Broads Authority

Planning Committee

Minutes of the meeting held on 7 October 2011

Present: Mr M Barnard Mr C Gould Mrs J Brociek-Coulton Mr G W Jermany Mr N Dixon Dr J S Johnson Mr S Dorrington Mr A S Mallett Dr J M Gray Mr R Stevens In Attendance:

Mrs S A Beckett – Administrative Officer Mr C Brown– for the Solicitor Mr F Bootman – Planning Officer Ms M Hammond – Planning Assistant Mr B Hogg – Historic Environment Manager Ms A Macnab – Planning Officer Mr A Scales – Planning Officer (NPS Consultants) Ms C Smith – Head of Development Management Ms K Wood – Planning Assistant

Members of the public in attendance who spoke:

BA/2011/0236/FUL Dockyard, Griffin Lane, Thorpe St Andrew, Mr Phillip Duncan Agent on behalf of applicant Corylus Ltd. Rob Rogers On behalf of Applicant Ms Trudi Wakelin

BA/2011/0244/FUL Compartment 1, River Bank of Upstream of Upton Mill and Adj to Upton Boat Dyke, Upton Mr Jeremy Halls (BESL) On behalf of Applicant

BA/2011/0260/FUL Compartment 12, Reedham to Cantley Floodbank, Mr Jeremy Halls (BESL) On behalf of Applicant

BA/0262/FUL Compartments 10 and 11, Riverbank of River Bure between Stokesby and Great Yarmouth Mr Jeremy Halls (BESL) On behalf of Applicant

BA/2011/0223/CU Amusement Arcade, Norwich Road, Hoveton Mr M Grey Applicant Mrs J Brandford Resident

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p1of30/251011

BA/2011/0257/FUL Lime Kiln Quay, Irstead Road, Neatishead Mr M Powell Applicant

BA/2011/0243/FUL , Cantley Ms A Kelly On behalf of applicant

1/1 Apologies for Absence and Welcome

The Chief Executive welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Mrs S Blane and Mr N Dixon who would be arriving late due to prior commitments.

1/2 Appointment of Chairman

The Chief Executive invited nominations for the Chairman of the Committee. It was proposed and duly seconded that Dr J M Gray be appointed as Chairman.

RESOLVED

that Dr Gray be appointed as Chairman of the Planning Committee for the forthcoming year.

Dr Gray in the Chair

1/3 Appointment of Vice-Chairman

It was proposed and duly seconded that Mr Gould be appointed as Vice- Chairman.

RESOLVED

that Mr Gould be appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee for the forthcoming year.

1/4 Declarations of Interest

Members expressed declarations of interest as set out in Appendix 1 to these minutes.

1/5 Minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 9 September were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to an amendment to Appendix 1 Declarations of Interest for Mr A S Mallett having a personal interest for Minute 13/8 (4) and prejudicial interest for item 13/11 (i).

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p2of30/251011 1/6 Points of Information Arising from the Minutes

There were no points of information arising from the minutes to report.

1/7 To note whether any items have been proposed as matters of urgent business

There were no items of urgent business.

1/8 Chairman’s Announcements and Introduction to Public Speaking

(1) The Chairman gave notice of the Fire Regulations.

(2) Public Speaking

The Chairman reminded everyone that the scheme for public speaking was in operation for consideration of planning applications, details of which were contained in the Code of Conduct for Members and Officers. Those who wished to speak were requested to come up to the public speaking desk at the beginning of the presentation of the relevant application.

(3) Variation in the Order of the Agenda

The Chairman proposed to rearrange the order of business by taking application BA/2011/0292/FUL of agenda item 10 first. In addition it was agreed to take agenda item18 Wayford Mill following consideration of all the applications in order to ensure that all members were available for its consideration.

1/9 Requests to Defer Applications Included in this Agenda

No requests for deferral of applications had been received.

1/10 Applications for Planning Permission

The Committee considered applications submitted under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as well as matters of enforcement (also having regard to Human Rights), and reached decisions as set out in Appendix 2 to these minutes on the blue pages. Acting under its delegated powers the Committee authorised the immediate implementation of the decisions.

The following minutes relate to further matters of information, or detailed matters of policy not already covered in the officers‟ reports, and which were given additional attention.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p3of30/251011 (1) BA/2011/0236/FUL Dockyard, Griffin Lane, Thorpe St Andrew, Norwich Removal of various existing buildings and relocation of access/associated boundary treatment. Extension to existing workshop with additional boat shed/workshop, first floor office and welfare facilities. New police launch shed and new inlet. Removal of one existing slip and associated new piling; new aggregate bays; and associated works Applicant: Land and Water

The Planning Officer explained that the proposal was at the long established Thorpe Dockyard on land owned and operated as a Dockyard by the Authority. The application was submitted by Land and Water who would occupy the proposed office in partnership with the Authority. The proposals followed on from previous applications granted temporary permission in May 2011 and the desire for more permanent buildings and enhancement of the site. The application represented part of the Authority‟s review of its operations which sought to tidy the area, provide new facilities, provide an area for car parking and rationalise the buildings to enable a more efficient operation of the whole site. An application submitted in July had been withdrawn due to the height and size of the proposed building not being sufficient to accommodate the operational needs of the workshop. The current proposal had been developed to accommodate those needs and the resulting extended portion of the building would be 2.1 metres taller than the current workshop. Photomontages were shown.

The Planning Officer drew attention to the comments received explaining that those in italics represented comments on the withdrawn application. However, Society had since confirmed that it had no objections and had indicated its positive support. The had provisionally supported the proposals considering them to be appropriate and water compatible for this location subject to mitigation measures for Flood Risk; no objections had been received from the Internal Drainage Board, and the Highways Authority had no objections, their concern being mainly with the junction of Griffin Lane with Yarmouth Road (A1242).

The Planning Officer explained that the plans addressed many of the concerns expressed previously. The new facilities would provide a rationalisation of an existing activity and there was operational justification for the height of the proposed building. It was also recognised that there had been a mixture of buildings on the site previously and that the character was similar to other sites in the vicinity. However, officers had concerns about the bulk and mass of the building and further negotiations were required to finalise details of the building. Therefore officers recommended that the application be approved in principle subject to further satisfactory amendments being made, particularly relating to the eaves height and roof pitch, and that the application be brought back to the next meeting.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p4of30/251011

Mr Duncan, on behalf of the applicant, was given the opportunity to address the Committee explaining that Land and Water Ltd were a specialist marine engineering company wishing to establish itself within the Broads and employ local people. It would be sharing the office space with the Authority. He considered that the company had gone a considerable way to address the operational needs of the Authority and the concerns of the planning officers to soften the appearance, already providing a compromise. The height was in part due to the need to make the building DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) compliant and provide a lift as well as the workshop facilities. He emphasised that, in essence, the proposals were for an industrial building in an industrial area. The timing of a decision was critical in order to secure the necessary funding and therefore he requested that a decision be made at this meeting.

In general, members did not consider it appropriate to approve the application in principle at this stage and accordingly they wished to approve the detailed scheme when finalised. Therefore they considered that the application should be deferred for further negotiations in an attempt to achieve a more acceptable design. A member suggested that the application be deferred until the end of the meeting to enable the relevant officers to carry out further negotiations and assist in the timing of the development, but this was not supported. Members also considered whether to delegate a decision to the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee subject to satisfactory negotiations. Although recognising the pressures in relation to funding and the operational requirements, it was important that the planning matters were given full consideration in an appropriate way.

Dr Johnson proposed, seconded by Mr Barnard and it was

RESOLVED by 5 votes to 1 with one abstention

that the application be deferred to the next Planning Committee meeting on 4 November 2011 for officers to have further negotiations with the applicant on design, particularly relating to the eaves height of the main building and extension in an attempt to reduce the mass and bulk of the proposals without affecting their functionality.

(2) BA/2011/0244/FUL Compartment 1, River Bank of River Bure Upstream of Upton Mill and Adjacent to Upton Dyke Boat Yard, Upton Rollback of 250m length of floodbank following piling removal. Crest raising of floodbank adjacent to Upton Dyke. Additional flood measures crest raising Applicant: Environment Agency

The Planning Officer explained that the application was for limited additional works in two short sections of flood defence in the

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p5of30/251011 Compartment where works had already been carried out on the basis of planning permission granted in 2006. The works were in an area where piling was removed in 2010 and for which planning permission was granted in 2009 and at the last meeting on 9 September 2011. The proposals had been designed to ensure that the standard of flood defences would be maintained to an acceptable level in the compartment both in terms of crest height and position of defences. Access would be retained and BESL had confirmed that they would be carrying out the works outside the holiday season.

The Navigation Committee had considered the application at their meeting on 8 September 2011 when they had no adverse comments to make. The Planning Officer drew attention to the concerns expressed by a resident about the size of vehicles and equipment being used while works were carried out and their impact on Marsh Road. However, the Highways Authority had no objections.

Having addressed the main issues of the impact on recreation, ecology and access, the Planning Officer recommended approval subject to conditions.

Members concurred with the officer‟s assessment and considered that the scheme was acceptable and represented an appropriate design of development associated with flood defence work in this location.

RESOLVED unanimously

that the application be approved subject to conditions and an Informative as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as the proposal was in accordance with adopted Core Strategy Policies CS3 and CS4 and saved Broads Local Plan Policies INF5, TR27, TR2, C3 and C14. The proposal would not conflict with the tests of „saved‟ Policy TC6, therefore the application was considered to meet the requirements of the Broads Local Plan and Core Strategy DPD policies, in particular Policy INF5 (Broadland Flood Alleviation Strategy) and would not materially conflict with other policies in the Plan and Strategy.

(3) BA/2011/0260/FUL Reedham to Cantley Floodbank. Compartment 12 (River Yare) Piling removal and lowering of abandoned floodbank following completion of consented works in planning permission BA/2007/0116/FUL Applicant: Environment Agency

The Planning Officer explained that the application involved the removal of a total of approximately 830 metres of piling (and bank re- grading) in three areas where banks had been setback. This piling was no longer required for flood defence purposes and was in a deteriorating condition. Works in these areas were completed in 2009

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p6of30/251011 and the new setback banks had consolidated and stabilised. Consent was required as a result of a condition imposed on the 2007 permission. An 83 metre length of piling close to Reedham, anticipated for removal, was still the subject of negotiation with the landowner who had indicated his willingness to take on responsibility for its future maintenance. The area was not identified as an area for maintenance within the moorings strategy. Therefore the application still included this area for removal in order to ensure that the area would not be a future liability in terms of navigation hazard.

The Planning Officer drew attention to comments endorsed by the Navigation Committee at its meeting on 8 September 2011, accepting that the piling was deteriorating and removal was justified and would improve navigation safety. The Committee had also welcomed the opportunity provided for dredging disposal capacity as well as ecological and landscaping benefits in the set back areas.

The Planning Officer recommended approval subject to conditions, particularly referring to that of erosion monitoring.

Members concurred with the officer‟s assessment and considered that the proposal would bring navigation benefits, provide a natural appearance in the landscape and the set back bank would provide a footpath for walkers. The proposal was considered to represent an appropriate design of development associated with flood defence work in this location.

RESOLVED unanimously

that the application be approved subject to conditions and an Informative as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as it is considered that the proposed development is in accordance with saved Local Plan Policies INF5, TR2 and TR3, and Core Strategy Policies CS3, CS4 and CS15. Therefore it is considered to meet the requirements of the Broads Local Plan and Core Strategy DPD policies, in particular Policy INF5 (Broadland Flood Alleviation Strategy) and would not materially conflict with other policies in the Plan and Strategy.

(4) BA/2011/0262/FUL Compartments 10 and 11, Riverbank of River Bure between Stokesby and Great Yarmouth Piling removal and lowering of floodbank following completion of consented works in Compartments 10 and 11 Applicant: Environment Agency

The Planning Officer explained that the application was very similar to the previous proposal as it involved pile removal (and bank re- grading) in a number of areas where banks had been setback or rolled back. It also included additional erosion protection. The piling was no longer required for flood defence purposes and was in a

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p7of30/251011 deteriorating condition. Works on the areas had been completed between 2008 and 2010 and the new banks had consolidated and stabilised.

The Navigation Committee had considered this matter at its meeting on 8 September 2011 and endorsed the officer concluding comments on the application, accepting that the condition of piling was deteriorating to the extent that removal was justified. The Committee had also welcomed the opportunities the setback works provided for dredging disposal as well as delivering ecological and landscape benefits. The Planning Officer considered that the techniques proposed were acceptable and recommended approval.

Jeremy Halls, on behalf of the applicant, confirmed that the erosion protection monitoring included detailed hydrographic surveys before piling was taken out and then repeated on a regular basis with quarterly reports to the Navigation Committee.

Members concurred with the officers‟ assessment and considered that the proposals would provide navigation benefits and erosion protection subject to the conditions proposed and therefore it provided an appropriate design of development associated with flood defence work in this location.

RESOLVED unanimously

that the application be approved subject to conditions and Informatives as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 attached to these minutes as the application is acceptable in respect of the Development Plan and in accordance with saved Policies INF5, TR2 and TR3 of Broads Local Plan (1997) and Policies CS3, CS4 and CS15 of the adopted Core Strategy (2007).

(5) BA/2011/0223/CU Amusement Arcade, Norwich Road, Hoveton Change of use from Amusement Arcade (D2) to Restaurant and Cafe (A3) plus Hot Food Takeaway (A5) Applicant: Mr Malcolm Grey

The Planning Assistant explained that the application was before the Committee due to objections received from third parties including the Parish Council. The proposal sought to change the use of the amusement arcade to a restaurant and takeaway and included an extension in the form of external timber decking to the immediate south of the site. The existing retail use would remain.

Since writing the report further consultation responses had been received from the Broads Society and the Highways Authority, both of which had no objections.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p8of30/251011 The Planning Assistant referred to the concerns of the objectors, addressing these in turn and explaining that it was not the role of the Local Planning Authority to control competition. The Environmental Health Officer considered that there was adequate provision in relation to noise and smell. The Planning Assistant concluded that the change of use was acceptable and, subject to conditions, was recommended for approval.

Mr Grey, the applicant, was given the opportunity to address the Committee and explained that he had other eating establishments within the vicinity. The same delivery vehicle would be used for each and therefore there would not be an increase in the number of vehicles in the area. His aim was to provide a quality tea shop and provide a facility which he considered was not available in Wroxham/Hoveton at present. Mrs Brandford, in support of the application, commented that the change of use from an amusement arcade was to be welcomed. She made a plea for the fence on Granary staithe to be removed. However, officers clarified that this was not the subject of the application but the responsibility of County Council.

The Committee was mindful of the objections received and the request from the Parish Council for a site visit. Members considered that they were suitably familiar with the site and that there were no planning reasons to justify a refusal. The Committee concurred with the officer‟s recommendation and

RESOLVED unanimously

that the application be approved subject to conditions as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as the application is considered to be acceptable in terms of design and in the context of the surrounding area and therefore in accordance with the saved Policies B11 and EMP3 of the Broads Local Plan (1997) and Policy CS1 and CS22 of the adopted Core Strategy (2007).

(6) BA/2011/0257/FUL Lime Kiln Quay, Irstead Road, Neatishead Erection of balcony to front elevation of boathouse and erection of external stairs and doorway opening to first floor of boathouse Applicant: Mr John Powell

The Planning Officer explained that the application was before the Committee due to the objections received from the neighbouring property. The application fell within the Neatishead Conservation Area. The proposal involved the erection of a balcony to the north facing gable of an existing one and a half storey wooden boatshed with accommodation in the roof together with new fenestration and access, and a new external staircase. These were similar in design to others in the locality. The use of the boatshed and its accommodation was restricted to being incidental to the use of the main dwelling.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p9of30/251011 The Planning Officer concluded that the proposed alterations were acceptable as they would help preserve the boatshed character along this part of Lime Kiln Dyke and would not have a detrimental impact on amenity. Given the distance between the nearest dwelling, it was not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on neighbouring amenity.

Mr Powell, the applicant, confirmed that the space was used for ancillary accommodation and storage. The internal staircase was becoming too steep for practical use and hence the proposal for this to be sited externally. It would also be to the rear of the building to minimise the visual impact.

Members gave consideration to the objection but considered that the distance between the properties (70 metres) and the landscaping and planting provided sufficient screening so as not to have a significant detrimental impact on neighbouring amenity. The Committee was satisfied that the proposals were acceptable and concurred with the officer‟s assessment.

RESOLVED unanimously

that the application be approved subject to the conditions as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as the application was considered to be in accordance with saved Broads Local Plan Policies B7, B11, B12 and H11 and it was considered that there were not any material considerations which could justify the refusal of this application.

(7) BA/2011/0254/FUL North and South Bank of River Wensum, Norwich Siting of 2 no floating pontoons to enable new temporary river bus service between The Deal Ground, and Norwich City FC to enable delivery of planned developments within the East Norwich Regeneration area Applicant: Landpro Services Ltd

The Planning Officer explained that the application for two floating pontoons was to enable a temporary passenger and ferry service to operate for a three year period in order to connect the planned development sites which were part of the Norwich Regeneration area. The outline schemes for this area, which included the Deal Ground and Utilities site and May Gurney site off Bracondale, were the subject of a separate joint planning application yet to be determined but included the provision of two bridges. The river bus service would be provided in lieu of a bridge over the River Wensum linking the Deal Ground and Utilities site for pedestrians and cyclists until such time as this could be installed.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p10of30/251011 Since the report had been written, two further representations had been received. The Planning Officer drew attention to the comments from the Navigation Committee which had been supportive of the proposal but had some concerns regarding design and the possible intrusion of the pontoons on navigation as well as security issues. Norwich City Council had no objections but recommended a condition relating to details of access to and from the highway. The pontoons had been redesigned to address some of these concerns.

The Planning Officer recommended approval of the amended plans with an amendment to the recommendation from a three year temporary consent to six years to enable the river bus to have sufficient time for viability to be established, and the inclusion of further conditions to address materials and access details.

Members were satisfied with the amended proposals. Some concerns were expressed about security and the possible need for adequate supervision in relation to anti-social behaviour, although it was recognised that final details were still required. The Committee accepted the proposal.

RESOLVED

that the amended application be approved for a temporary period of six years to enable the service to operate for three years and establish viability subject to the conditions as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as the application was considered to be an appropriate form of development, would promote the use of sustainable transport and provide a sustainable link between settlements and therefore is considered to be in accordance with Policies CS3 and CS16 of the adopted Broads Core Strategy (2007), Policies TC10 and B11 of the adopted Broads Local Plan (1997) and Policy DP12 of the unadopted Broads Development Management Development Plan Document.

(8) BA/2010/0251/FUL Herbert Woods Boat Yard, Broads Haven, Bridge Road, Potter Heigham Retrospective application for the retention of six flagpoles – each approximately 6 metres high with coloured 1 metre flags/pennants Applicant: Herbert Woods

The Planning Officer explained that the application was before the Committee since the applicant was a member of the Navigation Committee. The proposal sought retrospective consent for the retention of six flagpoles running along the boundary of the boatyard site. Within the context of the Potter Heigham site the poles were considered to be an appropriate form of development and there was no objection to their retention.

Members concurred with the officer‟s assessment.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p11of30/251011

RESOLVED

that the application be approved subject to conditions as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as the development is considered to be in accordance with Local Plan Policy B11 and it is not considered that there are any material considerations which could justify the refusal of this application.

(9) BA/2011/0263/COND Woods Dyke Boatyard, School Road, Horning Variations of Conditions 2, 6 and 7 of pp BA/2010/0307/FUL to amend approved plans, finished floor levels and access Applicant: Mr L Funnell

The Planning Assistant explained that the application was before the Committee as it required a revised Section 106 Agreement if the application was approved. She outlined the background to the application which involved the redevelopment of Woods Dyke boatyard. This would involve the varying three of the conditions of the planning permission granted in 2010 involving the finished floor levels of a replacement boatshed, as well as access arrangements as a result of new survey work undertaken.

Since the report had been written further consultation responses had been received from:

the Highways Authority who had no objection and therefore condition 7 was no longer required; and the Environment Agency who had no objection to the amendments.

The Planning Assistant concluded that the proposed amendments to the floor levels would not result in any significant additional flood risk or alter the external appearance of the dwelling. The Highways Authority was also satisfied with the amended proposals and therefore the application was recommended for approval.

Members were satisfied with the amendments and accepted the officer‟s recommendation.

RESOLVED

that prior to the completion of an amended Section 106 Agreement, the application be approved subject to conditions including one relating to minimum floor levels, and an Informative as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as the proposals are considered to be in accordance with saved policies B11, INF1, INF2 and TC8 of the Broads Local Plan (1997) and Policy CS1 of the adopted Core Strategy (2007). The submitted Development Management Policies DPD is also a material consideration in the determination of this application and the

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p12of30/251011 proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policies DP4 and DP11.

(10) BA/2011/0205/FUL Melsham House, Marsh Road, Cantley Proposed conversion of existing stables to annex, demolition of existing barn and shed with erection of new stable block and removal of mobile home. Applicant: Mr and Mrs Hewitt

The Planning Assistant explained that the proposal involved the creation of an annexe within an existing stable building and within the curtilage of a dwelling, although the annexe would be detached from the main dwelling. The proposal also involved the replacement of existing sheds with a new stable block and the removal of the static caravan on the site. As the proposed annexe would not be integral to the main dwelling and the application fell outside the development boundary, the proposed large self-contained unit required careful consideration. However, the application had been the result of considerable pre-application discussions with officers and consideration of a number of options. Having carefully assessed the proposals against policy, it was considered that it would be difficult to refuse. The proposals would provide improvements to the appearance of the site and on balance subject to conditions and that prior to granting consent, a Section 106 Agreement be entered into to tie the occupation of the annexe to the main house and enable monitoring of the use, the application was recommended for approval.

In general, members concurred with the officer‟s assessment.

RESOLVED by 7 votes to 1 against

that, subject to the prior completion of a Section 106 Agreement, the application be approved subject to conditions as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as the proposal is considered to be in accordance with saved Policies B11, H7, H11 and TR25 of the Broads Local Plan (1997) and Policy CS1 of the adopted Core Strategy (2007). The submitted Development Management Policies DPD is also a material consideration in the determination of this application, and the proposals are considered to be in accordance with Polices DP4, DP21 and DP28.

(11) BA/2011/0243/FUL Cantley Marshes, Cantley Creation of five pond complexes on the wet grassland reserve and use of resulting spoil to repair adjacent historic access routes Applicant: RSPB Mr Alasdair Fraser

The Planning Officer explained that the application was before Committee as it constituted major development and fell within the designated Cantley Marshes SSSI, Broads Special Area of Conservation, the Broadland Special Protection Area and Ramsar

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p13of30/251011 sites. It involved the creation of five in-field pond complexes which would each comprise three ponds with a range of diameters, depths and profile shapes. The excavated material from their creation would be used to repair 700 metres of adjacent historic agricultural access routes which were stated to be vital to the conservation grazing of the marshes. The scheme was designed to maximise the ecological value of the marshland and insure minimal damage. It was considered that there would be no long term detrimental impact on the Broads landscape and as the Environment Agency was satisfied that the potential increase in flood risk was negligible, the application was recommended for approval.

Members accepted that the timing of the works would adequately protect wintering birds and there would be potential ecological benefits from the scheme.

RESOLVED

that the application be approved subject to conditions as set out in the schedule at Appendix 2 to these minutes as the proposal is considered to be in accordance with saved Policy INF1 of the Broads Local Plan, Policies CS1, CS2, CS4 and CS20 of the Core Strategy and Planning Policy Statements 9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation and 25 Development and Flood Risk.

Agenda Items 1/17 and 1/18 were taken at this point.

1/11 Enforcement of Planning Control: Item for Consideration: Unauthorised Use of Holiday Chalets as Permanent Residential Accommodation

The Committee received a report concerning the unauthorised use of holiday chalets as permanent accommodation at Waveney Holiday Village, Butt Lane, Burgh Castle. The site was one of a number of holiday parks, some of which were in the Broads Authority area and others in Great Yarmouth Borough‟s executive area. The site in question adjoined Kingfisher Holiday Village which fell within the Great Yarmouth area, although to a casual observer the two sites might be seen as a single entity. The Committee noted that the chalets were restricted by planning conditions to use for holiday purposes only and were subject to a closed period in the winter months when they should be vacant.

Following detailed investigations, Great Yarmouth Borough Council had recently taken enforcement action in the form of Breach of Condition Notices together with a letter, where it had been shown that caravans on the Kingfisher Park were being used as permanent accommodation contrary to planning conditions. The accompanying letter explained the action being taken and advised that the Council did not intend to enforce the Breach of Condition Notices until the existing owners moved and only new owners/ occupiers would need to comply.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p14of30/251011 It was noted that the Authority‟s investigations had also resulted in finding that the planning restrictions for the use of chalets to „holiday use only‟ was also being breached within the Waveney Holiday village. The site was not in an area where permanent housing would be permitted and the chalets were permitted to meet a need for holiday accommodation and to support the tourist economy of the area. To allow such a use to continue would impact on the neighbouring amenity, put pressure on services, change the nature of the area and be contrary to policy, particularly saved Policies H1, H2, TR12 and TR17 of the Broads Local Plan. It was therefore proposed to take similar action to that of Great Yarmouth Borough including mitigating measures to reduce anxiety caused by the service of the notices.

Members considered that it would be expedient to take the proposed action and in particular be consistent with the neighbouring authority, and that close liaison should continue to take place between the Authorities particularly for monitoring purposes.

RESOLVED

(i) that officers be authorised to serve Breach of Condition Notices on those chalets believed to be occupied other than as holiday accommodation and requiring that the use of chalets as permanent accommodation must cease; and

(ii) that an accompanying letter be served with the Breach of Condition Notice stating the Authority‟s proposed course of action and reasons for serving the notice.

1/12 Consultation on Draft National Planning Policy Framework: Report Back

The Committee received a report updating the comments proposed to be made in response to the draft National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published for consultation on 25 July 2011, following consideration at its meeting on 9 September 2011 (Minute13/9). As requested, officers had been in contact with other organisations with similar duties, and considered the proposed response from the English National Park Authorities Association (ENPAA) . It was noted that the Authority‟s comments in the report to the 9 September meeting were included within ENPAAs report which it was coordinating and compiling for submission to the CLG.

ENPAA‟s report was summarised as a two part response to Government, the first part being ENPAA‟s view as to priority comments and recommending changes welcoming what was workable and proposing changes considered practical , the second part responding to the issues of lower priority generally but setting out points where solutions might not be straightforward.

In general the ENPAA response covered the following points:

The simplification of the Planning Policy Framework was to be welcomed.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p15of30/251011 Nowhere was “Sustainable Development” defined. In National Parks sustainable development would be different for each and sustainable development was not always compatible with National Park Policy. The draft NNPF did not relate to established planning principles. National Parks and the Broads were not specifically mentioned and specific reference should be reinstated. With reference to housing, the terms “need” and “demand “were used interchangeably and as they were not the same, this should be clarified.

Members noted and endorsed the ten bullet points within the report setting out the key impacts for the Broads in addition to the original comments made. It was considered that the response coordinated by ENPAA should not be duplicated but that some of the specific comments relating to the key impacts on the Broads should be developed further. It was noted that when the Authority was compiling its first reports for the Local Development Framework, it had been advised not to repeat the national planning policies as this could be duplication. However, in the light of the proposed draft NNPF it would now be necessary to make specific provisions particularly in relation to landscape protection and enhancement. The loss of PPS5 and PPS25 was of particular concern to the Broads and this should be highlighted.

RESOLVED

(i) that the response coordinated by ENPAA be supported;

(ii) that the comments contained in the report setting out the implications of the proposals in the National Planning Policy Framework specifically for the Broads be fully endorsed subject to further details being included; and

(iii) that the conclusion of the previous report and meeting of the 9 September Planning Committee, together with the comments above, be forwarded to the CLG as the formal response of the Broads Authority.

1/13 Enforcement Update

The Committee received an updated report on enforcement matters already referred to Committee. The Head of Development Management further reported on:

(1) Land adjacent to Pallet Yard, Old Station Road, Geldeston Road, Ellingham: Unauthorised Change of Use of Land for Storage of Vehicles Scrap (also subject of Appeal)

Since the publication of the report, the appellant had withdrawn the appeal against the Enforcement Notice. As a result of negotiations with the appellant, a compromise agreement had been reached in relation to the use of the site and a Section 106 agreement was being drawn up.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p16of30/251011

(2) Sotshole Cottage, School Road, Woodbastwick: Unauthorised Conservatory

The date for compliance for the removal of the conservatory was 28 September 2011 but it was understood that the structure was still in situ. The property owner had been informed of the breach of the enforcement notice and it was understood that work would be commencing within the next two months.

RESOLVED

that the report be noted.

1/14 Appeals to the Secretary of State: Update

The Committee received a table showing the position regarding appeals against the Authority since March 2011 as set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

RESOLVED

that the report be noted.

1/15 Decisions Made by Officers under Delegated Powers

The Committee received a schedule of decisions made by officers under delegated powers from 30 August 2011 to 27 September 2011.

RESOLVED

that the report be noted.

1/16 Date of Next Meeting

It was noted that the next meeting of the Planning Committee would be held on Friday 4 November 2011 at 10.00am at Dragonfly House, 2 Gilders Way, Norwich, followed by a meeting of the Heritage Asset Review Group.

1/17 Exclusion of Public

RESOLVED

that the public be excluded from the meeting under section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 for consideration of the following item on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined by Paragraphs 3 and 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 12 A to the Act as amended, and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public benefit in disclosing the information.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p17of30/251011

1/18 Options for Action at Wayford Mill, Smallburgh

The Committee considered a report containing exempt information providing a detailed history of planning breaches and current breaches as well as options for addressing those breaches at Wayford Mill Smallburgh. Members noted the current planning situation at Wayford Mill:

(a) the occupation of the dwelling was in breach of the S106 Agreement, because the provisions of that Agreement had not been complied with; (b) the conversion of the former windpump building was in breach of the S106 Agreement because the Schedule had not been complied with; a (c) the use of the former windpump building was in breach of the S106 Agreement because it was being used for the purposes of residential accommodation; (d) any conversion and use of the former windpump building for a separate residential use was in breach of planning legislation; and (e) the construction of decking and domestic structures in the curtilage of the former windpump building and dwelling was in breach of planning legislation.

Members noted the various options and given the longstanding history of breaches considered that efforts should be made to resolve these and provide a comprehensive solution to a long running, time consuming, and costly situation.

RESOLVED

that the options set out within paragraphs 3.9 and 3.10 of the report be explored further, and a report be brought to the Committee for consideration and final decision.

The meeting concluded at 14.05pm

CHAIRMAN

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p18of30/251011 APPENDIX 1

Code of Conduct for Members

Declaration of Interests

Committee: Planning Committee

Date: 7 October 2011

Please tick here if the Nature of Interest Name Agenda interest is a (Please describe the nature Item/Minute No(s) Prejudicial of the interest) interest

All Members 1/10(1) Application BA/2011/0292/FUL Relates to land owned by Broads Authority and its operation

M Barnard 1/10(11) Member of RSPB

G W Jermany 1/10 Woods Dyke, 1/11 Holiday Chalets Toll payer, appointed by Great Yarmouth Borough

C Gould Member of SNDC

J Brociek 1/10(6) BA/2011/0254FUL North and Coulton South Bank of River Wensum Appointed by Norwich City Council A S Mallett 1/5 Minutes as per previous meeting

Appointed by Broadland District Council

1/10(1)- (4) Member of Navigation Committee. Was present but did not take part when matters discussed

1/10(9) BA/2011/0263/COND– applicant known to me (personal)

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p19of30/251011 1/13(i) Enforcement Norwich Frostbite Sailing Club Commodore so will withdraw if matter discussed

R Stevens Appointed by NNDC, Norfolk Boating and Yachting Club, EACC, Toll Payer, Broads Internal Drainage Board.

S Dorrington 1/10(5) Appointed by Norfolk Country Council and Toll Payer

N Dixon All General Appointed by Norfolk County Council – any item that may affect NCC

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p20of30/251011 APPENDIX 2

Decisions on Planning Applications considered by the Planning Committee on 7 October 2011

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0236/FUL Dockyard, Land and Removal of various Griffin Lane, Water existing buildings and Thorpe St Andrew Thorpe St relocation of Andrew access/associated boundary treatment; erection of extension to existing workshop with additional boatshed, workshop first floor office and welfare facilities; new police launch shed and associated new inlet; removal of one existing slipway with associated new piling; new aggregate bays; and associated works.

Decision by 5 votes to 1 with one abstention

That the application be deferred for officers to further negotiate on possible amendments to the design of the building relating to its mass and bulk without compromising the operational functioning of the Dockyard.

Reason for Decision:

To ensure that all avenues and options had been explored to provide a design of a functional building to the satisfaction of the Authority. .

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p21of30/251011

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0244/FUL Compartment Environment Rollback of 250m length of 1, River Bank Agency floodbank following piling Upton of River Bure, removal. Crest raising of Upstream of floodbank adjacent to Upton Mill and Upton Dyke. Additional Adjacent to flood measures crest Upton Boat raising Dyke

Decision unanimous

Approved subject to the imposition of the following conditions:

Standard time limit condition. Approved list of plans. Landscape/planting. Temporary footpath closure/signage. Site access/delivery route. Navigation hazard markers. Hours of working. Archaeological investigation. Phasing of works to flood banks.

That the following Informative be specified on the decision notice of the planning application:

The permission shall be granted in the context of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Broads Authority and the Environment Agency on 25 April 2003. Some works may require approval by the Broads IDB and the applicants‟ attention is drawn to this matter.

Reason for Decision

The proposal is accompanied by supporting information which outlines the proposal and the impacts on the area. The recreational interest of the area will be safeguarded by the proposals; protecting walking interests by the provision of diversions for walkers to use during construction. Navigation interests will be protected by the timing of works, continuing access to mooring and the marking of the re-graded edge on part of the River Bure. Subject to planning conditions, the recreational interest (both land and water based) will be protected as required by saved Local Plan Policies INF5, TR27 and TR2 or Core Strategy Policy CS3. The ecological interest of the area will be safeguarded and the enhanced defences (by crest raising and roll back) will reinforce protection to a wide area of

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p22of30/251011 grazing marsh, meeting the tests of „saved‟ Local Plan Policies C3 and C14 and Policy CS4 of the Core Strategy. The construction traffic generated will be for a limited period and the highway network that serves the site is sufficient for this traffic and the proposal will not conflict with the tests of „saved‟ Policy TC6. Visual and residential amenity and historic interest will be safeguarded as a result of sympathetic design, re-vegetation, working hours and archaeological investigation as controlled by planning condition. Therefore the application is considered to meet the requirements of the Broads Local Plan and Core Strategy DPD policies, in particular Policy INF5 (Broadland Flood Alleviation Strategy) and would not materially conflict with other policies in the Plan and Strategy. The proposal is considered to represent an appropriate design of development associated with flood defence work in this location.

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0260/FUL Reedham to Environment Piling removal and Cantley Agency lowering of abandoned Cantley Floodbank floodbank following Compartment completion of consented 12 works in planning permission BA/2007/0116/FUL

Decision unanimous

Approved subject to the following conditions:

Approved list of plans. Erosion protection monitoring. Navigation hazard markers.

The following informative be specified on the decision notice of the planning application:

The permission shall be granted in the context of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Broads Authority and the Environment Agency on 25 April 2003.

Reason for Decision

The proposal is accompanied by supporting information which outlines the proposal and its impacts:

The removal of piling will provide navigation benefits as this is currently in a deteriorating condition. Subject to planning conditions to provide navigation markers and monitor erosion protection in the specified manner, the navigation

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p23of30/251011 interest will be protected as required by „saved‟ Local Plan Policies INF5, TR2 and TR3 or Core Strategy Policies CS3 and CS15. The pile removal will provide a natural appearance in the landscape, consistent with the aims of „saved Policy INF5 and Core Strategy Policy CS4. The set back bank provides a footpath for walkers to use so there will be no unacceptable harm to walking interests.

Therefore the application is considered to meet the requirements of the Broads Local Plan and Core Strategy DPD policies, in particular Policy INF5 (Broadland Flood Alleviation Strategy) and would not materially conflict with other policies in the Plan and Strategy. The proposal is considered to represent an appropriate design of development associated with flood defence work in this location.

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0262/FUL Compartments Environment Piling removal and 10 and 11, Agency Lowering of floodbank Stokesby, Riverbank of following completion of Fleggburgh, River Bure compartments 10 and 11 Mautby, Caister and between Great Yarmouth Stokesby and Great Yarmouth

Decision unanimous

Approved subject to the following conditions: Approved list of plans. Erosion protection monitoring. Erosion protection in the Bure Loop. Navigation hazard markers. Hours of working.

The following Informatives be specified on the decision notice of the planning application:

The permission shall be granted in the context of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Broads Authority and the Environment Agency on 25 April 2003. The works require Flood Defence Consent under the Water Resources Act 1991, and the Anglian Region Land Drainage and Sea Defence Byelaws. Consent is also likely to be required from the Broads IDB.

Reasons for Decision

The proposal is accompanied by supporting information which outlines the proposal and its impacts:

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p24of30/251011 The removal of piling will provide navigation benefits as this is currently in a deteriorating condition. Subject to satisfactory erosion protection in the Bure Loop coupled with planning conditions to secure this, navigation markers and monitor erosion protection in the specified manner, the navigation interest will be protected as required by „saved‟ Local Plan Policies INF5, TR2 and TR3 or Core Strategy Policies CS3 and CS15. Whilst the new erosion protection in the Bure Loop will have a concrete appearance, this will provide the necessary erosion protection in this area and it is considered that its appearance will be satisfactory once vegetation has established. Elsewhere pile removal will result a natural appearance in the landscape, consistent with the aims of „saved Policy INF5 and Core strategy Policy CS4.

Therefore the application is considered to meet the requirements of the Broads Local Plan and Core Strategy DPD policies, in particular Policy INF5 (Broadland Flood Alleviation Strategy) and would not materially conflict with other policies in the Plan and Strategy. The proposal is considered to represent an appropriate design of development associated with flood defence work in this location.

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0223/CU Amusement Mr Malcolm Change of use from D2 Arcade, Grey Amusement to A3 Hoveton Norwich Road Restaurant and Cafe plus A5 Hot Food takeaway

Decision unanimous

Approve subject to the following conditions:

Time Limit. In accordance with plans. Details of extraction unit to be submitted. Details of refuse area to be submitted. Details of Flood Evacuation Plan and Notice to be submitted. Hours of opening 8am-10pm.

Reasons for Decision

The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in terms of design and is acceptable in the context of the surrounding area. Consequently, the development is in accordance with Policies CS1 and CS22 of the Adopted Core Strategy (2007) and Policies B11 and EMP3 of the Broads Local Plan (1997).

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p25of30/251011

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

B BA/2011/0257/FUL Li Lime Kiln Mr John Erection of balcony to front Quay Powell elevation of boathouse N Neatishead and erection of external stairs and doorway opening to first floor of boathouse

Decision unanimous

Approve, subject to conditions:

Standard time limit. In accordance with approved plan. The accommodation hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time for a use other than purposes ancillary to the residential dwelling known as Lime Kiln Quay. Details of any additional external lighting to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons for Decision

The development is considered to be of a scale, form and design, appropriate to the setting of the Neatishead Conservation Area. The proposed alterations would allow existing first floor accommodation to be more fully utilised by the occupiers of the main residential property at the site and it is considered that the use of this accommodation can be restricted to the provision of ancillary accommodation only through the imposition of a planning condition. Consequently, the development is considered to be in accordance with Local Plan Policies B7, B11, B12 and H11 and it is not considered that there are any material considerations which could justify the refusal of this application.

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0254/FUL North and Landpro Siting of 2 no floating South Bank of Services Ltd pontoons to enable new Norwich River temporary river bus Wensum, service between The Deal Norwich Ground, Trowse and Norwich City FC to enable delivery of planned developments within the East Norwich Regeneration Area

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p26of30/251011 Decision unanimous

Approve subject to conditions:

Temporary consent for six year period. At expiration of consent the pontoons, walkways and any associated development shall be removed from site and the site restored to its condition before the start of the development hereby permitted, or any such other condition agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. In accordance with amended plans. Prior to the first use of the pontoons hereby approved a scheme detailing the scheduling of the ferry service facilitated by the pontoons shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Broads Authority. The scheme shall include the number of ferries operating between the pontoons, hours of operation and indicate the level of service provided (i.e. how many boat movements per hour, throughout the period of service). Materials. That the concerns expressed by Norwich City Council relating to details of access be addressed and submitted to Norwich City Council. No vessel shall be moored alongside the pontoons hereby approved unless for the purposes of access/egress to the river bus service facilitated by the development hereby approved. In any event, no vessel shall be moored alongside the pontoon hereby approved overnight. Details of any additional external lighting to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason for Decision

The application is considered to be an appropriate form of development, would promote the use of sustainable transport and provide a sustainable link between settlements. The proposal would have no significant detrimental impact on navigation. Consequently, the application is considered to accord with Policies CS3 and CS16 of the adopted Broads Core Strategy (2007), Policies TC10 and B11 of the adopted Broads Local Plan (1997) and Policy DP12 of the unadopted Broads Development Management Development Plan Document.

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0251/FUL Herbert Herbert Retrospective application Woods Woods for six flagpoles - each Potter Heigham Boatyard, approximately 6 metres Broad Haven, high with coloured 1 metre Bridge Road flags/pennants

Decision unanimous

Approve, subject to conditions:

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p27of30/251011 In accordance with approved plan.

Reason for Recommendation

The development is considered to be of a scale, form, design and colour which would be appropriate to the setting of the Potter Heigham Staithe area. The poles are considered to respect the commercial character of the area and are situated so as to minimise their visual impact when viewed from the more sensitive receptor points downstream of the application site. Consequently, the development is considered to be in accordance with Local Plan Policy B11 and it is not considered that there are any material considerations which could justify the refusal of this application.

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0263/COND Woods Dyke Mr L Funnell Variation of Conditions 2, Boatyard, 6 and 7 of pp Horning School Lane BA/2010/0307/FUL amend approved plans, finished floor levels and access Decision unanimous

Subject to the prior completion of a revised Section 106 Agreement, approve subject to conditions:

Standard time limit. In accordance with submitted plans. Wet-proofing measures to be implemented prior to first occupation. Minimum floor levels.

Informative Note:

All other conditions of permission BA/2010/0307/FUL remain applicable.

Reason for Decision

The proposal is considered to be in accordance with saved Policies B11, INF1, INF2 and TC8 of the Broads Local Plan (1997) and Policy CS1 of the adopted Core Strategy (2007). The submitted Development Management Policies DPD is also a material consideration in the determination of this application and the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policies DP4 and DP11.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p28of30/251011

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0205/FUL Melsham Mr and Mrs Proposed conversion of House, Marsh Hewitt existing stables to annexe, Cantley Road, demolition of existing barn and shed with erection of new stable block and removal of mobile home.

Decision by 7 votes to 1 against

Subject to the prior completion of a Section 106 Agreement the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

Standard time limit. In accordance with submitted plans. Annexe shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling. Stables only to be used for purposes incidental to and in connection with the use of the dwelling. Remove permitted development rights for curtilage buildings. Remove permitted development rights for fences, walls, gates and other means of enclosure. Replacement tree planting. Demolition of sheds to be undertaken in accordance with recommendations of submitted Ecology Survey. Swallows nests to be installed on new stables. Mobile home to be removed within three months of completion of development .

Ref No /Parish Situation Applicant Proposal

BA/2011/0243/FUL RSPB Cantley RSPB Creation of 5 pond Marshes complexes on the wet Cantley grassland reserve and use of the resulting spoil to repair adjacent access route. Decision unanimous

Approved subject to the following conditions:

Standard time limit for implementation of consent. In accordance with approved plans and supporting documentation. Time frame for work outside breeding season. Requiring all new excavation works to be more than 9 metres from the main Board – maintained watercourse.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p29of30/251011 Reason for Decision

The proposal is considered to be in accordance with saved Policy INF1 of the Broads Local Plan, Policies CS1, CS2, CS4 and CS20 of the adopted Broads Core Strategy and Planning Policy Statements 9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation and 25 Development and Flood Risk.

SAB/RG/mins/pc071011/p30of30/251011