is used by children from Lawson Way who access the
field through the site.
8. Building in this location would mean that the playing field would not be visible from
Lawson Way, which could result in issues of children's safety.
9. The development would result in it being difficult to access the rear of the adjoining
properties.
10. What is required is a bus route or shop in the Lawson Way area.
11. Lawson Way is already over populated.
Development Control Committee (West)
9
28 May 2009
12. Surface water drains are unable to cope with all the storm waters now.
13. The development would result in a loss of light to neighbouring property.
In addition a petition signed and addressed by 52 individuals has been received who
do not agree to the construction of the proposed dwellings.
CONSULTATIONS
Beeston Regis Parish Council - Awaiting comments.
Community Safety Manager - Awaiting comments.
Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager (Landscape) - No objection subject to
the imposition of conditions regarding hard landscaping and paving.
County Council (Highways) - During an evening site visit 43 number vehicles were
seen parked within the parking area and on street, with parking within turning heads,
which accords with the Car Parking Appraisal submitted as part of the application.
Whilst it is evident that residents seek to park as close as possible to their homes, in
some instances, parking on the verge, this is not unusual in residential areas where
driveway parking facilities are at a premium. However given that there are currently
no tenants occupying the garage court, having relocated over 12 months ago, and
that the Car Parking Appraisal indicates that there are garaging facilities within
Lawson Way which are still available for leasing, the Highway Authority would find it
difficult to raise a sustainable objection to the proposal.
Strategic Housing - Fully support the application which is in the ownership of Victory
Housing Trust and which has been allocated joint funding for the Homes and
Communities Agency and North Norfolk District Council.
Sustainability Co-ordinator - No objection subject to the imposition of conditions.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8 : The right to respect for private and family life, and
Article 1 of The First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy 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 5: The transport impact of new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
Development Control Committee (West)
10
28 May 2009
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development.
2. Design.
3. Impact on neighbouring properties.
4. Car parking.
5. Child safety.
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the development boundary for Sheringham which is defined
as Secondary Settlement in an area identified as primarily in residential use, where in
principle the development as proposed would be acceptable subject to compliance
with relevant policies.
Lawson Way is an established residential street on the eastern fringe of Sheringham
which is situated some 10-15 minutes walk from the town centre. The existing
development comprises a mix of 58 dwellings of various types including 46 houses in
terraces and 12 flats together with various garage blocks and parking courts. The
application site consists of eleven flat roofed lock up garages and court parking for a
further eleven vehicles is situated on the eastern boundary between number 12A to
the north, which is an end terraced property and number 14 to the south which is the
end property in a terrace of four dwellings. Following licensees of the garages being
given notice to vacate, they have been empty since February 2008, but part of the
concrete apron appears still to be used for parking by up to three local residents with
the rest of the site being informally used by skateboarders.
As far as the design of the proposed dwellings is concerned, these would be of a
similar scale, massing and elevational treatment to existing dwellings within the
development and as such would fit in well with surrounding properties.
In terms of the relationship of the proposed dwellings to the neighbouring properties
to either side, both numbers 12A and 14 Lawson Way have gable ends facing the
site with their rear gardens facing east towards the adjoining playing field. Number 14
has a blank gable facing the site and number 12A has in the past had a ground floor
window inserted in the gable end and also a conservatory to the east elevation.
However due to the fact that the proposed dwellings would be set back within the site
and also would abut the southern boundary, resulting in a separation distance from
the northern boundary of some 8.5m, it is not considered that dwellings in the
position proposed would result in a loss of light to the property to the north. However
it is proposed that the new dwellings would have a single window to the ground and
first floor to both gable ends which would provide a secondary means of light to the
living/dining room and bedroom 2. As such in order to overcome any privacy issues
and to comply with the basic amenity criteria a condition would be imposed requiring
the windows to be fixed shut and obscure glazed.
The issue of car parking has been raised as the principle concern of local residents,
who consider that there is already a lack of available car parking, especially at
weekends, with residents, having to park on highway verges and the turning heads of
road junctions, which lead to issues of highway safety.
Based on the car parking standards contained within the North Norfolk Core Strategy
under the current requirement there would be a need for a total of 122 off-street car
parking spaces to serve the total of 58 existing dwellings. However, the Car Parking
Appraisal submitted as part of the application indicates that, excluding the potential
for on-street car parking, there currently exists a total of 51 garage/spaces (excluding
the application site). In addition whilst reliance cannot be placed on on-street spaces
Development Control Committee (West)
11
28 May 2009
there are approximately 37 within the Lawson Way development. The appraisal goes
on to suggest that based on car ownership within census data in theory 33% of the
households in Lawson Way do not have a car, which would mean that of the 58
dwellings 19 dwellings have no need for 37 spaces. Therefore based on a
combination of existing garage/spaces and on street car parking there is an adequate
supply of car parking for the existing development without utilising the application
site, which would in itself have adequate car parking for the proposed dwellings. In
addition the appraisal also indicated that at the present time there is no demand for
garages in Lawson Way and two remain empty and that there is a regular hourly bus
service from the entrance to Lawson Way from 09:23 to 16:23.
This view is borne out by the Highway Authority who have indicated that although
there would be a shortfall of car parking based on current standards, given the
amount of available parking within the development it would be difficult to sustain an
objection to the proposal.
A further issue raised by a number of local residents is the fact that if built the
development would obscure views from within the Lawson Way development to the
playing field to the east which could result in issues of the safety of children using the
field. Whilst it is accepted that the development would result in a loss of this view this
is only enjoyed by a small number of properties as the gap between the existing
development is only 20m in width, with a small number of properties having a direct
view through the gap. Furthermore some 18 dwellings within the Lawson Way
development have their ground and first windows facing out over the playing field.
However, the views of the Community Safety Manager are awaited on this issue.
In conclusion it is considered that the erection of two additional dwellings in this
location would blend successfully with the rest of the development in Lawson Way,
the development has adequate car parking facilities and amenity space and it would
not unduly affect the amenities of neighbouring properties. Given the fact that the
lock-up garages have not been available to residents for over a year and the
remaining parking on the garage court is ad hoc, together with the fact that the
Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposal, it is not considered that
refusal of the application could be justified. It is therefore considered that the
proposed development would accord with Development Plan policy and that, subject
to the imposition of appropriate conditions, including the use of obscure glazing to the
ground and first floor windows to each gable end, the scheme is considered
acceptable.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated approval subject to no new grounds of objection from outstanding
consultees and the imposition of appropriate conditions, including the use of
obscure glazing the ground and first floor windows to each gable.
4.
WALSINGHAM - 20090181 - Erection of garages and boat store; 45a
Scarborough Road for Mrs J Wilson
Target Date :21 Apr 2009
Case Officer :Mr G Linder
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Countryside Policy Area
Conservation Area
Development Control Committee (West)
12
28 May 2009
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20071292 - (Outline Planning Permission) - Erection of four timber holiday lodges
Withdrawn, 08 Oct 2007
THE APPLICATION
Seeks the erection of a garage and boat store.
Amended plans have been received reducing the overall size of the building to 11.7m
x 7.5m with an overall ridge height of 5.8m.
The front elevation of the garage and boat store would face south and would have
three single vertical emphasis garage doors with brick quoins and flintwork to either
side whilst to the eastern gable end there would be a larger vertical emphasis door
which would provide a second access to the boat store. The rest of the building
would be of red brick under a pantiled roof.
Access would be via the existing entrance to the property with an existing
substandard garage to the southern boundary demolished to allow the driveway to be
extended and a turning and manoeuvring area provided to the frontage of the
proposed garage and boat store.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
The application was deferred at the previous meeting of the Committee.
PARISH COUNCIL
Original comments - Objects on the grounds that the access is unsuitable and that
due to the size of the development once built could be converted to living
accommodation.
Comments in respect of amended plans - of the eight Members who considered the
application four had no objection and the other four objected on the grounds of
unsuitable access and unsuitable development of the site.
REPRESENTATIONS
Ten letters of objection have been received from local residents which raise the
following concerns (summarised):
1. The proposed building is massive being larger than the applicant's bungalow.
2. It is situated at the top of the hill and will loom over us all.
3. Garage is too far from the bungalow.
4. The construction with cavity walls smacks of more holiday homes.
5. This is a back door approach to getting a holiday home which was rejected a year
of so ago.
6. The proposed site seems a most inconvenient spot for the location of a garage.
7. Scarborough Road is very narrow at this point and lorries cannot turn directly into
the site.
8. The delivery of materials by lorries and vans would result in them having to drive
into my shared access opposite the property.
9. There are already problems with highway safety on Scarborough Road with two
vehicles trying to pass.
10. Would create noise and disturbance to local residents.
11. Proposed building would have an adverse effect on our property as it would be
very close to our rear garden and would also invade the privacy of our side garden.
12. Should permission be granted then the use should be restricted.
A further six letters and e-mails have been received from local residents in response
to the amended plans which reiterate their previous concern.
Development Control Committee (West)
13
28 May 2009
CONSULTATIONS
County Council (Highways) - Original comments - No objection.
Comments in respect of amended plans - No objections however requested the
imposition of a condition requiring the garage boat store to be used solely for
ancillary purposes to the residential use of No.45A and that at no time should be
sold, leased or occupied independently from the main dwelling.
Environmental Health - 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.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS2: Development in the Countryside (prevents general development in the
countryside with specific exceptions).
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).
Policy CT 5: The transport impact of new development (specifies criteria to ensure
reduction of need to travel and promotion of sustainable forms of transport).
Policy CT 6: Parking provision (requires compliance with the Council's car parking
standards other than in exceptional circumstances).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Principle of development.
2. Design.
3. Impact on neighbouring properties.
4. Visual impact in Conservation Area.
5. Access.
APPRAISAL
The application was deferred at the last meeting in order for a site visit to be carried
out.
The site is situated within the Countryside policy area where Policies EN 2, EN 4 and
EN 8 of the Core Strategy are applicable.
Number 45A Scarborough Road is a detached single storey bungalow set within a
large plot of some 6,200sq.m, where, in principle, the erection of a replacement
garage and boat store would be acceptable.
Development Control Committee (West)
14
28 May 2009
At the present time the site is divided into two distinct elements with the dwelling
situated to the front of the site with Scarborough Road whilst to the rear is a belt of
trees leading onto a large area laid to grass. The garage would be located
approximately 73m from Scarborough Road. In order to gain access to the building it
is proposed that the existing small garage which abuts the southern boundary and is
set some 40m back from the entrance to the site would be demolished.
As far as the design and siting of garage boat store are concerned, it is considered
that whilst being slightly larger than a conventional double garage that the overall
scale and massing of the building in this location is acceptable, subject to the use of
appropriate materials. Given the existing trees on the site, which are to be retained, it
would not be possible to site the garage closer to the dwelling and provide adequate
manoeuvring and turning area.
In terms of the impact on neighbouring properties, the closest dwellings to the site
are the row of cottages to the north, numbers 33 - 41 Scarborough Road which have
south facing rear gardens, whilst number 41, the eastern most cottage, also has a
long narrow side garden extending the full length of the application site. However,
given the fact that the existing tree belt is to be retained, views of the garage boat
store from these dwellings and their rear gardens, the closest of which would be
some 18m away, would be restricted and would not result is any loss of privacy or
amenities. As such the only views of the building from the north would be from the
eastern-most section of the garden to No.41 which is used as a vegetable plot and is
some 30m way and which for some of its length is screened by a hedgerow some 2m
in height.
In terms of the impact of the garage boat store on the wider area, given the relatively
enclosed nature of the site together with the distance from the Scarborough Road, it
is considered that it would preserve the character and appearance of this part of the
Walsingham Conservation Area.
In respect of access, the existing access to the southern boundary of the site, which
serves the current garage, would be utilised. However, the garage boat store in the
proposed location would allow a larger area for turning and manoeuvring which
would have the benefit of allowing vehicles to turn within the site and enter the
highway in a forward gear, which at the present time is difficult to achieve.
Furthermore, given that the proposed use would not result in an intensification of the
domestic use of the site, the Highway Authority has indicated that it has no objection
to the access arrangements.
It is therefore considered that the scheme as proposed would not have an adverse
impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties or the wider Walsingham
Conservation Area. Subject to the imposition of an appropriate condition that the
building is not used as habitable accommodation and is used solely as a garage/boat
store in association with the existing dwelling, the proposal would accord with
Development Plan Policy.
RECOMMENDATION:Approve, subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions including that the
building is not used as habitable accommodation but is used solely as a
garage/boat store in association with the existing dwelling and at no time shall
be sold, leased or occupied independently from the main dwelling.
Development Control Committee (West)
15
28 May 2009
5.
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090333 - Erection of single-storey dwelling with
accommodation in roofspace; Wingate Two Furlong Hill for Mrs Richards
MINOR DEVELOPMENT - Target Date :04 Jun 2009
Case Officer :Miss J Medler
(Full Planning Permission)
CONSTRAINTS
Undeveloped Coast
Residential Area
Tree Preservation Order
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
20081588 - (Full Planning Permission) - Erection of single-storey dwelling with
accommodation in roofspace
Withdrawn, 22 Jan 2009
THE APPLICATION
Is for the erection of a single-storey dwelling with accommodation in the roof space,
including a one bedroom attached annexe with an internal doorway link to main
dwelling.
The site measures approximately 36.5m x 20m. The footprint of the proposed
dwelling is in the shape of a cross.
The proposed dwelling would span approximately 17.5m east to west, and 14m north
to south at its longest points. The height of the proposed dwelling to the ridge would
be approximately 6.8m. The kitchen projection to the north would have a ridge height
of approximately 6m.
The materials proposed are red/orange brick, slate roof tiles and timber joinery.
REASONS FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
At the request of Councillor Trett having regard to the following planning issues:
1. Impact on neighbouring dwellings.
2. Scale and design of dwelling.
TOWN COUNCIL
No objection.
REPRESENTATIONS
Four letters of objection have been received from local residents raising the following
points:
1. Loss of light.
2. Overlooking.
3. Too close to boundaries.
4. Concerns over scale and height.
5. Out of keeping with surrounding properties.
6. Location of septic tank not shown.
7. Outline planning permission was granted in 2005 for a bungalow.
CONSULTATIONS
Building Control Manager - No comment on fire service access, route acceptable.
Development Control Committee (West)
16
28 May 2009
County Council (Highways) - No principle objection to this application, but require
certain access improvements to be indicated on the proposed drawings, including:
1. Visibility splays of 43m x 2m 43m to be provided from the access, involving the
removal of walls and vegetation to either side of access.
2. Widening of access to minimum 4.1m for first 6m into site from nearside edge of
adjacent highway carriageway to allow two cars to pass off-highway if required.
3. Setting back of any gates to minimum 5m from edge of carriageway with gates
opening inwards.
4. On site parking and turning arrangements for both new and existing property to be
detailed.
Sustainability Co-ordinator - The application complies with Policy EN 6, subject to the
imposition of the Code for Sustainable Homes condition.
Environment Agency - Awaiting comments.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that the proposed development may raise issues relevant to
Article 8 : The right to respect for private and family life, and
Article 1 of The First Protocol: The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Having considered the likely impact on an individual's Human Rights, and the general
interest of the public, approval of this application as recommended is considered to
be justified, proportionate and in accordance with planning law.
CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998 - SECTION 17
The application raises no significant crime and disorder issues.
POLICIES
North Norfolk Core Strategy (Adopted September 2008):
Policy SS 1: Spatial Strategy for North Norfolk (specifies the settlement hierarchy and
distribution of development in the District).
Policy SS 3: Housing (strategic approach to housing issues).
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).
MAIN ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
1. Acceptability of development in residential policy area.
2. Impact upon neighbouring dwellings.
3. Design.
4. Highway safety.
APPRAISAL
The site is located within the residential policy area of Wells where new residential
development is considered to be acceptable providing it accords with other relevant
policies contained in the Core Strategy.
Outline planning permission was first granted on this site under application reference
20050732 for the erection of a single-storey dwelling. All matters apart from access
were reserved.
Development Control Committee (West)
17
28 May 2009
Last year a full application reference 20081588 for the erection of a single storey
dwelling with accommodation in the roof space was withdrawn. This followed Officer
concerns that the proposal was not acceptable in terms of its relationship to
neighbouring dwellings due to the height and scale of the proposed dwelling in such
close proximity to the northern boundary of the site. Under that application the
proposed dwelling was shown to be approximately 1m from the conifer hedge on the
northern boundary, and 4.5m from the dwellings to the north.
However, since the withdrawal of that application discussions have taken place
regarding a revised scheme and the current application has been submitted.
The siting and orientation of the proposed dwelling have been revised in order to
improve the relationship with the dwellings to the north. The proposed dwelling has
been moved further to the south, with the main part of the proposed dwelling
approximately 11.5m from the neighbouring dwellings and the kitchen projection
approximately 6m away. The tall conifer hedge remains on the northern boundary
and is considered to be at least 2.5m in height and in some places 3m, which
provides a more than adequate screen between properties.
There is a high level porthole window shown in the northern elevation of the kitchen
projection. However, this is a double height room and therefore has no first floor. This
is not a window that will be possible to look out of. There are three roof lights
proposed in the northern elevation for two bedrooms and the landing. Subject to
these roof lights being located at high level, it is not considered that the proposal
would result in loss of privacy to the neighbouring dwellings to the north.
The proposed dwelling would be approximately 1.5m from the eastern boundary of
the site. All the openings on this elevation would be at a high level. It is not therefore
considered that this would result in a significant loss of privacy to the dwelling to the
east, which has a blank gable facing the site and is approximately 4.5m from the
boundary. Whilst it is considered that there would be some overshadowing to the
east late in the day it is not considered that this would be of significant detriment the
amenities of occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling.
The relationship to the dwellings to the west and the south is considered to be
acceptable.
It is therefore considered that, whilst there is a slight shortfall in the basic amenity
criteria distance to the north, the relationship between dwellings would be
acceptable. It is considered that the existing hedge along the northern boundary is of
such a height that this alone would result in loss of light to the dwellings to the north.
At the time of writing this report the agent was considering further alterations that
could be made to the proposed dwelling to improve the relationship to neighbouring
dwellings. The Committee will be updated at the meeting regarding this matter.
The site is located off the existing access drive to the dwelling known as 'Wingate'.
The site is set well back and well screened from the road to the west and is not
located in a prominent position. There is a mixture of types and styles of dwellings in
the immediate area. It is not therefore considered that there is an overriding local
distinctiveness in this part of Wells-next-the-Sea. In terms of materials the roof is
proposed to be constructed in slate. At the time of writing this report discussions with
agent regarding justification of the choice of roof materials were taking place. The
materials are generally considered to be acceptable, but the Committee will be
updated regarding the actual roofing material at the meeting. The design is therefore
considered to be acceptable in this location.
Development Control Committee (West)
18
28 May 2009
The Committee will note the comments of the Highway Authority. At the time of
writing this report an amended plan regarding access, visibility and car parking was
still awaited.
Subject to any further amendments to the proposed dwelling being considered
acceptable, clarification of the roofing material and the receipt of a satisfactory
amended plan regarding access, visibility and car parking, and no objection from the
Highway Authority regarding this matter, it is considered that the proposal would be
acceptable and accord with Development Plan policy.
RECOMMENDATION:Delegated authority to approve, subject to the receipt of a satisfactory
amended plan regarding further possible alterations to the dwelling,
clarification of roofing material and no objection from the Highway Authority
regarding any amended plan regarding access, visibility and car parking, and
the imposition of appropriate conditions.
6.
APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR A SITE INSPECTION
The following planning application is recommended by officers for a site inspection by
the Committee prior to the consideration of full reports at the next meeting.
As the application will not be debated at this meeting it is not appropriate to invite
public speaking at this stage. Members of the public will have an opportunity to make
their representations at the next meeting of the Committee when the application is
discussed.
Please note that additional site inspections may be recommended by Officers at the
meeting or agreed during consideration of report items on this agenda.
GREAT RYBURGH – 20090432 – Conversion and extension of former granary
to form nine affordable residential dwellings; The Granary Station Road for
Michael McNamara Associates
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE
A site visit is recommended by the Head of Planning and Building Control in order for
Members to appreciate the relationship between the development and the nearby
Maltings particularly in view of the issue of noise impact.
RECOMMENDATION
The Committee is recommended to undertake a site visit.
7.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
BINHAM - 20090286 - Erection of office; Foxburrow Farm Binham Road
Hindringham for Wordingham Plant Hire Ltd
(Full Planning Permission)
BLAKENEY - 20090256 - Installation of replacement first floor window; 52 High
Street for Mr and Mrs Allen
(Alteration to Listed Building)
Development Control Committee (West)
19
28 May 2009
BLAKENEY - 20090261 - Erection of one and a half-storey dwelling and
detached garage; 39 Morston Road for Martin King
(Full Planning Permission)
BRISTON - 20090307 - Erection of double garage; Apple Wood Reepham Road
for Mr Bishop
(Full Planning Permission)
CORPUSTY - 20090257 - Construction of pitched roof to flat-roofed extension
and installation of two roof lights; Breke House 3 Norwich Road for Mr Sullivan
(Full Planning Permission)
DUNTON - 20090240 - Conversion of barn to one unit of holiday
accommodation; 10, Cannister Hall Barns Swaffham Road Toftrees for Mr
Johnson
(Full Planning Permission)
EDGEFIELD - 20090218 - Change of use of land from agricultural to garden and
formation of vehicular access; Duck Pond Cottage Holt Road for Mr R J
Window
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20090244 - Change of use from class D1 (college annexe) to A1
(retail); 18-20 Norwich Street for Mr Titley
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20090273 - Erection of wall, demolition of section of wall to
provide access and erection of gate; 21 Norwich Road for Mr Thoday
(Alteration to Listed Building)
GRESHAM - 20090258 - Conversion of garages to residential annexe; Penlan
Farmhouse Barningham Road for Mr Stokes
(Full Planning Permission)
HEMPSTEAD - 20090300 - Prior notification of intention to erect replacement
agricultural building; Hole Farm Hole Farm Road for Mr Carver
(Prior Notification)
HIGH KELLING - 20090237 - Erection of single-storey dwelling; Farend Vale
Road for Mr Rudd
(Planning Permission; Reserved Matters)
HOLT - 20090215 - Erection of single-storey front/side extension; 50 Grove
Lane for Mr Elsom
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - 20090219 - Use of land for siting mobile classroom; Greshams School
Cromer Road for Greshams School
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - 20090221 - Erection of single-storey side and rear extension ; 18 Mill
Street for Mr Langton
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (West)
20
28 May 2009
HOLT - 20090246 - Erection of extension to provide covered shelter and
parasols to provide outdoor eating area; The Kings Head 19 High Street for
Byfords
(Full Planning Permission)
HOLT - 20090247 - Erection of covered shelter; The Kings Head 19 High Street
for Byfords
(Alteration to Listed Building)
HOLT - 20090254 - Conversion of outbuilding to habitable accommodation; 67
Cromer Road for Ms P Coast and Mr S Grewcock
(Full Planning Permission)
KELLING - 20090033 - Erection of loggia, swimming pool, detached garage and
alterations to driveway, erection of bridge and rear entrance gates; Kelling Hall
Holt Road for Mr and Mrs Widdowson
(Full Planning Permission)
KETTLESTONE - 20080596 - Change of use of redundant barns to four
residential dwellings; Manor Farm The Street for Ralph Harrison and Partners
(Full Planning Permission)
LANGHAM - 20090177 - Conversion of former stables to one unit of holiday
accommodation; Langham Lodge Cockthorpe Road for Mr Blackwell
(Full Planning Permission)
LANGHAM - 20090243 - Alterations to stables to facilitate conversion to holiday
accommodation; Langham Lodge Cockthorpe Road for Mr Blackwell
(Alteration to Listed Building)
LITTLE SNORING - 20090290 - Erection of conservatory; Dairy Farm The Street
for Mr Parr
(Full Planning Permission)
MATLASKE - 20081109 - Change of use from B1 (office) to additional
accommodation for adjoining holiday unit; Medicare Chapel Loke The Street
for Mrs T Brett
(Full Planning Permission)
MELTON CONSTABLE - 20090222 - Erection of single-storey side extension;
Gamekeepers Cottage Melton Park Hindolveston Road for Mr Pratt
(Full Planning Permission)
RYBURGH - 20081002 - Erection of two-storey side extension and conversion
of one dwelling to two dwellings; 11 Fakenham Road Great Ryburgh for Omnia
Homes Limited
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20090264 - Sub-division of one dwelling into two; Units 1 and
2, 3 The Boulevard for Mrs R Allard
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20090185 - Erection of single-storey front and side extensions
and car port; 18 Holt Road for Mr W Owen
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (West)
21
28 May 2009
SHERINGHAM - 20090193 - Erection of single-storey dwelling (revised design
incorporating attached garage); 2 Churchill Crescent for Mrs Godleman
(Full Planning Permission)
SHERINGHAM - 20090302 - Erection of single-storey side extension; 2 Meadow
Way for Mr Bishop
(Full Planning Permission)
STIBBARD - 20081383 - Removal of condition four of 20071659 to permit
residential occupancy; Grove Farm Barn Guist Bottom Road for Mr and Mrs
Spencer-Ashworth
(Full Planning Permission)
STIBBARD - 20090190 - Erection of conservatory; The Beeches Moor End Lane
for Mr R Bunting
(Full Planning Permission)
TATTERSETT - 20090202 - Erection of two-storey rear extension and front
porch; 63 Halifax Crescent Sculthorpe for Mr Taylor
(Full Planning Permission)
TATTERSETT - 20090229 - Erection of two-storey rear extension; 57 Halifax
Crescent Sculthorpe for Mr Hart
(Full Planning Permission)
TATTERSETT - 20090266 - Continued use of former car park as car wash and
car park; Tattersett Cafe, Four Winds Trading Fakenham Road for Mr Zeneli
(Full Planning Permission)
WALSINGHAM - 20090168 - Retention of two en-suite toilets and fixed lighting
system; The Manor House Westgate for Mr K Weed
(Alteration to Listed Building)
WARHAM - 20090238 - Erection of kiosk in connection with gauging station;
land off Binham Road for Environment Agency
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20081635 - Erection of first floor extension; Vine
House Freeman Street for Mr and Mrs Millwood
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090205 - Installation of patio doors; 15 Mainsail
Yard Freeman Street for Mr Rhodes
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090276 - Erection of single-storey side extension
and garden wall; 54 Mill Road for Mr Warren
(Full Planning Permission)
WELLS-NEXT-THE-SEA - 20090291 - Demolition of outbuilding and erection of
single- storey extension; 54 Mill Road for Mr Warren
(Alteration to Listed Building)
WOOD NORTON - 20090227 - Erection of extension to stable block to provide
hay barn; Lyng Hall Holt Road for Mrs R Condon
(Full Planning Permission)
Development Control Committee (West)
22
28 May 2009
8.
APPLICATIONS REFUSED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS
FAKENHAM - 20090195 - Erection of single-storey rear extension; 6 Clarendon
Road for Mr and Mrs Bothamley
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20090214 - Erection of one and a half storey side extension; 73
Norwich Road for Mrs Rose
(Full Planning Permission)
FAKENHAM - 20090272 - Formation of vehicular access, erection of wall and
sliding gate; 21 Norwich Road for Mr Thoday
(Full Planning Permission)
LANGHAM - 20090197 - Part retention and erection of 2 metres high boundary
fence; Langham Lodge Cockthorpe Road for Mr Blackwell
(Full Planning Permission)
APPEALS SECTION
9.
NEW APPEALS
WARHAM - 20081310 - Erection of two dwellings; adjacent The Reading Room
The Street Warham for Holkham Estate
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS
10.
PUBLIC INQUIRIES AND INFORMAL HEARINGS - PROGRESS
None.
11.
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS APPEALS - PROGRESS
HINDRINGHAM - 20081166 - Erection of cottage style dwelling and garage; land
adjacent to 44-46 Wells Road for Mr and Mrs M Woodhouse
HOLT - 20081526 - Erection of building to provide serviced holiday
accommodation; land at, Jenis Barn Thornage Road for Mr S Chapman
LANGHAM - 20081176 - Erection of dwelling and garage; land adjacent Stable
Court, Langham Hall Holt Road for Mr A Burlingham
WARHAM - 20081276 - Erection two-storey dwelling; 79 The Street for Holkham
Estate
12.
APPEAL DECISIONS
SWANTON NOVERS - 20081648 - Continued display of non-illuminated
direction signs; Half Mile both sides of Crossroads Dereham Road for Mrs H
Duffield
APPEAL DECISION :- DISMISSED
UPPER SHERINGHAM - 20080492 - Erection of detached two-storey dwelling;
land at The Green The Street Upper for John Ashton's Children's Settlement
APPEAL DECISION :- Withdrawn
Development Control Committee (West)
23
28 May 2009