Planning Committee Agenda and the June Agenda

PLANNING COMMITTEE

AGENDA

Monday 1st June 2015 at 10.00 am

Please note venue

Committee Suite King’s Court Chapel Street King’s Lynn Norfolk 2

If you require parts of this document in another language, large print, audio, Braille or any alternative format please contact the Council Information Centre on 01553 616200 and we will do our best to help.

LATVIAN Ja Jums nepieciešamas daļas no šī dokumenta citā valodā, lielā drukā, audio, Braila rakstā vai alternatīvā formātā, lūdzu, sazinieties ar Padomes informācijas centru (Council Information Centre) pa 01553 616200 un mēs centīsimies Jums palīdzēt.

RUSSIAN Если вам нужны части этого документа на другом языке, крупным шрифтом, шрифтом Брайля, в аудио- или ином формате, обращайтесь в Информационный Центр Совета по тел.: 01553 616200, и мы постараемся вам помочь.

LITHUANIAN Jei pageidaujate tam tikros šio dokumento dalies kita kalba, dideliu šriftu, Brailio raštu, kitu formatu ar norite užsisakyti garso įrašą, susisiekite su Savivaldybės informacijos centru (Council Information Centre) telefonu 01553 616200 ir mes pasistengsime jums kiek įmanoma padėti.

POLISH Jeśli pragną Państwo otrzymać fragmenty niniejszego dokumentu w innym języku, w dużym druku, w formie nagrania audio, alfabetem Braille’a lub w jakimkolwiek innym alternatywnym formacie, prosimy o kontakt z Centrum Informacji Rady pod numerem 01553 616200, zaś my zrobimy, co możemy, by Państwu pomóc.

PORTUGUESE Se necessitar de partes deste documento em outro idioma, impressão grande, áudio, Braille ou qualquer outro formato alternativo, por favor contacte o Centro de Informações do Município pelo 01553 616200, e faremos o nosso melhor para ajudar. 3

King’s Court, Chapel Street, King’s Lynn, Norfolk, PE30 1EX Telephone: 01553 616200 Fax: 01553 691663

PLANNING COMMITTEE

Please note that due to the number of applications to be considered it is proposed that the Committee will adjourn for lunch at approximately 12.30 pm and reconvene at 1.10 pm.

Please ensure that all mobile phones are switched to silent

DATE: 1 June 2015

VENUE: Committee Suite, King’s Court, Chapel Street, King’s Lynn

TIME: 10.00 am

1 APOLOGIES

To receive any apologies for absence and to note any substitutions.

2 MINUTES

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the Meetings held on 27 April 2015 and the Reconvened Meeting held on 30 April 2015.

3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Please indicate if there are any interests which should be declared. A declaration of an interest should indicate the nature of the interest (if not already declared on the Register of Interests) and the agenda item to which it relates. If a disclosable pecuniary interest is declared, the Member should withdraw from the room whilst the matter is discussed.

These declarations apply to all Members present, whether the Member is part of the meeting, attending to speak as a local Member on an item or simply observing the meeting from the public seating area.

Planning Committee 1 June 2015 4

4 URGENT BUSINESS UNDER STANDING ORDER 7

To consider any business, which by reason of special circumstances, the Chairman proposes to accept, under Section 100(b)(4)(b) of the Local Government Act, 1972.

5 MEMBERS ATTENDING UNDER STANDING ORDER 34

Members wishing to speak pursuant to Standing Order 34 should inform the Chairman of their intention to do so and on what items they wish to be heard before the meeting commences.

6 CHAIRMAN’S CORRESPONDENCE

To receive any Chairman’s correspondence.

7 RECEIPT OF LATE CORRESPONDENCE ON APPLICATIONS

To receive the Schedule of Late Correspondence received since the publication of the agenda.

8 DECISIONS ON APPLICATIONS

To consider and determine the attached Schedule of Planning Applications submitted by the Executive Director (attached at pages 8 to 126).

9 DELEGATED DECISIONS

To receive the Schedule of Planning Applications determined by the Executive Director (attached at pages 127 to 155).

10 PLANNING ENFORCEMENT: LAND AT GARWOOD CLOSE, KING’S LYNN

To update Members in respect of a continuing breach of planning control and to seek a resolution in respect of what further enforcement action is required, if any, to remedy the breach of planning control (attached at pages 156 to 166).

11 PLANNING ENFORCEMENT: QUARTERLY REPORT

To receive a quarterly update report covering performance for the period 01 January to 31 March 2015 (attached at pages 167 to 200).

12 DECISIONS ON PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS: QUARTERLY REPORT

To receive the quarterly update report covering performance for the period 01 June 2015 – 31 March 2015 (attached at pages 201 to 202).

Planning Committee 1 June 2015 5

To: Members of the Planning Committee

Councillors Mrs V M Spikings (Chairman), M J Peake (Vice-Chairman), C Bower, T Bubb, S Buck, J Collingham, P Colvin, C J Crofts, I Gourlay, G Middleton, J Moriarty, A Morrison, M S Storey, G Wareham, Mrs E Watson, A White, Mrs A Wright and Mrs S Young

Site Visit Arrangements

When a decision for a site inspection is made, consideration of the application will be adjourned, the site visited, and the meeting reconvened on the same day for a decision to be made. Timings for the site inspections will be announced at the meeting.

If there are any site inspections arising from this meeting, these will be held on Thursday 4 June 2015 (time to be confirmed) and the meeting reconvened on the same day (time to be agreed).

Please note:

(1) At the discretion of the Chairman, items may not necessarily be taken in the order in which they appear in the Agenda.

(2) An Agenda summarising late correspondence received by 5.15 pm on the Thursday before the meeting will be emailed (usually the Friday), and tabled one hour before the meeting commences. Correspondence received after that time will not be specifically reported during the Meeting.

(3) Public Speaking

Please note that the deadline for registering to speak on the application is 12 noon the working day before the meeting, Friday 29 May 2015. Please contact [email protected] or call (01553) 616443 to register.

For Major Applications Two speakers may register under each category: to object to and in support of the application. A Parish or Town Council representative may also register to speak. Each speaker will be permitted to speak for five minutes.

For Minor Applications One Speaker may register under each category: to object to and in support of the application. A Parish or Town Council representative may also register to speak. Each speaker will be permitted to speak for three minutes.

For further information please contact:

Kathy Wagg Democratic Services Officer Telephone: 01553 616276 Email: [email protected]

Planning Committee 1 June 2015 6

INDEX OF APPLICATIONS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE MEETING TO BE HELD ON MONDAY 1 June 2015

Item Application No. PARISH Recommendation Page No. Location and Description of Site No. Development

8/1 MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS

8/1(a) 15/00190/FM SNETTISHAM APPROVE 8 Snettisham Park Bircham Road Change of use from livery yard to camping with associated camping pods and amenities block

8/2 OTHER APPLICATIONS/ APPLICATIONS REQUIRING REFERENCE TO THE BOARD

8/2(a) 15/00185/F BURNHAM APPROVE 26 Land Adj Hamilton Antiques MARKET 21 North Street Proposed shop

8/2(b) 15/00430/CU CASTLE RISING APPROVE 38 The Old School House (South Wing) Lynn Road Change of use from an art school to a hairdressers

8/2(c) 15/00544/CU CASTLE RISING APPROVE 44 The Old School House Lynn Road Retrospective application for change of use from art and craft tuition centre with ancillary sales to fashion (ladies) retail

8/2(d) 15/00433/F DOWNHAM 50 The Stables Bexwell Road MARKET APPROVE Conversion of former offices to form 3 two bedroom residential units, alterations to coach house to form 1 two bedroom dwelling and construction of 3 terraced two- three bedroom cottages.

8/2(e) 15/00266/CU HUNSTANTON APPROVE 63 Annexe Town Hall The Green Change of use from B1 to A1

Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Item Application No. PARISH Recommendation Page No. Location and Description of Site No. Development

8/2(f) 15/00445/F KING’S LYNN APPROVE 69 Land To the North And North East of 19 Gaywood Road Construction of 6 dwellings and associated groundworks incidental to the development

8/2(g) 15/00137/F OUTWELL APPROVE 84 Oakley House Nurseries Hall Road Supply and install 2 x victory 24-60 wind turbines (22m).

8/2(h) 15/00237/F SNETTISHAM APPROVE 94 The Compasses 16 Lynn Road Change of use and extension to provide ground floor retail and first floor office space

8/2(i) 15/00455/F UPWELL APPROVE 109 20 Small Lode Alterations to garage to form study.

8/2(j) 15/00150/RM WIGGENHALL ST APPROVE 114 Church Meadow Farm (Plot 2) 9 Lynn Road MARY Reserved Matters Application: Construction MAGDALEN of residential dwelling.

Planning Committee 1 June 2015

8 15/00190/FM

Snettisham Park Bircham Road Snettisham

A Sutton Fields A

D M O H T

T Suttonlea S

Allotment Gardens Hill-side 26.2m The Beeches 5 7 6

4 2 29.3m 16 12 Park Farm Barns Tra B 1 ck IRCH AM R

Caravan Site

Tr ack 31.0m

Snettisham Park

Scale: 1:2,500

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:2500

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 21/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map with permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright 2014. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. 9 AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/1(a)

Parish: Snettisham

Proposal: Change of use from livery yard to camping with associated camping pods and amenities block Location: Snettisham Park Bircham Road Snettisham Norfolk

Applicant: Stanton Farms Ltd

Case No: 15/00190/FM (Full Application - Major Development)

Case Officer: Mrs K Lawty Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616403 14 May 2015 Extension of Time Expiry Date: 11 June 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – The views of Snettisham Parish Council is contrary to the Officer recommendation and raises matters of wider concern.

Case Summary

The site consists of an existing livery yard within part of Park Farm, a large farm holding (and established tourist site) situated on the eastern side of the village of Snettisham. The application site is a paddock and stable block with existing hedging and fencing to the site boundary. It is located to the north of the main visitor centre buildings.

Park Farm itself covers an area of approximately 9.2 hectares and includes an existing small caravan site and a series of farm buildings, fields and paddocks.

The site is surrounded by allotments to the north, open fields to the east, fields and camp site to the west and the visitor centre building and parking to the south.

The application proposes the change of use of the livery yard into a campsite with the conversion of the existing stable block into an amenities block including washing facilities, reception and campsite shop.

Vehicular access will be via the existing access to the visitor facilities off Bircham Road.

Key Issues

Principle of development Character and appearance and impact upon the countryside; Impact upon residential amenity; Tourism and local economy; Highway issues; Flood Risk; Ecology; and Other material considerations

Recommendation

APPROVE 15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

THE APPLICATION

The project aims to provide the following facilities:

• 6 wooden camping pods for short term holiday lets • 24 touring caravan pitches • 55 camping pitches • Modern ablution (washing) facilities • On site shop supplying local farm produce to guests including meat and eggs from the farm. • Communal facilities including BBQ, seating and play areas. • Disabled access around the site.

SUPPORTING CASE

The application has been supported by a raft of planning documents including:-

• Design and Access Statement • Supporting Statement • Business Plan • Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment • Ecology statement • Flood Risk Assessment

The Design and Access Statement concludes:

‘The proposal seeks to provide added accommodation to the North West Norfolk Coast which from the applicant’s experience within the tourism industry is in high demand.

The proposal, by its nature, is one that needs to be located in a rural area on a working farm as the applicant’s aim is to provide accommodation for those who wish to enjoy and experience ‘life on a farm’.

Diversification of the site to a campsite will help sustain the family business and allow the applicant, Mrs Caroline Kerss to help run the family farm with her father Mr Edward Stanton.

The applicant’s father has operated a tourist attraction for many years without any highway problems being created. In the previous year’s Snettisham Park attracted many more visitors than it does now, therefore indicating there is capacity for more vehicles to use the entrance. It has also been found that the very popular existing Caravan CL site adjacent to the proposed new campsite entrance shows that large vehicles have no problems accessing the site.

The applicants would like to encourage the use of sustainable modes of transport for occupiers. They will promote cycling by providing cycles for hire and provide information for walkers within the Reception particularly with the view of enticing people to use the established farm trails.

The proposal will not have any detrimental effect upon adjoining landowners or property in visual or noise terms. The siting of pitches and the access has been carefully designed to avoid such problems.’

The application includes a Planning Supporting Statement. It concludes ‘The proposed development will broaden the tourist facilities available at Snettisham Park Farm and will 15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

have a neutral impact on the setting and character of the local area and therefore should be supported.’

The application has been supported by a Business Plan which refers:

‘The Business Plan is provided in support of a planning submission for the development of a campsite to be located at Snettisham Park, Snettisham. The new business will be developed as part of Stanton Farms Limited by Caroline Kerss daughter of the owner Edward Stanton.

The proposed site occupies an area of land immediately to the east of the existing main entrance of the tourist attraction, Snettisham Park. It is located on a small area of grassed fields which have been used for grazing and stabling horses. To the South of the site lies the Visitor Centre and Car Park of Snettisham Park and to the west are two large pastural fields and the existing Caravan Certified Location site. The North and East are enclosed by the roadways of Bircham Road and St Thomas’s Lane. The proposed site is fully enclosed by mature hedgerows.

The development proposed is to install a set of 79 grassed pitches, 24 electric hook up pitches for the use of caravans and tents, 55 pitches for tents and 6 wooden camping pods. It is however planned to provide the site in phases with expansion to the full site dependent on its success.

At its core the business will seek to provide modern camping accommodation for those who wish to enjoy and experience ‘life on a farm’. It will be an extension to the existing farm park which will help improve and enhance tourism in the local area.

The project aims to create:

• A traditional campsite allowing a variety of different accommodation • Modern ablution facilities • On site shop supplying local farm produce to guests including meat and eggs from • the farm. • Communal facilities including BBQ, seating and play areas. • Encourage guests to visit Snettisham Park open farm. • Safeguard the future of the family farm • Create at least 3 new posts’

A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment has been submitted in support of the application. It summarises:

‘The significance of the landscape effect depends largely on the scale of the effect, and the sensitivity of the location of the development.

This is a small scale development and the scale of the effect is limited by the extent of visibility which is contained within a very small area where there are few visual receptors. The location of the site is not in open countryside, but is on the edge of the village and does not extend the extent of development of the settlement nor alter the settlement pattern. The proposed site has an existing use as a livery yard and is not a particularly sensitive location.

The development of a campsite will have very limited visibility and will not create a new focal point in the landscape. The proposed developments on site are low level and will be set against a background of low level vegetation and will not project into the skyline.

The development will not result in the loss of any of the characteristic landscape features, and the pattern of settlement within the landscape is unaltered. 15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The establishment of new hedgerows within the site, as proposed, will add to the sense of enclosure and also provide additional visual screening.

The infilling of the gaps in the external boundary hedgerow along the roadside in front of the site with native woody shrub species would help to enclose the site and in time obscure any direct views into the site from that direction and help to strengthen local landscape character. Allowing the existing hedgerows to reach a greater height, but still maintaining their managed profile, would help to further screen the development proposals while maintaining the local landscape character.’

The Ecology Statement concludes:

‘The site currently has low potential to support most protected species, but is not without biodiversity value. This lies mainly in the hedgerows and the semi-improved grass sward. Protected or valued species which the hedgerows could support include nesting birds, foraging bats and terrestrial species such as hedgehogs and common toads. The hedgerows and grassland are considered to be of no more than local value.

It is considered that the occurrence of great crested newts on the site is extremely unlikely, since the nearest pond (which may or may not hold great crested newts) is a considerable distance away, and is situated within much more suitable terrestrial habitat than that presented by the proposal site itself.

Bat species will almost certainly forage across the site, as they would do on almost any site, most likely staying close to hedgerows and buildings. However, the site does not have any particular attracting features for foraging bats. The building is considered to offer a low potential for roosting bats, as are the other structures on the site (a wooden shed and a caravan).

The site provides a suboptimal habitat for reptiles, and although conceivably low numbers could shelter in the hedgerows, the biological record does not indicate high numbers in the area. In any case, the proposal will not involve hedgerow removal.

There are no aquatic habitats on the site, therefore semi-aquatic species such as otter and water vole will not be affected by the proposal. There is no suitable habitat on the site to support any nesting Schedule 1 bird species. The site will almost certainly support generally protected nesting birds in the hedgerows and possibly in some of the lone bushes and field edges.

In summary, no further specialised surveys are recommended for the site. The main receptors for which some potential for impacts are anticipated are designated sites, hedgerows, semi-improved grassland, nesting birds and terrestrial animals.’

The Flood Risk Assessment concludes that the proposal falls outside the areas affected by flood zone 2 & 3 and poses no additional risk to flooding of the site or adjoining property.

PLANNING HISTORY

09/00578/F: Application Permitted: 02/06/09 - Variation of condition 3 of application 05/02131/FM

05/02131/FM: Application Permitted: 20/01/06 - Construction of new visitors centre and associated buildings to house animals

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

05/01054/FM: Application Withdrawn: 23/08/05 - Construction of new visitor centre and associated buildings to house animals

2/93/1681/CU: Application Permitted: 19/01/94 - Change of use from poultry house to riding stables

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Parish Council: OBJECT - The proposed development clearly meets the criteria for growth and expansion of business, diversification of agricultural business and the support of rural tourism and leisure. There were concerns over the need to “respect the character of the countryside”.

There was consensus that there would be a likely positive effect in the Village generally. - The present site itself is not the most attractive – so Council would seek adequate assurance of planting to reduce the visual impact. There should be guarantees that the temporary and refashioned buildings on-site should be time-limited, with the design proviso strictly adhered to when further planning permission is sought at such time as they may be rebuilt.

Regarding DM11 (2015 LDF submission documents, recently under consultation) assurance is sought that the required business plan is satisfactory, the occupation limits are strictly adhered to, and that the site is not open during the winter months, as per the developer’s statement. Regarding access, there are many specific issues.

Access via Station Road and Alma/Common Roads are realistically impossible for touring caravans. Poppyfields has humps which make this unsuitable. This leaves access only via the Lynn Road, which possesses a chicane which has already been an issue in planning applications. From here both Church Road and Old Church Road have major issues, both of these with width and visibility problems, and the second with three 90 degree corners, school access etc.

In the summer there are regular (almost daily) functions at the halls in each road, and car boot sales at weekends, as well as school-run waiting. At such times, these are almost impassable for cars alone, and would simply not allow caravan access – we would stress that any viewing of this by officials or committee members must be at a time when the problem exists. This has been conceded by NCC Highways in a recent application (Solar Farm development) where they insisted, following our comments, that all traffic should be diverted via Bircham. We would recommend a similar approach, requiring consultation with Highways, and the use of signage to prevent caravans coming through the Village at all, and all site literature/reservations etc. making this clear. This would also avoid the tight corner on the approach to the site on the Bircham Road from the Village, the final obstacle to access via the Village. There is great risk to pedestrians given that there is no footway on the road. There is also considerable equine activity in the area, using the narrow roads.

Council seeks assurances that an adequate analysis of the speed of such drainage is such that this does not lead to any increase in water levels beyond those currently experienced. This is one reason that winter use of the site is not appropriate.

The ability of the proposed waste water system to cope with chemicals etc. from caravan and other sources has been questioned to us, and we seek re-assurance that in the event of the plans being accepted that this is investigated.

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Council is supportive of the general principle of the site, but must OBJECT to the proposal in its current state, on the grounds that:

• the access to the site needs to be dealt with such that caravan users avoid the Village entirely, • there is real danger to pedestrians and other non-motor vehicle road users along the route into the Village • there are currently inadequate details of the amount of additional water going into the drainage system, and how this will impact on the Village downstream. • It also requests that its concerns outlined above (character, enhancement etc.) are included in the detailed review of this by the Borough.

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION - conditionally

Environmental Health & Housing - CSNN: NO OBJECTION - conditionally

REPRESENTATIONS

57 third party representations received referring to the following:-

• General highway safety (1) • Parking issues in locality (1) • Caravans parking and waiting to enter site (1) • Caravans will be hazardous (1) • Narrow roads (28) • Roads unsuitable for caravans (20) • Two cars cannot pass each other (11) • Congestion / Additional traffic (particularly during summer months) (41) • Inadequate provision of pedestrian footpaths in the area (17) • Primary school children / pedestrians at risk (21) • Dangerous for cyclists (4) • Blind bends (21) • Poor visibility (4) • Increased number of accidents in the village (6) • No regular bus service on Sundays (1) • Damage to verges and existing roads (2) • Damage to the screen walls (1) • Dangerous for horse riders (2) • Increase in the number of visitors in the summer months (6) • Increased use of local services / local services not able to cope with additional visitors / trade (5) • Late night drinking (1) • No benefit to the local community - jobs (6) • Adverse impact on residential amenity – general (3) • Close proximity to neighbouring properties (2) • Noise – general (6) • Noise nuisance from users of the camp site (15) • Concerned about the ‘no noise policy’ after 10pm (12) • Pollution – general (1) • Car fume pollution (1) • Light pollution from campsite (9) • Odour from ablutions block (1)

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

• BBQ smoke and smells (2) • Increase in vermin (1) • Litter (4) • Cause stress to local residents (1) • Devalue homes (2) • Neighbouring property may be at risk (open fronted cart sheds) (1) • Compromised security (1) • Loss of privacy (1) • Affect peace and tranquillity of village (3) • Impact on the night sky (3) • Impact on wildlife – general (3) • Impact on bats and owls (1) • Impact on birds1 (1) • Impact on existing hedgerow (2) • Inadequate soak-away system (5) • Localised flooding (3) • Sewage – inadequate chemical treatment (4) • Ground water pollution (2) • Impact on character of the area (4) • Impact on visual amenity (3) • Excessive scale (3) • Detrimental impact upon the rural setting of the village (7) • Small historic village (1) • No screening to the site (3) • Change of use of farm land (1) • Impact on the Conservation Area (1) • Lack of infrastructure (2) • Not a need for more camping facilities within the area (6) • Campsite users will have no right of way through Park Farm Barns (1) • Planning Officer advised applicant that the application is likely to be approved. (1) • Justification of proposal - Personal circumstances should not be taken into consideration. (1) • Recommends screening around the site (1) • Reduce the intensity of the site (4) • More planting between pitches (1) • Increase pitch sizes (1) • More pods (1) • Less tents (1) • Less caravans (only 12) (1) • Allow touring caravans to book for the year (avoid towing to and from site) (1) • A cabin could be built to allow groups of children / disabled people to visit (1) • Site could provide a mini bus to bring people into the village (1) • Car boot days already bad – will make worse(4)

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

National Planning Policy Framework – sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. National Planning Practice Guidance - Provides National Planning Practice Guidance, in support of and in addition to the NPPF

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS01 - Spatial Strategy

CS02 - The Settlement Hierarchy

CS07 - Development in Coastal Areas

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS10 - The Economy

CS11 – Transport

CS12 - Environmental Assets

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

DM11 – Touring and Permanent Holiday Sites

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The application raises the following issues:-

• Principle of development • Character and appearance and impact upon the countryside; • Impact upon residential amenity; • Tourism and local economy; • Highway issues; • Flood Risk; • Ecology; and • Other material considerations

Principle of new development

The site comprises stables and field/paddock associated with the existing Snettisham Park site. It is grassed with hedgerow planting to the field boundaries.

The site is within the countryside as depicted on the Local Plan inset map.

In the Core Strategy Policy CS06 states that in the countryside and rural areas the strategy will be to protect the countryside for its intrinsic character and beauty, the diversity of its landscapes, heritage and wildlife and its natural resources to be enjoyed by all. Development is therefore restricted to that appropriate in a rural area.

Tourism plays a significant role in the Borough’s local economy and the Council takes a positive approach to the development of tourism. The main tourist appeal is based on the unique natural environmental assets and the historic built environment. Locations for 15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

proposed holiday accommodation need careful consideration. Proposals for holiday accommodation should also provide for a range of accommodation which will continue to positively contribute to the local economy. With this regard CS10 is relevant.

CS12 refers that proposals to protect and enhance the historic environment and landscape character, biodiversity and geodiversity will be encouraged and supported.

Nationally, the NPPF seeks to protect and enhance the natural, built and historic environment whilst contributing to the achievement of sustainable development. It also recognises the need to support sustainable development, and this should be given significant weight.

It states that rural tourism and leisure developments that benefit businesses in rural areas, communities and visitors, and respect the character of the countryside, should be supported.

The proposed use is therefore acceptable in principle subject to the scale of the development being appropriate and that it does not harm the natural environmental assets or nature conservation.

Character and appearance and impact upon the countryside

The development proposal is for the change of use of the existing stables, livery yard and paddocks to a touring caravan/camping site. The proposal is for 79 grassed pitches, 24 for the use of caravans and 55 for tents. It is also planned to provide 6 wooden camping pods. The 24 pitches proposed for touring caravans shall be provided with electric hook-ups.

The proposal includes the installation of camping pods and also portable buildings for sanitation purposes. Long term the stable building would be converted to an office and amenities block.

The site has a certain degree of screening from existing planting to the field boundaries. From longer views across the fields from public highways there are views of the paddock. These are softened to some degree by existing planting, but there are some long views where there are gaps in the hedgerow which could be infilled. The applicant has submitted a landscape plan to show that there will be some infill planting to the north east corner of the site and to the southern boundary. The existing hedgerows and tree planting to the site boundary is shown to the retained.

The boundary hedge at its current height does not fully screen the whole site from longer views due to the topography of the surrounding countryside, although it certainly helps to soften the impact of the existing development and would assist with future development.

The applicant has also supported the planning application with a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) to demonstrate that the proposed development would sit comfortably within the surrounding landscape.

The LVIA concludes that ‘This is a small scale development and the scale of the effect is limited by the extent of visibility which is contained within a very small area where there are few visual receptors. The location of the site is not in open countryside, but is on the edge of the village and does not extend the extent of development of the settlement nor alter the settlement pattern. The proposed site has an existing use as a livery yard and is not a particularly sensitive location.

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The development will not result in the loss of any of the characteristic landscape features, and the pattern of settlement within the landscape is unaltered.

The establishment of new hedgerows within the site, as proposed, will add to the sense of enclosure and also provide additional visual screening.

Allowing the existing hedgerows to reach a greater height, but still maintaining their managed profile, would help to further screen the development proposals while maintaining the local landscape character.’

Yours Officer’s agree with this assessment and consider that the proposed use will not have significant harm on the wider landscape and it is recommended that allowing the height of the hedgerow to increase over time and infilling the gaps would further assist the successful assimilation into the countryside. This could be controlled through planning condition.

Tourism and local economy

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) seeks to support a prosperous rural economy. Paragraph 28 states inter alia:

“Planning policies should support economic growth in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity by taking a positive approach to sustainable new development. To promote a strong rural economy, local and neighbourhood plans should:

• support the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas, both through conversion of existing buildings and well-designed new buildings; • promote the development and diversification of agricultural and other land-based rural businesses; • support sustainable rural tourism and leisure developments that benefit businesses in rural areas, communities and visitors, and which respect the character of the countryside. This should include supporting the provision and expansion of tourist and visitor facilities in appropriate locations where identified needs are not met by existing facilities in rural service centres…”

Policy CS10 states that opportunities to improve and enhance the visitor economy will be promoted. Smaller tourism opportunities will be supported in rural areas to sustain the local economy, providing these are in sustainable locations and are not detrimental to the valuable natural environment.

The policy also states that the Council will permit the development of new tourism accommodation in rural areas provided it is located in or adjacent to villages and towns, it is of a high standard of design, will not be detrimental to the landscape and mechanisms will be in place to permanently retain the tourism related use.

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

In this case the site adjoins an existing well established tourist attraction and, although it is not immediately adjacent to the village of Snettisham, the facilities of the village are in relatively close proximity.

The proposal would allow for a mix of visitor accommodation appropriate to this area which would add to the tourist facilities of the Borough. The proposal accords with the general provisions of the NPPF and policy CS10.

Proposed development management policy DM11 allows new touring holiday caravan sites outside the AONB subject to meeting a number of criteria. Amongst other requirements this policy refers to the need to produce a Business Plan, which has been provided by the applicant. This explains that diversification of the site to a campsite will help sustain the family business and allows the applicant, Mrs Caroline Kerss, to help run the family farm with her father Mr Edward Stanton.

The applicant’s father has operated a tourist attraction for many years. In the previous year’s Snettisham Park attracted many more visitors than it does now. The Business Plan also refers to the existing Caravan CL site adjacent to the proposed new campsite entrance. The Business Plan sets out a financial appraisal of the business ongoing and how it is intended to function over a five year period. The camping pods are intended to be introduced gradually over this time period as the business grows.

Policy DM11 also refers to the need to ensure that the accommodation is maintained for tourist facilities in the future. This is through the use of occupancy conditions relating to the length of stay of the occupant and maintaining a register of lettings/occupation. It is recommended that appropriate conditions are imposed in this case.

Impact upon Residential Amenity

The site is separated from any residential properties in Snettisham by open fields. The use of the site will, however, generate noise from the increased amount of traffic and general activity from people using the site.

Third party concerns were raised regarding the impact of the proposed use upon the amenity of local residents, with particular regard to noise and activities, especially at night. The applicant has submitted details to say that they will operate a ‘no noise’ policy after 10pm which shall be enforced by a member of staff visiting the site in the evening.

The Environmental Health Officer has been consulted and raises no objection to the proposal, subject to the imposition of an appropriate condition relating to noise protection of the neighbours. This is in order to protect the nearest residential properties from noise from the new proposed activities on site. However, the Environmental Health Officer considers the details of the noise protection scheme can be further assessed through planning condition.

Snettisham Park already has a small certified caravan site for up to five caravans or motorhomes (no tents) on another part of the farm site. It is worth noting that of all the third party comments received, none of the objectors has referred to any problems with regard to noise from caravans or motorhomes using the existing certified caravan site. This small camp site is closer to the nearest residential properties than the camp site currently proposed. No formal complaints about noise or disturbance have ever been recorded by the Environmental Health Team regarding this existing site.

Third party concern has referred to the impact of lighting from the site in this rural area. This issue has also been raised by the Environmental Health Officer who recommends that a

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

condition is imposed relating to the submission of details of any outdoor lighting scheme prior to installation to ensure there are no neighbour amenity issues.

Highway Issues

The site already has a vehicle access point onto the public highway and this is also the existing Snettisham Park entrance track that is accessed from Bircham Road. The access is well established and has good visibility splays in both directions. This access point is already used by caravans and motorhomes using the existing certified camp site.

Clearly the use of the application site for additional vehicles in connection with the proposed camping and caravan site will have an impact on the local road network and the Highways Authority has been consulted.

Nearly all of the third party objections received relate to the impact on the village and road network from additional traffic, with many concerns relating to vehicles pulling touring caravans. Concern is raised regarding the fact that the local roads are narrow, with blind bends and the road network is not adequate to cater for additional vehicles towing caravans as they are not wide enough for vehicles to pass one another safely.

Concern is raised regarding the additional traffic and the dangerous implications for impacts with pedestrians, particularly children, cyclists and horses. Concern is raised that the roads are already congested on event days (e.g. car boots held at the Halls on School Road) and this will add to road safety issues.

Specific reports have been submitted by third parties to demonstrate the extent of their concern.

The Highways Authority has closely examined the proposal, including the route taken by vehicles, including towing vehicles, which would follow the brown tourist information road signs. Their response to the proposal and the third party reports is included, verbatim, below:

‘In terms of traffic generation, the applicant’s design and access statement indicates the site is expected to generate up to 175 additional vehicular movements per day. From past experience of such sites, the Highway Authority anticipates the figure being higher at 255 movements and we have based our assessment against that higher figure. There is no breakdown between the traffic figures associated with each element - i.e. the figures for the 24 caravans in isolation to the much larger number of tents.

We note local concerns have been raised with regard to the suitability of the surrounding highways for use by caravans towed by 4x4 vehicles and residents have commissioned a report by a local agent (Adrian Parker). At paragraph 4.5 of his report, Mr Parker indicates that a typical towed caravan is about 2.2m wide and a tow car could be 2.3m wide.

When assessing this application, we have made our assessment against the maximum sizes allowed for a towing vehicle (under 3500kg GVW), which allows a maximum towed width of 2.3m. With regard to the tow car itself, a Land rover Discovery (for example) measures 2.2m wide between the wing mirrors, slightly less with the mirrors folded back.

Accordingly, the anticipated widths of the towed vehicle/trailer combination are broadly similar to those quoted by Mr Parker.

Mr Parker’s report is accompanied by swept path analysis drawings produced by Create consulting. The drawings cover Bircham Road between the site access and the Church Road junction. The drawings indicate that if two caravans approach from opposite directions,

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

then in places one or the other vehicle would need to wait for an oncoming vehicle to pass before proceeding. The drawings are indicative of the fact that it should be possible for vehicles to wait, other than for a short section between the site access and the first bend to the west.

The ability for vehicles to wait in safety is governed by the frequency of such an occurrence - in this instance limited to a maximum of 24 caravans allowed on site. We note the applicants propose to reduce the probability of towed vehicles meeting in opposing directions by staggering the arrival and departure times. Departures will be before 11am and arrivals will be made after 2pm. Whilst staggering the times in the manner suggested would help to overcome the problems associated with two vehicles from this site meeting, it would not overcome the issue of a towed vehicle associated with this site meeting a vehicle already on the network from elsewhere.

Nevertheless, the Highway Authority also notes that the site is unlikely to be fully occupied at all times of the year. The greatest occupancy is expected to occur during school holidays when school traffic is absent.

In addition, the vast majority of caravan movements will not occur every day as tourists are expected to stay for more than one day at a time (potentially 1 to 2 weeks) - leaving the caravan on site whilst they explore the wider area by car.

On the problematic section of Bircham Road (between the site access and the first bend to the west) there are wide highway verges. It would be possible for the applicants to undertake minor widening to the carriageway within those verges at this point sufficient to allow two towed vehicles to pass in safety and thereby overcoming the problem identified by Create.

On the remaining section of Bircham Road, caravans should be able to wait in safety, provided the numbers are limited to the 24 proposed. In the circumstances, we have no objection to this proposal subject to minor carriageway widening on Bircham Road between the site access and the first bend to the west.’

Accordingly the limitations of the road network and the narrow sections of road close to the access to the site are noted. However, given the nature of the use of the site (proposed for only 24 caravans at any one time) and the anticipated staggered time of arrival and departure of vehicles, the Highways Authority does not consider the proposed use would result in significant highway safety issues. Consequently the application can be supported in terms of highways matters, subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions.

It is of note that of the 57 representations received none of these have referred to any problems from traffic using the existing certified caravan site on the Snettisham Park site. Albeit this is a much larger proposal, this site for five units has been in use by caravans and motorhomes now for several years without complaint.

Given the comments above it is considered that with regard to highways matters the proposal accords with national and local planning policy, specifically Policies CS11 and DM11.

Other material considerations and third party considerations

The site is currently an active field and paddock. The site lies within 2km of a SSSI. The applicant has supported the planning application with an ecology statement and protected species survey.

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

This concludes that the site currently has low potential to support most protected species, but is not without biodiversity value. There are no protected species present and benefits can be made on the site to improve biodiversity.

Third party concerns about the impact on wildlife are noted but the ecology statement addresses these concerns. It is recommended that if planning permission is forthcoming a condition is imposed ensuring that the mitigation measures and biodiversity improvements referred to within the ecology statement are implemented.

The site is within Flood Zone 1 and a flood risk assessment has been submitted with the planning application. This raises no flood risk issues.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer who monitors caravan sites has raised no objection to the proposal. The site will be controlled by licence under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 and operation of the site will be subject to conditions attached and Model Standards issued by the Government under HO Circular 23/83. There are no outstanding issues regarding the layout of the site or the way it has been set out.

Third party concern has been received regarding drainage and localised flooding. Details of the drainage of the site in terms of foul and surface water drainage have been submitted with the application.

The Environmental Health Officer raises no objection to the proposal with regard to drainage, based on the information submitted. Notwithstanding this, a planning condition requiring that the drainage is implemented as submitted prior to commencement of the use is recommended to be added to any planning permission granted.

The majority of third party objections received have related to highways issues and have been addressed above. However, some issues are addressed below.

Concern has been raised regarding the impact on the village centre and its historic character. However, the site is far enough away not to be visible from the village centre. Traffic may stop off in the village but this would be a temporary arrangement and would not have a long term harmful impact upon the village or Conservation Area.

Concern has been raised regarding the loss of farmland, but the site is currently used as paddocks.

Concern is raised to the pollution from additional car fumes as a result of this proposal. However, this is not significant enough to create a statutory nuisance, and is certainly no reason to object to the application.

Concern has been raised regarding odour from the ablutions block, litter, vermin on the site and BBQ smoke. However, these matters would affect other holiday visitors on the site to their detriment if left unmanaged. These matters are therefore self-governing and will be controlled by the managers of the site.

Third party concern has been raised regarding crime and compromised security for local residents as a direct result of the proposed use. However, there is nothing to suggest such a use has a significant impact on crime.

Third party concern has been raised regarding the impact on the depreciation of the value of surrounding residential properties. However, this is not a matter able to be considered as part of the planning process.

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Suggestions have been made that the scale and intensity of the site could be reduced by offering fewer, larger pitches. Some third parties have no objection to a camp site in principle but oppose the size of the one proposed. Whilst these comments are noted, this is not the application being proposed and consideration needs to be given to the details of this particular development proposal.

Suggestions have been made to provide a mini bus to bring people into the village. However, this is not essential to the granting of a consent. The applicant however, states that they will maintain the public footpath across their land so that it is fit for wheelchairs and pushchairs to use. They also intend to ensure that notice boards are incorporated around the site and 'information leaflets' given to every camper to explain how they can access the village by using the site footpath gate, walking down the farm track past Snettisham Park and onto the public footpath. Therefore campers would not need to access the site via Bircham Road.

Suggestions have been made that more pods should be incorporated into the scheme to avoid touring caravans using the road network. Whilst this is noted, this is not part of the application currently under consideration.

CONCLUSION

In summary, the principle of the use of the stable building, livery and paddocks for a camping and caravanning site generally accords with the provisions of planning policy at a national and local level. The site is partially screened and planting is proposed to be enhanced as part of the proposal. With improved planting it is considered that the development could be undertaken without significant harm to the wider landscape character of the area in general.

The proposed use of this site is for a significant number of touring caravans and will have implications on the local road network. After consideration the Highways Authority raises no objection on highway safety grounds, subject to the imposition of conditions relating to highway improvement works, parking and turning etc.

Subject to planning conditions, the proposal raises no significant neighbour amenity issues.

The proposal raises no flood risk issues, ecology or landscaping issues.

Accordingly, it is considered that the development proposal accords with the provisions of national and local planning policy and for this reason it can be supported subject to the following conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

2 Condition The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:-

• Drawing SPC001, Rev B, Site Location Plan, Scale 1:2500 • Drawing SPC002, Rev B, Site Layout Plan, Scale 1:100 • Drawing SPC004, Rev B, Amenity Block, Proposed Plans & Elevations, Scale 1:100 • Drawing SPC005, Rev B, Amenity Block, Existing & Proposed Roof Plans, Scale 1:100 • Drawing SPC006, Rev B, Proposed Drainage Layout, Scale 1:500 • Drawing SPC009, Rev A, Proposed Landscape Plan, Scale 1:100 • Drawing POD – 02, 2.01, Camping Pod, Front Elevation, Scale 1:20 • Drawing POD – 02, 2.02, Camping Pod, Side Elevation, Scale 1:20 • Drawing POD – 02, 2.03, Camping Pod, Rear Elevation, Scale 1:20 • Drawing POD – 02, 1.05, Camping Pod, Roof Layout, Scale 1:20

2 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3 Condition All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details shown on drawing no SPC009 Rev A. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation or use of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The hedgerow to the boundary of the site shall be allowed to grow to a height of at least 2m in height. Any trees or plants that within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species as those originally planted, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written approval to any variation.

3 Reason To ensure that the work is carried out within a reasonable period in accordance with the NPPF.

4 Condition The foul and surface water drainage scheme shown on drawing SPC006 Rev B shall be implemented and ready for use prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved.

4 Reason In order to minimise the risk of flooding in accordance with the NPPF.

5 Condition Notwithstanding the details indicated on the submitted drawings no works shall commence on site unless otherwise agreed in writing until a detailed scheme for off-site highway improvement works to widen part of Bircham Road have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority.

5 Reason To ensure highway improvement works are designed to an appropriate standard in the interest of highway safety and to protect the environment of the local highway corridor.

6 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the off-site highway improvement works referred to in condition 5 of this condition shall be completed to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority.

6 Reason To ensure that the highway network is adequate to cater for the development proposed.

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

7 Condition No development above foundation level shall take place on site until a scheme to protect the nearby residents from noise has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved before the development is brought into use.

7 Reason To ensure that the amenities of future occupants are safeguarded in accordance with the NPPF.

8 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, a detailed outdoor lighting scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the type of lights, the orientation/angle of the luminaries, the spacing and height of the lighting columns, the extent/levels of illumination over the site and on adjacent land and the measures to contain light within the curtilage of the site. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with approved scheme and thereafter maintained and retained as agreed.

8 Reason In the interests of minimising light pollution and to safeguard the amenities of the locality in accordance with the NPPF.

9 Condition No more than 24 touring caravans or motorhomes and 61 tents (including camping pods) shall be stationed on the site at any one time.

9 Reason To ensure that the use of the site and the occupation of the accommodation is restricted to holiday use since permanent occupation is inappropriate in this location in accordance with the NPPF.

10 Condition This permission relates to the use of the site for holiday use only and holiday accommodation shall not be used as permanent residences at any time. No caravan shall remain on site for more than 28 days, be fixed to a hard standing or drain, or be stationed for the purposes of letting.

10 Reason To ensure that the use of the site and the occupation of the caravan(s) is restricted to holiday use since permanent occupation is inappropriate in this location in accordance with the NPPF.

11 Condition The owners/operators of the site shall maintain an up-to-date register of lettings/occupation and shall make this available at all reasonable times to the local planning authority.

11 Reason To ensure that the use of the site and the occupation of the caravan(s) is restricted to holiday use since permanent occupation is inappropriate in this location in accordance with the NPPF.

12 Condition The development shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures set out in the Ecology Report unless provided for in any other conditions attached to this planning permission.

12 Reason In the interests of the amenities of the locality in accordance with the NPPF.

15/00190/FM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

26 15/00185/F

Land adj Hamilton Antiques 21 North Street Burnham Market

r y

Tank t a

o Red u n Gables d r y 1 en House Windy Tel Ex Y a r Ridge d

Locksley C o

t Cottage t a ET g TRE e TH S NOR Ho ry nd l ou l e F e Th s l e W y

Roys C h C R d r i ar m Y o Barn a e 's k N er t n y a b ild t a o k u B n r B N r o e e P S t l R e d o h r C t n a f C o t l r o t E s i 49 I t e s s e h o t d r l t e u g d t C m s t a at C o e H F u r o t T e o n t i t s ta d H h s o 15 g e e 5 r 47 3 s s Trinity Ho T er EC 46 High Jul TRE S o 5 T House N S t 0 O B P R t 3 F k 3 2 B B l 4 al u e a r e e 32 g a n b t r c k Well 1 av e C 34 2 k 5 7 l o 8 e l 3 1 e n C t t 30 H a C o g 26 o t 28 B o t t o 1155 t B w 18 Mostyn l 4 i FB 1 O n

I l g v d Sunny E 8

y H PO s 3 W 5 T House W

t o C i c 5 i l 5 i t e War Meml o o n t 8 s 5 u t e o t r a r n H 60 t a g s Roydon o l e s u Cottage s e The Old 66 57 7 Crabbe Hall 6 Stile Bowling 70 Cott Bowling Green House 64

Scale: 1:1,250

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:1250

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 20/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Burnham Market

Proposal: Proposed shop

Location: Land Adj Hamilton Antiques 21 North Street Burnham Market Norfolk Applicant: B & L Properties Ltd

Case No: 15/00185/F (Full Application)

Case Officer: Mrs K Lawty Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616403 6 April 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – The views of Burnham Market Parish Council is contrary to the Officer recommendation.

Case Summary

The application site comprises an open parcel of land on the southern side of North Street within the centre of Burnham Market. It is flanked by two commercial premises; one is a former Warehouse now a retail unit and one is a traditional flint cottage used for retail purposes.

The immediate surrounding area is mixed residential and commercial in character, with a variety of predominately retail uses focussed around ‘The Green’ to the west.

The application site lies within an area defined as Built Environment Type C and is within the Conservation Area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, according to Local Plan Proposals Maps for Burnham Market.

This application, as amended, seeks consent for the construction of a new shop unit. Amended plans have been received as the proposal has evolved.

Key Issues

Principle of Development Impact upon Designated Heritage Assets Impact upon Neighbour Amenity Highway Safety Other Material Considerations

Recommendation

APPROVE

THE APPLICATION

The application site comprises an open parcel of land on the southern side of North Street within the centre of Burnham Market. It is flanked by two commercial premises; one is a 15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

former Warehouse now a retail unit and one is a traditional flint cottage used for retail purposes.

The immediate surrounding area is mixed residential and commercial in character, with a variety of predominately retail uses focussed around ‘The Green’ to the west.

This application, as amended, seeks consent for the construction of a new shop unit. Amended plans have been received as the proposal has evolved.

SUPPORTING CASE

The application (as amended) has been supported by a Design and Access Statement which refers:

History:

A pre-application enquiry was submitted (Ref: 14/00041/PREAPP) for a standalone proposal comprising a dwelling. Following a meeting with the planning officer and their comments and meeting with the client the design has been amended to a shop and a two storey flat above due to the high demand for retail space in Burnham Market.

A full planning application was submitted (Ref: 14/01079/F) for a ground floor shop and two storey flat. Following the consultation period the application was withdrawn due to issues with overlooking from the residential unit. A full planning application was submitted (Ref: 14/01627/F) for a three storey shop only.

Following the consultation period the application was withdrawn following a meeting with the planning officer due to issues with the design and its proximity and overbearing nature to the surrounding properties.

The design has since been amended following a meeting with the planning officer to reduce the building size which allows for a 1m wide side and rear passageway to create separation from the adjacent party wall and boundary wall.

Amount:

The new build creates a retail space which has an internal floor area of: Ground Floor 70.5m² First Floor 70.5m² Attic Space 23.5m² Total Internal Floor Space 164.5m²

Scale:

The proposal is of a traditional design. The eaves height is in between the adjacent properties which is 4.65m. The ridge height for the new element is 8.11m.

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Layout:

The new shop is accessed off North Street and consists of an open plan shop floor with a central staircase leading to a matching open plan space at first floor. A contained staircase then leads to the second floor attic space. The layout on plan is indicative for when the property is let and a shop fitter will do the internal fit out to their own specification and needs.

Landscaping:

The site will not need a landscaping scheme, the side passageways between the adjacent property and the boundary wall will consist of paving slabs.

Appearance:

The proposed facing brickwork and roof tiles are to match the adjacent properties. The joinery is to be white painted timber and flint work to the front and side elevations

Access:

The site is located in the centre of the village of Burnham Market and has public transport links to the major towns in the local area. The development will not have any parking spaces but due to its central position in the village it is easy to access the amenities and transport. If parking is required the proposal is opposite to the recently approved development and large car park.

Inclusive Access:

A disabled threshold with floor levels being similar inside to the outside will be provided at of the entrance doors. The external entrance door and all ground floor internal doors will be at least 838mm wide to allow good access for disabled persons throughout the ground floor space.

Secured By Design:

Our client intends to enter into discussions with the local constabulary regards ensuring the property meets the ‘Secured by Design’ standards.

Flood Risk:

The Site is identified on the Environment Agency indicative flood risk map as being located within Flood Zone 2, i.e. the site has less than 0.5% of flooding each year from rivers or the sea, shared i.e. less than 1 in 200 or less year chance. Please see the accompany email from the Environment Agency stating that a full Flood Risk Assessment is not required.

PLANNING HISTORY

14/01627/F: Application Withdrawn: 12/01/15 - Proposed shop

14/01079/F: Application Withdrawn: 10/10/14 - Proposed shop and flat -

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Parish Council: OBJECT - Burnham Market Parish Council would recommend that the planning application be refused. The Parish Council feels that the construction of the proposed building would be overbearing.

The proposed building would be in very close proximity to the neighbouring building and would occupy near on the entire footprint of the plot, making the proposals out of proportion to the location and to the site itself. The Parish Council would also comment that there is nothing included within the application to show the visual impact the property would have on the street scene, which the Council believes would be significant. The proposals for the three storey development would be intrusive and totally alter the characteristics of North Street.

The Parish Council also has concerns about the safety of pedestrians stepping out in to North Street. Once the car park is fully operational there will be an increased flow in traffic along this stretch, therefore the development may significantly impact upon road safety.

Conservation Areas Advisory Panel: OBJECT – The Panel considered that the land adjacent to Hamilton Antiques should not be developed.

Environment Agency: NO OBJECTION – but made comments

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION – conditionally

Environmental Health & Housing - Environmental Quality: NO OBJECTION – conditionally

Arboricultural Officer: NO OBJECTION – conditionally

Historic Environment Service: NO OBJECTION – conditionally

Police Architectural Liaison Officer: NO OBJECTION

REPRESENTATIONS

To the original scheme:-

Two letters received objecting to the application on the following grounds:-

• Overdevelopment /Overbearing Nature of the Building: Generally, the size and scale of the proposed building, in the context of the relatively small size of the site, would be such that it would radically and negatively affect its immediate surroundings, and would constitute overdevelopment • Overshadowing: given its design, and in particular its height and location within the site, the proposed building will very significantly overshadow our property (just as that in the November proposal would have done, and indeed significantly more than the July proposal would have done). • Overlooking: the proposed building has windows both at first floor and at second floor level. These will overlook our garden. (NB the November application only had south- facing windows at first floor level; the current proposal is therefore significantly worse than that from this point of view.) • Out Of Character: the proposed building would have a significant impact (both from the point of view of proportionality and from the point of view of conservation) upon

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

the immediate locality, and would indeed affect some of its prettiest features including in particular the west wall of the Warehouse. • The car parking situation is unsatisfactory; there does not seem to be room for any vehicles apart from in areas which currently service the Hamilton Antiques shop next door. There are also significant numbers of trees on the site • We are pleased that the developers have now taken into consideration our beautiful wall; however it will still be almost completely obscured by this potential development. The slight alterations to the application will not alleviate the need for a party wall agreement. We are very concerned that our footings will move if a trench is dug only 1 metre away from our wall. We have been informed that our footings will not be very deep as there is no cellar and our architect has implied that this could be a serious issue. If there was a problem in this regard, the potential business interruption might be devastating to the company which in turn would seriously impact employment. • There are a great many architecturally important buildings in North Street - perhaps some of the most interesting and important ones in the village. Therefore any development would need to be very sensitive in terms of scale and building materials used to be in keeping with the surroundings. We believe that the size and scale of the proposed development are excessive and will not only block light from the street but will appear over-bearing to the character of the street and village.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS01 - Spatial Strategy

CS02 - The Settlement Hierarchy

CS06 - Development in Rural Areas

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS10 - The Economy

CS11 – Transport

CS12 - Environmental Assets

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

OTHER GUIDANCE

Burnham Market Conservation Area Character Statement

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The main planning considerations in regards to this application are:-

• Principle of Development • Impact upon Designated Heritage Assets • Impact upon Neighbour Amenity • Highway Safety • Other Material Considerations

Principle of Development

The application site is located within Built Environment Type C, the Conservation Area of Burnham Market and an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) as defined by the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan 1998.

Nationally, the NPPF seeks a high standard of design, and design that takes the opportunity to improve an area. Some of the key objectives referred to in the NPPF are for development which responds to local context and creates or reinforces local distinctiveness, are visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping.

Local Plan policy 4/21 supports the principle of development in an area defined as Built Environment Type C provided it is in harmony with the building characteristics of the area.

Core Strategy Policies CS01, CS02, CS06 and CS08 are relevant. CS01 promotes sustainable patterns of development to ensure strong, diverse economic activity whilst maintaining local character and a high quality environment.

Burnham Market is a ‘Key Rural Service Centre’ as defined by CS02 where limited growth of a scale and nature appropriate to secure the sustainability of each settlement will be supported within the development limits in accordance with Policy CS06.

The construction of new shop unit on the site is acceptable in principle provided it is of a good design, is in harmony with the building characteristics of the locality and does not have a detrimental impact on the heritage assets or the AONB.

Impact upon Designated Heritage Assets

The site is within the Conservation Area.

North Street contains a mix of residential and commercial properties which are mostly located on the back of the footpath. These are a mixture of ages and designs, constructed

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

of a variety of materials including colour washing, chalk block, random chalk, red brick, gault brick, random flint and flint cobble. Some of the properties along this section of North Street are listed but those either side of the site are not.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), specifically paragraphs 131 and 132, state that: "When determining planning applications, local authorities should take account of: the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness and the desirability of sustaining and enhancing heritage assets. When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset's conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting".

The National Planning Practice Guidance states that: "the setting of a heritage asset is the surroundings in which an asset is experienced, and may therefore be more extensive than its curtilage. All heritage assets have a setting, irrespective of the form in which they survive and whether they are designated or not. The extent and importance of setting is often expressed by reference to visual considerations."

The Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) places statutory duties upon Local Planning Authorities. In determining applications that affect a Listed Building or its setting Section 66(1) states that the Local Planning Authority: "shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting". Section 72 requires the LPA to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a Conservation Area when determining applications affecting buildings or land within the Conservation Area or its setting.

Furthermore, Policy CS12 of the Core Strategy states that "The historic and built environment play a crucial role in delivering environmental quality and well-being. Therefore the Council will preserve and where appropriate enhance its qualities and characteristics.

The application site comprises an existing, open space within this street frontage. Walling to the front of the site indicate that there was once a building on the site, although no details regarding the history are readily available.

Prior to this application a previous application for a shop unit on this site was withdrawn (lpa ref: 14/01627/F). This current proposal has been further amended and reduced in scale so that the eaves and ridge height are significantly lower than that previously submitted. Also, in response to comments received from the earlier application, the frontage has been redesigned so that it has a more traditional shop front rather than the appearance of a converted cottage or a warehouse building which featured in earlier schemes.

The ridge height is stepped so that it is lower than that of the warehouse building to the east but is higher than that of the property to the west. The same stepped approach has been taken with the eaves heights.

The proposed building has also been moved away from the east and south boundaries to allow more spacing around the building. The rear section can now be used for the storage of bins. This means that the proposed building is detached from the warehouse building to the east and small glimpses of the brick and flint panel side wall of this property can still be seen.

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The Conservation Areas Advisory Panel has objected to the proposal as they consider that no building should appear on this site. They have not commented on the details of the scheme, just the principle. The Conservation Officer concurs with this opinion.

The Parish Council has objected to the scheme due to its scale and mass which they consider would be overbearing and be out of proportion with its location in the streetscene and the site itself. They consider it would be intrusive and alter the characteristics of North Street.

Currently there is a brick and flint panel wall which runs along the front of the site with an infilled window opening. Clearly this is part of the former building on the site, the remainder of which has long since been demolished. Behind this wall the site is planted with some grass and peripheral planting which can be seen above the boundary wall. It is true to say that the site does create a gap in the built up frontage along North Street which is softened by foliage. However, it is the importance of this open space and its place within the streetscene and the character of the Conservation Area which needs to be considered.

The walling to the front of the site limits public views into the site and gives the impression that the site is enclosed and private. The site offers no public recreation facilities, either formal or informal. The proposal would, in effect, extend the height of the wall to two full storeys to be in keeping with surrounding buildings.

The proposed development would not result in the infilling of the whole of this opening in the streetscene. Space is retained to the western side of the building to retain the vehicle access for the parking to No. 21 North Street. A small gap of 1m would also remain to the eastern side of the building.

The proposal as amended does take reference from surrounding buildings and characteristics of other buildings in the vicinity and their built form. Buildings are set on the back of the footpath and this proposal continues this form.

It is considered that the proposed building would not have a harmful impact through the infilling of spacing in the street scene. The gap has been formed by the removal of most of the building previously on site and in this case it is considered that the spacing is at odds with the streetscene. Accordingly it is not considered the proposed new building would harm the character of the streetscene or any heritage assets.

The amended plans now show a building which better reflects the design elements of surrounding development. It is considered that the scheme as amended no longer dominates the plot or this part of North Street. The plans as amended now demonstrate that the proposed development can fit into the site without harm to the character of this part of the village and Conservation Area.

The success of the scheme to fit into the streetscene and Conservation Area will also be closely linked to the finish of the built form and it is recommended that planning conditions relating to materials should be imposed if permission is forthcoming.

Third party objections have been received relating to overdevelopment of the site and the proposal being out of character, but it is considered that the proposal is an efficient use of land whilst replicating the key design characteristics of this part of the village.

In summary, it is considered that the proposal is now acceptable in design terms. It is considered that the proposal as amended now reinforces the character of development along North Street and will therefore preserve and enhance the character of the Conservation Area, and the nearby listed buildings.

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Impact upon the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The site is also within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

The NPPF, specifically paragraph 115, states that: "Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Boards and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty.

The site is within the village settlement boundary although will be visible across the new village car park and fields beyond. The cross sections provided by the applicant demonstrate that the development will fit in amongst the existing built form and the approved development on Foundry Field without harm to the character of the area.

Given the scale and nature of the proposal, and its location within the village, however, it is considered that the integrity of the AONB will be retained.

Impact upon Neighbour Amenity

The National Planning Policy Framework, specifically paragraph 17, states that, in respect to neighbour amenity: "Planning should provide a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings".

Policy DM 15 of the Draft Development Management Policies Pre-submission Document states that, in respect to neighbour amenity: "Proposals will be assessed against a number of factors including: Overlooking, overbearing and overshadowing… Development that has a significant adverse impact on amenity of others … will be refused".

The relationship between the proposed works and neighbouring properties has been examined and the impact upon the amenity of the occupants of these properties has been assessed. Consideration has been given to overlooking, overshadowing and whether or not the proposed new dwelling and outbuildings would be overbearing.

Third party objections have been received relating to overlooking and overshadowing from the height of built form on the site boundary. The proposed building is set off 1m from the eastern and southern boundaries. There are no windows to the western elevation of the warehouse building and to the south is a garden room to a residential property with no windows facing the site. High level windows and rooflights are shown to the southern elevation. The windows serve part of the retail floor space and are set at 1.6m above floor level. The rooflights serve attic space to the retail unit.

There will be no overshadowing to the residential properties to the south due to the orientation of the site and the way that shadow is cast. Shadowing to the east and west would be largely over existing flank walls of existing buildings and not to any residential amenity space.

The rear section of the building would be just under 5m to eaves height and just over 7m to ridge set off 1m from the boundary. It would span just under 5.5m. Given the existing densities of development in the village this arrangement is not unexpected. The building is no deeper than other buildings to the west and is not as deep as the warehouse building to the east.

A parcel of land would remain between the site and the residential property to the south so that there would be no direct impact on the windows of this neighbouring property.

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The proposed building would be visible from the garden land of the property to the south and the first floor windows would also look out towards the garden land of this property. However, these are high-level windows which serve commercial premises and therefore overlooking would be limited. In this case the feeling of being overlooked would be worse than the actual overlooking, and this would not warrant a refusal.

The relationships have been examined and it is considered that due to the position of existing windows, separation distances and spacing between the properties it is not considered there will be an undue detrimental impact upon the amenity of the occupants of the adjoining properties in terms of overlooking, being overshadowed or the dwellings being over bearing.

Highway Safety

The proposal shows the retention of the vehicle access point which is historic. The boundary wall already limits visibility splays so in this case the wall of a building in the same location has no bearing on the visibility of this existing access. The existing parking and turning arrangements will therefore remain unchanged.

No additional parking is proposed for the retail unit but the site is within the centre of the village and works are currently underway for a new village car park in proximity to the site. Accordingly in this case the Highways Authority raises no objection.

Other Material Considerations

Third party concern has been raised regarding the loss of trees on the site. However, these are garden trees and not of such significance or size that they are protected by TPO or worthy of protection through a TPO.

Third party concern has been raised regarding the impact on the footings of the warehouse building to the east from any new development. However this is a civil matter between land owners and covered by legislation outside the Town and Country Planning Acts.

The site is within Flood Zone 1, low risk. There are no outstanding flood risk issues.

Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 requires Local Authorities to consider the implications for crime and disorder in the carrying out of their duties. The application will not have a material impact upon crime and disorder.

The site lies within 2km of a SSSI. However, the proposed development would not have a significant adverse effect on the features on which the SSSI is designated.

CONCLUSION

The design of the proposed shop unit, as amended, is now considered acceptable in the Conservation Area and will fit in with the streetscene and surrounding development. The proposed development will not have a detrimental impact upon the natural beauty of the landscape in this designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It is also considered that the loss of this gap within the streetscene will not adversely affect the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

The plans, as amended, demonstrate that the development will not cause significant overlooking of neighbouring properties, will not be unduly overbearing and will not cause significant loss of light. There are no significant amenity issues.

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The Highways Authority has no objection to the amended scheme.

The proposal complies with national policy, saved Policy 4/21 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan 1998 and Policies CS01, CS02, CS06, CS07, CS08 and CS12 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Adopted Core Strategy 2011.

Accordingly the application is recommended for approval subject to the imposition of planning conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

2 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

• Drawing No. 1826 – 07D, Scale 1:50, 1:200 & 1:1250, Proposed Section, Site and Location Plan • Drawing No. 1826 – 08I, Scale 1:100, Proposed Plans and Elevations

2 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3 Condition No development shall commence on any external surface of the development until a sample panel of the materials to be used for the external surfaces of the building(s) and/or extension(s) hereby permitted has been erected on the site for the inspection and written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The sample panel shall measure at least 1 metre x 1 metre using the proposed materials, mortar type, bond and pointing technique. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

3 Reason To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and grouping of materials in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.

4 Condition No development over or above foundations shall take place on site until full details of the window style, reveal, cill and header treatment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

4 Reason To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and grouping of materials in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.

15/00185/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

38 15/00430/CU

The Old School House (South Wing) Lynn Road Castle Rising

6 Trinity Hospital Lych Gate

21.5m The Black Horse Inn

4 The Old School House

8 2

TCB 26.3m War Memorial

8 3

7 3

Castle Farm Barn

S 8

U H

2 1 C 3 5 10

6 3 11 Castle Farm House 34

Scale: 1:1,250

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:1250

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 20/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Castle Rising

Proposal: Change of use from an art school to a hairdressers

Location: The Old School House (South Wing) Lynn Road Castle Rising Norfolk Applicant: Miss Gemma Cook

Case No: 15/00430/CU (Change of Use Application)

Case Officer: Mr C Fry Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616232 14 May 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – Contrary to Highways Officer recommendation.

Case Summary

The application site lies within Built Environment Type C according to Local Plan Proposals Maps for Castle Rising.

The site contains a two storey building which is classified as an important unlisted building, within the Castle Rising conservation area.

The proposal seeks consent for a change of use from an Art School to hairdressers

Key Issues

Principle of Development Impact upon Amenity Highway Safety Issues

APPROVE

THE APPLICATION

The site lies within an area designated as Built Environment Type C according to Local Plan Proposals Maps for Castle Rising, as well as the Castle Rinsing conservation area. The whole of Castle Rising is within the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

Castle Rising is classified as a “Rural Village” according to Policy CS02 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy. Development within these villages is limited to minor development which meets the needs of the settlements and helps to sustain existing services.

The site comprises part of a former school building located on the northern side of Lynn Road, Castle Rising. The building is elevated above the road level. The ground floor area of this part of the school building is the subject of this change use application. This element of 15/00430/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

the school building has been used as an office in association with an Art studio. The Art studio operated from this part and adjoining eastern most part of the school building. The remainder of the Art Studio use is also subject to a change of use application, 15/00544/CU, which is also on this agenda. A carpark is located to the north (rear) of the site and vehicular access is shared with other adjacent commercial uses to the south of The Old School House building.

The proposal seeks a change of use from an Art School to hairdressers (A1). There are no external changes proposed as part of the application. There will be a maximum of 3 people working at the premises, 2 of which are expected to have up to 8 appointments a day; the other person will have no appointments.

SUPPORTING CASE

No supporting information has been provided with the application

PLANNING HISTORY

There is no recent relevant site history however the adjoining building (east) has relevant planning history

15/00544/CU: - Retrospective application for change of use from art and craft tuition centre with ancillary sales to fashion (ladies) retail

2/93/0415/CU: - Application Permitted: 10/05/93 - Change of use to art and craft tuition centre with ancillary sales

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Parish Council: NO COMMENT at time of writing the report

NCC Highways: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions:

It is the highway view that a build-out should be provided to the side of the existing access so that visibility can be brought in line with current standards. We would be looking to have such a build-out designed to be as small as practically possible while remaining safe and functional, so that it can remain in keeping with the environment in which it would be located.

I have attached a photograph which was taken during my site visit which demonstrates our concern in respect of the existing access visibility.

In respect of the above I recommend the following conditions:

SHC 39A Notwithstanding the details indicated on the submitted drawings no works shall commence on site unless otherwise agreed in writing until a detailed scheme for the off-site highway improvement works (build-out to aid visibility to the north of the existing access) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the highway improvement works are designed to an appropriate standard in the interest of highway safety and to protect the environment of the local highway corridor.

15/00430/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

SHC 39B Prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted the off-site highway improvement works referred to in Part A of this condition shall be completed to the written satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the highway network is adequate to cater for the development proposed.

In relation to car parking and access mentioned previously for this site, I would welcome your clarification that such could be provided and maintained for the life of the applications.

REPRESENTATIONS

None received

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS06 - Development in Rural Areas

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS10 - The Economy

CS11 – Transport

CS12 - Environmental Assets

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

DM2 – Development Boundaries

15/00430/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

DM10 – Retail Development Outside Town Centres

OTHER GUIDANCE

Castle Rising Conservation Area Character Statement

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The main planning considerations in regards to this application are:-

• Principle of Development • Impact upon Amenity • Highway Safety Issues

Principle of Development

The site is contained within an area which is designated as Built Environment Type C according to Local Plan Proposals Maps for Castle Rising. Development which has regard for and is in harmony with the building characteristics of the locality will be permitted in Built Environment Type C provided it relates to the older usually pre 1914 development forms.

The site is also within the Castle Rising Conservation Area, where development must preserve or enhance its character or appearance.

Castle Rising is also a “Rural Village” according to Policy CS02 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy. “Rural Villages” can accommodate limited minor development where it meets the needs of settlement and helps to sustain existing services in accordance with Policy CS06.

Paragraph 28 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that, “in order to promote a strong rural economy, planning should look to promote the retention and development of local services and community facilities in villages.”

It is therefore considered that the proposed change of use is acceptable in principle subject to satisfying other material considerations.

Impact upon Amenity

The proposed hairdressers will be located between what is currently a fashion outlet (subject of a retrospective change of use – 15/00544/CU – also on this agenda) and Soundwave Marketing and Berforts Information Press.

To the south there are a number of businesses operating from Castle Farm barn, including a dentists and a large antiques shop.

The nearest residential neighbours to the site are no. 38 (south) and 39 (opposite) Lynn Road. These neighbours are not considered to be detrimentally affected from the proposed use.

There are no external changes proposed, and there is no detrimental impact upon the conservation area or indeed the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

15/00430/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Highway Safety

There is a large shared parking area with ample parking that serves the commercial uses to the rear of the premises.

The Highways Officer requires a condition to be imposed on this and the other change of use application, to improve the overall access point.

There is concern from the Highways Officer that the overall site is growing to a level where improvements are needed. However, it does seem unreasonable that these applications should be required to improve access, given their small scale, the fact the access point is located on a one-way road, and the fact these uses replace existing traffic generating uses.

In line with paragraph 005 of the National Planning Practice Guidance it is your officer’s opinion that the highways officer request would not meet the test of reasonableness, and as such it is recommended that the conditions are not imposed on these proposed uses.

CONCLUSION

Whilst there are no amenity issues that are likely to arise from the proposal Members are being asked to consider whether the highways officer’s requirements are reasonable. However it is your Officers opinion that for the reasons set out above this application would not warrant additional access improvements, and it is recommended that the Highway condition should not be attached to any consents.

In accordance with the NPPF, which has a presumption in favour of sustainable development and seeks to support rural communities and businesses, the proposal is therefore recommended for approval subject to the following conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

2 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:-

• Location Plan drawing no. 10/01 dated March 2015 • Floor Plans as Proposed drawing no. 150563/10/02 dated 17th March 2015

2 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

15/00430/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

44 15/00544/CU

The Old School House Lynn Road Castle Rising

6 Trinity Hospital Lych Gate

21.5m The Black Horse Inn

4 The Old School House

8 2

TCB 26.3m War Memorial

8 3

7 3

Castle Farm Barn

S 8

U H

2 1 C 3 5 10

6 3 Scale: 1:1,250

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:1250

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 20/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Castle Rising

Proposal: Retrospective application for change of use from art and craft tuition centre with ancillary sales to fashion (ladies) retail Location: The Old School House Lynn Road Castle Rising King's Lynn

Applicant: Mrs Cheryl Daubney

Case No: 15/00544/CU (Change of Use Application)

Case Officer: Miss J Kendal Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616772 2 June 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – The applicant is the spouse of a Councillor.

Case Summary

The application site contains a two storey building which is classified as an important unlisted building situated on the western side of Lynn Road, Castle Rising.

The proposal seeks retrospective consent for a change of use from an Art School to a retail unit (ladies fashion).

The application site lies within Built Environment Type C as depicted within the Local Plan Proposals Maps for Castle Rising.

Key Issues

Principle of Development Impact upon Amenity Highway Safety

Recommendation

APPROVE

THE APPLICATION

15/00544/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The site comprises part of a former school building located on the western side of Lynn Road, Castle Rising. The building is elevated above the road level. The ground floor area of this part of the school building shown on the submitted plan is the subject of this change use application. The Art studio operated from this part and the adjoining southernmost part of the school building. The remainder of the Art Studio use is also subject to a change of use application, 15/00430/CU for hairdressers, which is also on this agenda. A carpark is located to the west (rear) of the site and vehicular access is shared with other adjacent commercial uses to the south of The Old School House building.

The proposal seeks retrospective change of use from an Art School to ladies fashion retail (A1). There are no external changes proposed as part of the application. There are two part time employees working at the premises and the opening hours are between 10am and 4:30 Monday to Saturday.

SUPPORTING CASE

Due to the scale and nature of the proposal, there is no supporting case submitted with the application.

PLANNING HISTORY

2/93/0415/CU: Application Permitted: 10/05/93 - Change of use to art and craft tuition centre with ancillary sales - Unit 2, The Old School House

15/00430/CU: Pending Consideration: - Change of use from an art school to a hairdressers - The Old School House (South Wing), Lynn Road, Castle Rising

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Parish Council: SUPPORT

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions:

I have attached a photograph which was taken during my site visit which demonstrates our concern in respect of the existing access visibility.

In respect of the above I recommend the following conditions:

Reason: To ensure that the highway improvement works are designed to an appropriate standard in the interest of highway safety and to protect the environment of the local highway corridor.

15/00544/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Reason: To ensure that the highway network is adequate to cater for the development proposed.

In relation to car parking and access mentioned previously for this site, I would welcome your clarification that such could be provided and maintained for the life of the applications.

REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS01 - Spatial Strategy

CS02 - The Settlement Hierarchy

CS03 - King's Lynn Area

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS11 - Transport

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

DM17 - Parking Provision in New Development

15/00544/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

OTHER GUIDANCE

Castle Rising Conservation Area Character Statement

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The key considerations in the determination of this application are:

• Principle of Development • Impact upon Amenity • Highway Safety Issues

Principle of Development:

The site is also within the Castle Rising Conservation Area, where development must preserve or enhance its character or appearance.

It is therefore considered that the proposed change of use is acceptable in principle subject to satisfying other material considerations.

Impact upon Amenity:

The proposed retail use is located within a cluster of small businesses operating from Castle Farm barn.

The nearest residential neighbours to the site are no. 38 (south) and 39 (opposite) Lynn Road. These neighbours are not considered to be detrimentally affected from the proposed use.

There are no external changes proposed, and there is no detrimental impact upon the conservation area or indeed the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Highway Safety:

There is a large shared parking area that serves the commercial uses to the rear of the premises.

The Highways Officer requires a condition to be imposed on this and the other change of use application, to improve the overall access point.

15/00544/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

CONCLUSION

In accordance with the NPPF, which has a presumption in favour of sustainable development and seeks to support rural communities and businesses, the proposal is therefore recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted relates to the following approved plans; Ordnance Survey Plan, scale 1:1250; and Ground Floor Plan, both received on the 7th April 2015.

1 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

15/00544/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

50 15/00433/F

The Stables Bexwell Road Downham Market D A O 8 2 R 5 4 2 G 5 IG R B L 19 E F Apple Tree Loke Kingfisher 5 11 House Cedar House

3 d 4 The 4 Woodlands

Th e Orchards

35.7m The St Christoph

Stables k

Telephone c

o d

Exchange d

h T

11 7

13 16 24 40 46 21 35.7m 42 29 Hadleigh

37.2m

Scale: 1:1,250

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:1250

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 18/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Downham Market

Proposal: Conversion of former offices to form three 2-bedroom residential units, alterations to coach house to form one 2-bedroom dwelling and construction of three terraced 2/3 bedroom cottages Location: The Stables Bexwell Road Downham Market Norfolk

Applicant: Mr John Murphy

Case No: 15/00433/F (Full Application)

Case Officer: Mrs N Osler Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616402 15 May 2015 Extension of Time Expiry Date: 5 June 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – Officer recommendation is contrary to Town Council recommendation.

Case Summary

The proposal is for the conversion of some offices to three, single-storey dwellings; conversion of a coach house to one, 1.5-storey dwelling and the construction of a terrace of three, two-storey dwellings.

The site lies to the north of Bexwell Road, Downham Market and benefits from an implemented scheme for the conversion of the offices to two, single-storey dwellings; conversion of the coach house to one, single storey dwelling and the construction of one, detached, two-storey dwelling.

As such the proposed development would result in an increase of 3 dwellings over and above the consented and implemented scheme.

The site lies within a Conservation Area and within Flood Zone 1.

Key Issues

Principle of Development; Form and Character and Impact on the Conservation Area; Highway Safety; Residential Amenity; and Other Material Considerations

Recommendation:

APPROVE

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

THE APPLICATION

The application site has been subject to a number of planning applications (see ‘History’ section below). The 2002 application resulted in permission to convert the offices to two dwellings, the coach house to one dwelling and to construct a further single dwelling. The 2002 permission has been confirmed by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) as having commenced and the permission has therefore been implemented and can be completed at any time.

The site comprises c.0.2ha of former garden land to The Rosary (a large, late Victorian detached house situated to the southwest of the site whose curtilage extends to the west of the site).

The site contains a linear building running north-south along the eastern boundary (historically stables, but most recently offices), a former coach house (located in the north- eastern corner of the site) and an area of walled garden to the west (the location of the consented detached dwelling). Along the western boundary wall of the site are three small lean-to outbuildings - it is proposed to repair and retain these as outbuildings to the proposed terrace of three.

The northern boundary of the site comprises iron ‘estate’ fencing and fronts the existing private access road serving The Orchard (a small development of houses). The eastern boundary consists of a carrstone wall that separates the site from Rabbit Lane (an unadopted and unmade track serving a number of dwellings). Rabbit Lane is also a pedestrian Public Right of Way.

The current application is for the conversion of the offices to three, single-storey dwellings, conversion of the coach house to one, 1.5-storey dwelling and the construction of a terrace of three, two-storey dwellings - an increase in three dwellings from the consented and implemented scheme.

SUPPORTING CASE

The DAS that accompanied the application states: ‘Consideration has been given to form, scale and appearance to ensure that the proposal is in keeping with the character and appearance of the conservation area, respects local amenity, ensures safe highway conditions and retains existing trees where possible.

‘It is asserted that the proposal provides a more appropriate use of the land than the existing permission in terms of design and layout and optimising the use of previously developed land. The design and use of materials and finishes to the development will ensure that the proposal will make a positive contribution to the designated conservation area and the wider area more generally. The site will make provision for smaller residential units suitable for starter homes and / or young families, set within a mature landscaped setting.

‘It is considered that the proposal would accord with the provisions of Policies 4/21 and 8/1 of the Local Plan, Policies CS1, 2, 4, 8, 9 and 12 of the Core Strategy, emerging Development Management Polices DM1, 2, 15 and 17, and the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.’

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

PLANNING HISTORY

Permission was granted in July 2002 for the conversion of offices to two dwellings, the conversion of the coach house to one dwelling and the construction of one, two-storey detached dwelling under reference 2/02/0566/CU.

In 2007 an application was made to convert the offices to five dwellings (rather than the two originally permitted). This application (07/01601/F) was refused and dismissed at appeal (APP/V2635/A/08/2070922). The reason for refusal of the LPA was: ‘The proposal to convert the former office building to 5 dwelling unit represents an over intensive form of development with limited private amenity space and would result in significant congestion and increased activity in the locality which is considered to be detrimental to the character and appearance of the area’. The Inspector did not concur with the LPA in relation to form and character, dismissing the appeal due to substandard living conditions; concluding that the proposal ‘would fail to provide satisfactory living conditions for future occupiers [of the proposed units], with regard to the provision of private external amenity space and access and parking arrangements’. The Inspector also concluded that highway safety was not a reason for refusal.

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Parish Council: Members were generally supportive of the scheme particularly in regard to the conversion of the former offices and the coach house but recommended refusal stating the proposed construction of three terraced cottages and the resultant loss of existing trees was an overdevelopment of the site. Members did comment that they would like to see a revised application for two dwellings that created more amenity space and allowed the trees to be retained as natural screening.

Highways Authority: The point of access would be of an acceptable width, it is surfaced over the highway (footway) and visibility splays would accord with the recommended standards without the need for alteration. I note that the parking numbers are a little short of the recommended standard where they have been indicated but it is evident that there is additional land available around the development where more cars could be accommodated if needed. As a result I would not seek to restrict the grant of permission.

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions relating to asbestos and its safe removal

Arboricultural Officer: I can confirm that I have NO OBJECTION to the proposals – please condition it is carried out in strict accordance with the submitted report and plans.

Norfolk Constabulary: NO OBJECTION – information sent to applicant / agent in relation to Secured by Design

Historic England: The application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice. It is not necessary for us to be consulted again on this application.

Conservation Officer: Recommend APPROVAL with conditions requiring sample panels of materials and joinery details.

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The Tithe Map of Norfolk and the First Edition OS map of 1886 indicate that the two building on this site were built between 1840 and 1886 and it seems likely that they were built as stables and coach house to The Rosary which was also considerably enlarged during the same period. They are within the conservation area (CA) and are marked on the CA map as being “important but unlisted buildings” or undesignated heritage assets.

The long low stable block serves to enclose the site and the back carrstone is a strong character feature of Rabbit Lane. Both buildings have been altered, particularly The Stables with the addition of modern horizontal windows installed to facilitate its use as offices, but they both appear to be structurally sound in spite of standing empty in recent years and this scheme which largely preserves them in their present form is to be welcomed.

New build on the site will be a departure from what has previously existed but the land is not used and its neglected appearance does not enhance the area. The cottages are modest in size and low key but with good detailing and choice of materials making them more appropriate than large modern houses which have been mooted previously. Developing the whole site as a small group of dwellings will ensure the future of the historic buildings and is merely a continuation of the development which has slowly crept along Rabbit Lane over the years - since in fact the Stables and Coach House themselves were built in the 1880s.

The proposal therefore accords with the NPPF which identifies protection and enhancement of the historic environment as an important element of sustainable development and establishes a presumption in favour of sustainable development within the planning system. The NPPF also states that conservation of historic assets is a core principle of the planning system.

REPRESENTATIONS

NINE letters of OBJECTION have been received. The issues raised are:

• Overdevelopment of the site; • Does not take into account the historic nature of the site and the tree reduction is too severe; • Highway safety; • Sewage provision is inadequate; • Increase in noise of detriment to neighbour amenity; • Not in keeping with surrounding development; • Overlooking leading to loss of privacy; • All the reasons cited for the dismissal of the previous appeal exists and some are worse; • Impact on protected species; • Impact on Rabbit Lane if scaffolding were erected on it; • Refuse storage – where will the bins be located? • Overbearing; • Asbestos removal; • There is a legal covenant on the site limiting any development to one, three-bedroom dwelling not overlooking The Rosary; • There is a discrepancy on the north-east boundary of the site; • None of the assurances relating to screening that the applicant made at the Downham meeting have been incorporated into the plans; and • The sewage and foul water drain from the four houses in The Orchards pass through the site; and a wayleave for the drain to continue should be a condition of any permission granted.

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

National Planning Policy Framework – sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

National Planning Practice Guidance - Provides National Planning Practice Guidance, in support of and in addition to the NPPF

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS01 - Spatial Strategy

CS02 - The Settlement Hierarchy

CS03 - King's Lynn Area

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS09 - Housing Distribution

CS11 - Transport

CS12 - Environmental Assets

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

DM2 – Development Boundaries

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

DM17 - Parking Provision in New Development

OTHER GUIDANCE

Downham Market by Design

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The key issues for consideration in relation to the determination of this application are:

• Principle of Development; • Form and Character and Impact on the Conservation Area; • Highway Safety; • Residential Amenity; and • Other Material Considerations.

Principle of Development

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2012 states, at paragraph 49, that: ‘Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development’.

Downham Market is one of the borough’s main towns. Furthermore the application site falls within Built Environment Type C as identified in the King’s Lynn & West Norfolk Local Plan, 1998. Within this area the principle of new residential development is generally considered to be acceptable under Policies CS02, CS04 and CS09 of the Core Strategy, Policy 4/21 of the Local Plan and emerging Development Plan Policies DM1 and DM2. Development must however have regard for and be in harmony with the building characteristics of the locality and comply with all other relevant policies.

In addition, the site also lies within a Conservation Area, and development must, at the very least therefore, preserve the qualities and characteristics of the designation as set out in planning law, the NPPF (Chapter 12) and the Core Strategy (Policy CS12).

Furthermore, permission has been granted in the past for residential development of the site (albeit on a smaller scale). As such it is considered that the principle of development is acceptable.

Form and Character and Impact on the Conservation Area

Whilst the predominant characteristic of the locality of the site is linear development fronting the main road (whether it is Bexwell Road or other main roads in the locality of the site) there are also numerous examples of comprehensive developments served off both large and small private accesses. Indeed The Orchards and other developments off Rabbit Lane are key examples. In this regard the proposed development is considered to respect the built characteristics of the locality and preserve the characteristics of the Conservation Area. Furthermore the conversion of the existing stables and coach house, in a fashion considered to preserve the fabric of these buildings, would be an enhancement of the area (however, it is a material consideration that these building could be preserved / enhanced under the implemented scheme).

The proposed new build (the terrace of three) is of a scale, mass and appearance (cottage proportions with vernacular materials) that relate adequately to the site and the wider locality (the latter of which contains dwellings of all manner of sizes, scales, ages and character).

The previously refused and dismissed appeal related to the conversion of the existing stable building into five units. It is considered that the lesser conversion to three (as proposed under this application) is appropriate and offers an appropriate degree of amenity space for each unit. It is therefore considered that the proposed development addresses the reasons for refusal.

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

In relation to the wider site, it is considered that it is of a size that can accommodate the proposed development without resulting in a cramped form of development, and each unit is considered to have an appropriate amount of amenity space. As such it is not considered that the proposed development could be considered as overdevelopment.

Trees in Conservation Areas are protected. Additionally there are four trees that benefit from Tree Preservation Orders. However, and notwithstanding the concerns / objections of third party representatives, the Local Authority’s Arboricultural Officer has no objection to the loss of those trees shown to be felled. This conclusion would have been reached by full consideration of the health and amenity value of each tree.

In summary, it is considered that the proposed development is appropriate for the site and its surroundings. It would not appear overly dominant or out of keeping in the locality and would not have any detrimental impact on the established character or appearance of the Conservation Area. The Conservation Officer has no objection to the proposed development.

Highway Safety

The Local Highway Authority (LHA) has no objection to the proposed development on highway safety grounds. Whilst the LHA does not wish to restrict the grant of planning permission (on the grounds that there is sufficient space for an appropriate degree of parking and turning (in accordance with parking standards)), the LPA considers it is necessary, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning, that these areas are clearly laid out. As such, if permission is granted it is recommended that a suitable condition is appended.

Residential Amenity

Occupiers of the proposed development are considered to have appropriate amenity space including adequate space for bin provision, washing lines, etc. There is not considered to be any overshadowing, overbearing or overlooking issues that are of a degree to suggest that the inter-development relationships are not acceptable.

In relation to the impact of the proposed development on occupiers of existing dwellings, each element of the proposed development shall be considered in turn.

Conversion of Stables / Offices

It is a material consideration that these could be converted in accordance with the 2002 permission. The separation distances (c.30m between the closest part of the building with both Bexwell House (to the southeast) and The Rosary (to the southwest)) and means of separation Rabbit Lane (to the southeast) and significant trees (to the southwest) are considered sufficient to suggest that there would be no material overlooking impacts.

Conversion of the Coach House

As with the stables / offices, it is a material consideration that this could be converted in accordance with the 2002 permission. The separation distances (c.19m) between the closest part of the building with both Kingfisher House and Cedar House to the north, together with the means of separation (private access), and the angles involved from first floor windows, are considered sufficient to suggest that there would be no material overlooking impacts.

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Construction of New Terrace

A significant element of the garden of The Rosary sits to the rear (west) of the proposed terrace. However, a site visit confirmed that this was not their main private amenity area. Additionally, the garden of The Rosary remains extensive and large parts of it would remain private and unaffected by the proposed development. It is therefore considered that the impact on The Rosary from this element of the development would not be sufficient enough to warrant refusal.

The only other dwellings that could realistically be impacted from this element of the development are the dwellings to their north. However, these dwellings are separated from the site by the private access serving them and their front gardens. Additionally there are no first floor windows proposed on the northern elevation of the terraces. It is therefore considered that the impact on the dwellings to the north of the site (Kingfisher House and Cedar House) from this element of the development would not be sufficient enough to warrant refusal.

Crime and Disorder

There are no specific crime or disorder issues relating to the proposed development.

Other Material Considerations

Whilst the application form states that surface water drainage will be via soakaway, because of known issues in this particular area, it is considered necessary and reasonable to append a condition to any permission granted requiring full details.

The safe removal and disposal of asbestos can be suitably conditioned.

Protected species – development relating to the coach house and stables /offices can continue at any time. Given this, and the fact that protected species are covered by other legislation, it is not considered necessary to condition these works in relation to the impact on protected species.

In relation to third party comments not covered in the main body of the report, the LPA comments as follows:

• Increase in noise of detriment to neighbour amenity – neither the noise associated with construction or the resultant development is considered to be sufficient enough to warrant either refusal or a condition restricted hours [construction]; • All the reasons cited for the dismissal of the previous appeal exists and some are worse – covered in the main body of the report; • Impact on Rabbit Lane if scaffolding was erected on it – this is a civil matter; • There is a legal covenant on the site limiting any development to one, three-bedroom dwelling not overlooking The Rosary – this is a civil matter; • There is a discrepancy on the north-east boundary of the site – the location plan is for the purposes of identification of the site. It is not considered that any part of the development extends outside of land in the ownership of the applicant; • None of the assurances, relating to screening that the applicant made at the Downham meeting, have been incorporated into the plans – the LPA is not privy to this information. Notwithstanding this, the proposal is considered adequate in terms of screening; and • The sewage and foul water drain from the four houses in the Orchards pass through the site; and a wayleave for the drain to continue should be a condition of any permission granted – this is a civil matter. 15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

CONCLUSION

Overall it is considered that the proposed development is appropriate for the site and its surroundings and would not have any detrimental impact on the established character or appearance of the conservation area. The proposed development would not result in any material harm to residential amenity or highway safety. As such there are no material considerations that suggest the proposed development should not be approved as it accords with the Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

2 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans drawing nos: 1264.1; 1264.3.A; 1264.S and RO/MH/1 received on 20 March 2015 and 1264.2 and 1264.3.B received on 5 May 2015.

2 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3 Condition No development shall commence on site until full details of the surface water drainage arrangements have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage details shall be constructed as approved before any part of the development hereby permitted is brought into use.

3 Reason To ensure that there is a satisfactory means of drainage in accordance with the NPPF.

This needs to be a pre-commencement condition as drainage is a fundamental issue that needs to be planned for and agreed at the start of the development.

4 Condition Prior to the occupation of any unit of the development hereby permitted, full details (in the form of scaled plans and / or written specifications) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to illustrate the following: -

i) Parking provision in accordance with adopted standard, and ii) Turning areas.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of any of the units hereby approved and shall be retained thereafter available for that specific use.

4 Reason To ensure the permanent availability of the parking / manoeuvring area, in the interests of highway safety.

5 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the Tree Survey that accompanied the application (dated 17 March 2015 and carried out by Mike Houldsworth).

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

5 Reason To ensure that existing trees and hedgerows are properly protected in accordance with the NPPF. This needs to be a pre-commencement condition given the potential for damage to protected trees during the construction phase.

6 Condition Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, a survey specifying the location and nature of asbestos containing materials and an action plan detailing treatment or safe removal and disposal of asbestos containing materials shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The details in the approved action plan shall be fully implemented and evidence shall be kept and made available for inspection at the local planning authority’s request.

6 Reason To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, and to ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of land after remediation.

7 Condition Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved evidence of the treatment or safe removal and disposal of the asbestos containing materials at a suitably licensed waste disposal site shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority.

7 Reason To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, and to ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of land after remediation.

8 Condition No development shall commence on any external surface of the development until a sample panel of the materials to be used for the external surfaces of the building(s) and/or extension(s) hereby permitted has been erected on the site for the inspection and written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The sample panel shall measure at least 1 metre x 1 metre using the proposed materials, mortar type, bond and pointing technique. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

8 Reason To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and grouping of materials in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.

9 Condition No development over or above foundations shall take place on site until full details of the window style, reveal, cill and header treatment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

9 Reason To ensure that the design and appearance of the development is appropriate in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.

15/00433/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

61 62 63 15/00266/CU

Annexe Town Hall The Green Hunstanton

1 Hall 11 15 17

LB 22.0m CLIFF TERRACE

rt 4 u 2 o o t 3 C 8 h

f 3 1 c f 6 e li 2 r C 1 to s o 7 u

t 0 El o l 1 h St Edmund's

5 1 2

C 1 C 8 o o t Sub 4 t 9 2 Church 7 Sta to 1 1 4 31.7m Tourist Information Golden Lion 2 Centre 32 Hotel Bank Northgate Precinct 20

14 17.1m Bank 2 4 a 8 26.8m 3 Works Bs Depot TC 0 3

4 8

24.4m 3

6 Cross 6 2 5

7 7

9 1 15.5m 2 5 H N 2 6 E I E Tamworth G Club 2 2 R S 1 H 2 3 4 G T 1 4 House a E 2 E S H 1 T D Le T M PO Strange R U E L N 2 Court E B 2 D T 'S T E 1 R 2 8 R

A 8 3 C t 3 E o 1

Scale: 1:1,250

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:1250

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 18/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Hunstanton

Proposal: Change of use from B1 to A1

Location: Annexe Town Hall The Green Hunstanton

Applicant: Mr Jack Schmollmann

Case No: 15/00266/CU (Change of Use Application)

Case Officer: Clare Harpham Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616318 23 April 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – The application is to be determined by the Planning Committee as the applicant is related to Councillor Richard Bird.

Case Summary

The application is for a change of use from a B1 use to A1 use (hairdresser) within the currently vacant Annexe building to Hunstanton Town Hall. The proposal seeks no external changes and is within Hunstanton Town Centre Zone where an A1 use is acceptable.

Key Issues

The Principle of the Change of Use Highways Issues Crime and Disorder Act 1998 Other material considerations

Recommendation

APPROVE

THE APPLICATION

The application site is located to the north-eastern side of the Town Hall and within the Town Centre and Conservation Area of Hunstanton. The Annexe, which is currently vacant, is a single storey flat-roofed building constructed of carrstone and accessed from the eastern side of the Town Hall and to the rear of the parking area.

There are no proposed external changes to the building; it is proposed to remove some walls within the inside of the building to open up the internal space.

The application seeks full planning permission for a change of use of the building to A1 use and will be utilised in this instance as a hairdressing/barber salon.

15/00266/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

SUPPORTING CASE

No supporting case received.

PLANNING HISTORY

Wider Town Hall complex

2/93/0772/LB: Application Permitted: 27/07/93 - Alterations to internal service areas conversion of foyer/ cloakroom areas and external window ramp and emergency exit with incidental demolition - Town Hall

2/94/1293/LB: Application Permitted: 21/11/94 - Provision of two signs and hanging sign - Town Hall

2/94/1292/A: Application Permitted: 25/11/94 - Provision of two signs and hanging sign - Town Hall

2/04/0219/LB: Application Permitted: 17/03/04 - Internal alterations to form lift shaft - Town Hall

2/93/0771/F: Application Permitted: 27/07/93 - Alterations to form multi-purpose hall with meeting/activity room and ancillary services conversion in part to Tourist Information Centre and provision of access ramp and emergency exit - Town Hall

2/99/1130/F: Application Permitted: 13/10/99 - Construction of lobby with disabled access - Town Hall

2/99/1129/LB: Application Permitted: 13/10/99 - Construction of lobby with disabled access - Town Hall

2/01/1991/LB: Application Permitted: 19/02/02 - Fenestration alterations and installation of floodlighting - Town Hall

2/97/0036/LB: Application Permitted: 26/02/97 - Infilling of lower section of low level windows on north- west elevation - Town Hall

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Town Council: Due to the close connection of the Town Hall and the application site the Town Council feels it should make no comment on this application.

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION it is within a Town Centre location in an area well controlled by comprehensive waiting restrictions, limited waiting bays and its proximity to public car parking. In relation to highway issues only this proposal will not affect current traffic patterns or the free flow of traffic.

Conservation Team: NO OBJECTION as there are no exterior changes proposed. Signage would need to be dealt with under a separate application.

15/00266/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

REPRESENTATIONS

No letters of representation received

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

National Planning Policy Framework – sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS01 - Spatial Strategy

CS02 - The Settlement Hierarchy

CS05 – Hunstanton

CS10 - The Economy

CS12 - Environmental Assets

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The application site is located within the Conservation Area of Hunstanton and the defined Town Centre. It is also immediately east of Hunstanton Town Hall which is a Grade II Listed Building.

The main issues to consider when determining this application are as follows:

• The Principle of the Change of Use • Highways Issues • Crime and Disorder Act 1998 • Other material considerations

15/00266/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The Principle of the Change of Use

Planning Policy seeks to promote competitive economic environments within Hunstanton town centre and support its viability and vitality including a range of uses which retains and strengthens the role of Hunstanton as a main town in the borough which is a service centre with supporting retail, culture and social infrastructure. This part of The Green is within Hunstanton Town Centre and the current use is B1 (vacant) at ground level (single storey). The proposed change of use to a hairdresser / barber shop (A1) is considered compatible with the existing uses within this town centre locality helping provide a diverse range of uses to meet the needs of different social groups.

There are no proposed external changes to the building and therefore the proposed change of use would have no material impact upon the heritage assets that are the Town Hall (a listed building) or the Hunstanton Conservation Area.

Highways Issues

There is no proposed parking for the retail unit however that is not required in this town centre location. There are no objections to the proposal from the Highways Officer. The town centre location is within an area which is well controlled by comprehensive waiting restrictions, limited waiting bays and is in close proximity to public car parking. The proposal would not affect current traffic patterns or the free flow of traffic.

Crime and Disorder Act 1998

No crime and disorder issues are raised by this application.

Other material considerations

There would be no impact upon residential amenity. The proposal is directly south of a retail unit and to the east of the town hall.

The application site is within Flood Zone 1 and therefore does not require a Flood Risk Assessment.

CONCLUSION

The proposed change of use to A1 and within the Town Centre of Hunstanton complies with the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies CS01, CS02, CS05, CS10 and CS12 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Core Strategy 2011, Policy 4/21 of the saved Local Plan Policies and Policy DM15 of the emerging Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Pre-Submission Document 2014. Consequently in light of National Guidance, Development Plan Policies and other material considerations it is recommended that Planning Permission be granted for the development as proposed.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

15/00266/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

2 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans ‘Location Plan’ and ‘Proposed Floor Plans’ both received by the Local Planning Authority on 26th February 2015.

2 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

15/00266/CU Planning Committee 1 June 2015

69 15/00445/F

Land North/North East of 19 Gaywood Road King's Lynn

y d 8 B d r a 9 r W Path e 3.7m v & i 7 R ED Allotment d Gardens o 1 o 3 w y a H G O 1 Telecommunication) FB 3 M 4 E L A 1 N 5 D R D 1

9 4.9m 1 8 E D AR 1 & CHDA S 5 W 5 LE TR 40 E a 35 E rd 7.3m 2 T B 3 1 E d 3 2 A 9 y S 24 To 2 T 2 G

w 1 A

n T K R

W E E 2 ec 1 3 T a S b T l r T l e 7 L R at E 1 E

a W i E o

T E n

L G

o L

u A D n N A d 1 O E R t 9 D r 1 u O o O 1 C W 4 s Y o e A t in 7 G 1 r 1 e th 3 a 1 K t S Tank T

( o c 4.6m o w

u n

s W

e a 1 4 o l El 1 l f Sub ) Sta 17 LB Alexandria 2 House Works 5.5m 6 ESS 11 TC SE ET S CLO TRE B DMAN T S DO OR EP rt PH Cou Playground ca 2 dic 1 Scale: 1:1,250

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:1250

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 20/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: King's Lynn

Proposal: Construction of 6 dwellings and associated groundworks incidental to the development Location: Land To the North And North East of 19 Gaywood Road King's Lynn Norfolk Applicant: Clients of David Taylor Associates

Case No: 15/00445/F (Full Application)

Case Officer: Mr C Fry Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616232 18 May 2015 Extension of Time Expiry Date: 8 June 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – The site has appeal history.

Case Summary

The site lies within an area designated as Built Environment Type D within King’s Lynn. The land is mainly tarmac/hard-standing sloping from north to south and previously contained garages for those living on Eastgate Street and Archdale Street. Access to the site is provided via Eastgate Street and Gaywood Road.

A recent application on the site for 7 dwellings was refused by the Planning Committee on 17th June 2014 and dismissed on appeal APP/V2635/A/14/2225873 on 18th December 2014.

This application seeks consent for the erection of 6 dwellings (3 pairs) on the site, and seeks to overcome the objections set out in the appeal decision.

Key Issues

Principle of Development & Planning History Form and Character Impact upon Neighbour Amenity Highway Safety Flood Risk Other Material Considerations

Recommendation

APPROVE

THE APPLICATION

The application site lies on the northern side of Gaywood Road, King's Lynn. The site is currently separated into two parts. The larger part of the site faces Eastgate Street, and is currently closed off by way of a Heras fence from Eastgate Street. Most of the larger part of

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

the site contains overgrown vegetation. The smaller part of the site is accessed from Gaywood Road to the eastern side of Adrian Lodge and is hard surfaced.

The land slopes from 4.19m (Aod) at the Gaywood Road end, to as low as 3.4m (AOD) in the northwest corner.

The northern part of the site once contained garages to some of the properties on Archdale Street and Eastgate Street, these were removed a number of years ago.

The site previously had the benefit of planning permission for 5- 1 bed flats and 5- 2 bed flats (05/02611/FM). The most recent application on the site was for 7 2 storey terraced dwellings refused by the Planning Committee on the grounds of form, character and the under provision of parking and dismissed on appeal by the Planning Inspector on the 18th December 2014. (A copy of the appeal is attached to their report)

This proposal seeks to overcome the issues raised by the Planning Inspector in dismissing the appeal by providing 6 semi-detached properties (3-pairs). The properties are laid out in a crescent shape with 1 parking space per property, 3 visitor spaces and 3 parking spaces for Adrian’s Lodge.

SUPPORTING CASE

A Planning Statement accompanies the application:-

• The proposal is to develop 6 houses on a brownfield site close to the town Centre. • The development sits within its own character however design reflects elements of scale and features found in the terraces on Eastgate Street and Archdale Street. • Permission was granted for a larger development of 10 dwellings in 2005 but this has expired. • 6 houses are semi-detached (3 pairs). • Density is lower than the very high density of adjacent streets. A tighter form of development could be expected in an edge of town centre site but efforts are made to allow for a development with higher garden and parking standards than are available to the adjacent terraces. • Off-street parking is provided whereas the surrounding houses have none other than on-street. In previous schemes a lower parking provision than now shown was acceptable to the County Council as Highways Authority. • The proposal is for 1 off-road parking space per dwelling (6) plus 3 visitor spaces. • Amenity issues were not an adverse issue for the Council in pervious schemes. Standards of privacy are now improved relative to earlier schemes, with larger gardens now proposed. • All refuse collection is to the front. • There were garages on the site up until 2004 these have been demolished. • The site has had benefit of a previous permission for 10 houses in policy circumstances that were little different to the present. • There are no significant or protected trees on this site, nor any heritage features. • The site access from Gaywood Road will be closed off to improve highway safety. • Vehicle access and parking would still be provided for staff occupants at Adrian Lodge. • The overall size of the site and its position provides an opportunity for an attractive development, and which makes the best use of previously developed land. • The proposal will provide starter homes for young families.

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

• Fenestration to living areas has been designed to minimise any impact on neighbouring properties. • Distances of between 11m-16m is achieved between new and existing dwellings.

PLANNING HISTORY

14/00309/F: Application Refused: 17/06/14 Appeal Dismissed 18/12/14; - Site development of 7 dwellings and associated landscape works

05/02611/FM: Application Permitted: 14/03/06 - Construction of 5 x 1 bedroom flats and 5 x 2 bedroom flats

04/01086/F: Application Refused: 05/10/04 Appeal Dismissed 04/05/05; - Construction of seven 2 bedroom houses and two 1 bedroom flats

04/00778/F: Application Withdrawn: 25/05/04 - Construction of 7 houses and 2 flats after demolition of garages

2/04/0356/O: Application Withdrawn: 04/05/04 - Site for construction of 29 one bedroom flats

2/98/0951/O: Application Refused: 16/02/99 - Site for residential development

2/96/0063/CU: Application Permitted: 27/03/96 - Conversion and extension of former public house to form residential care home for 14 persons (revised proposal)

2/93/1662/F: Application Permitted: 05/01/94 - Alterations to rear elevation

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

NCC Highway: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions

Water Level Management Alliance: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: NO OBJECTION subject to condition

Emergency Planning Officer: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions

Civic Society: OBJECTION modern terraced housing would be better which in turn would provide the opportunity of rear gardens that receive sunlight and a layout that will have less shading impact on the rear gardens of the existing dwellings on Archdale Street. The present layout will provide new residents with a small shaded rear garden whilst the south facing frontage is dominated by the awkwardly shaped proposed parking area. We would ask that a revised scheme be sought which develops and strengthens the existing character of this area and ensures more positive use of external spaces.

Environment Agency: NO OBJECTION subject to condition

Environmental Health and Housing – Community Safety Neighbourhood and Nuisance: NO OBJECTION

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

REPRESENTATIONS

37 signature petition against the application on the following grounds:-

• Overdevelopment of the site. Only one parking space per home and 2 visitor’s parking spaces. • Only 2 car parking spaces for Adrian Lodge but most days there are 8-9 cars parked • Congestion in the street from vehicles associated with the new buildings • Resident only parking will be required in Eastgate Street, Archdale street • Should only be 4 homes to give more parking to all • Building hours cannot start till 8am in the morning and finish at 5pm • No working after 12 am on Saturday • No working on the site on Sunday.

8 letters objecting to the application on the following issues

• Overshadowing issues • Intensification of parking on Eastgate Street • Not enough parking spaces • Noise and disturbance during construction • Overdevelopment of the site • Loss of parking spaces to Adrian’s Lodge • Fencing is not in keeping with boundary treatments in the locality. • Flooding issues • 4 houses would be more appropriate

1 letter received in regards to the amended plan

• 1 extra parking space is not enough • Still not adequate parking for Adrian’s lodge • Overbearing issues • Poor quality of homes • Better use of the land

1 letter in support of the application

• The proposed site is unsightly and requires development. As I understand it the site is unsightly and requires development. • 6 x 2 bedroom properties with adequate parking will have less of an impact on the locality and will also be in keeping with the surrounding properties.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS03 - King's Lynn Area

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS09 - Housing Distribution

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

DM17 - Parking Provision in New Development

DM2 – Development Boundaries

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The main planning considerations in regards to the application are:-

• Principle of Development & Planning History • Form and Character • Impact upon Neighbour Amenity • Highway Safety • Flood Risk • Drainage • Other Material Considerations

Principle of Development and Planning History

Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that at the "heart of the National Plan Planning Policy there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development and in relation to decision making this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan". There is also a presumption in favour of new housing development. The development plan also comprises of the Local Plan and the Local Development Framework Core Strategy which supports development on this site subject to satisfying other material conditions.

Whilst the principle of development is accepted on this site, the most recent application on this site for 7 - 2 storey terraced dwellings (14/00309/F) was refused by the Planning Committee on the following grounds:-

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

1. The proposal represents an over-development of the site illustrated by the fact that it would result in an under-provision of car parking and would not allow residents to access their back gardens other than directly through the dwelling. By virtue of a poorly considered layout and the number of units proposed for the site the proposal would therefore result in a cramped form of development that fails to provide sufficiently for the needs of future residents and is therefore contrary to Core Strategy CS03, CS08 and CS12 as well as to the provisions of the NPPF and NPPG.

2. The design and detailing of the proposed units does not adequately reflect the form and character of the surrounding area. Consequently, the development would appear unduly conspicuous and would have an adverse impact upon the character of the area. The development would neither promote nor reinforce local distinctiveness and fails to improve the quality of the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to Core Strategy CS03, CS08 and CS12 as well as to the provisions of the NPPF and NPPG.

An appeal was lodged against the Council’s refusal (APP/V2635/A/14/2225873) and was dismissed by the Inspector on poor design and layout issues.

This application seeks to address the Inspectors comments in dismissing the appeal to attain planning permission for the erection of 6 semi-detached dwellings and associated parking.

Form and Character

Third Parties and the Civic Society object to the proposal on form and character issues.

The area opposite and behind the site comprises of two storey terraced properties, Eastgate Street fronts the site whilst the Archdale Street houses have two storey gable end rear projections facing the site. The properties were constructed in the early C20th century and have small yards and gardens. Eastgate Street gently slopes away heading north as it leads into Archdale Street. Archdale Street has a curvature in the road. On the Corner of Eastgate Street and Archdale Street is Adrian's House, a two storey former public house, now a care home. Parking is on-street on both sides of the road.

The proposal is similar to the previous scheme in so far as seeking permission for 2 storey houses that face onto its own service courtyard/parking area. The Inspector did not criticise this layout, indeed the inspector commented in relation to this character of development as being "capable of creating its own character albeit taking clear reference from the neighbouring properties." The design of the proposed properties has taken references from the adjacent properties in so far as header and cill treatment detailing and the use of parapet roofs, as well as materials. This is considered to overcome the Council’s previous reason for refusal and by virtue of being able to create its own character, the semi-detached layout is acceptable.

The overlapping of private amenity spaces and the single storey side additions which were criticised by the Inspector have been removed from this proposal. Access to the rear amenity spaces is achieved from within the confines of the site and the private amenity spaces are also deeper than the previous scheme and are accessed from the front of the site itself as opposed to the alleyway beyond the rear boundary of the site.

Fencing is proposed along the footpath on Eastgate Street. The 1.8m high fencing is not considered to cause a detrimental impact upon the area.

The proposed form and character is therefore considered to be acceptable.

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Impact upon Neighbour Amenity

Third Party Representations are concerned about being overlooked, overshadowed and the housing being overbearing on their amenity spaces.

The proposed 6 dwellings are set further away from those on Archdale Street (approximately 1m) than previously proposed. The height of the dwellings, taking into account existing site levels being higher than Archdale Street (including the need to take into account the raising of the finished floor by 500mm) results in a ridge height of effectively 8.6m above the ground level. The separation distance between the properties (including the passage way that runs along the rear of the properties on the southern side of Archdale Street) means that the proposal is not going to cause detrimental overbearing, overlooking or overshadowing issues upon these neighbours.

It is therefore considered that in respect of the properties on Archdale Street the proposal does not cause any detrimental neighbour amenity issues that would warrant a refusal of the application.

At the closest point, the properties on Eastgate Street are 11m to the window serving the living room on Plot 1 and 12m from the two storey element (1m further away than previous). From that point the semi-detached properties move away from the properties on Eastgate Street. At this distance they are not considered to be detrimentally affected by the proposed properties.

The proposed dwellings, plots 5 and 6 are 0.8m closer to Adrian Lodge’s amenity space compared to the previous scheme which is used by the residents of the home. The amenity space is protected by 1.8m lap board fencing. This mitigates overlooking at ground floor and by virtue of being used as communal/shared amenity space and separated from the proposed properties by the access/roadway it is considered that on balance there is not a detrimental impact upon the residents of care home to a level that warrant an objection. It must also be noted that there is no direct window to window relationship between plots 5 and 6 and the care home.

Indeed, the Inspector did not consider there to be a detrimental effect upon neighbour amenity as a result of the erection of the proposed 7 dwelling scheme.

Third Party Representations are concerned about noise and disruption caused during the construction of the houses. Whilst the Environmental Health CSNN do not request a construction management plan in respect of this application, however it is considered that a condition be attached to any permission in relation to construction management, which protects the neighbours from noisy equipment, proposed timescales and hours of construction phase, given the proximity of neighbouring properties to the site would be reasonable.

Highway Safety

Third Party Representations consider that there should be only 4 houses on the site in order to accommodate more off-road parking for existing residents.

Whilst the loss of parking on the site has led to the parking of cars on street, the garages on the site were removed a long time ago and prior to the 2005 application, which offered no off-road parking for the nearby residents. It is not reasonable to request, especially considering the site's proximity to the town, the provision of off-road parking for the residents on Archdale Street on this development.

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Third Party representations are concerned that there is not enough parking on the site to serve Adrian’s Lodge and the 6 dwellings, and the ramifications of people parking on Eastgate Street and Archdale Street.

The previous scheme detailed 9 parking spaces for the 7 terraced houses (including two visitor spaces) and 3 for Adrian's House. The Council refused the previous application on grounds of under provision of parking. The highways officer is satisfied that there is enough parking on site to serve the properties and whilst a shortfall on-site parking for Adrian’s lodge, the officer would not object to the proposal on this basis because there is off street unrestricted parking available in the locality. Indeed the Inspectors concluded that because there were on-site spaces available during the during their morning visit of appeal site and their being other procedures to restrict parking and the site being close to the town centre, railway station and other facilities that the level of off-street parking with the previous scheme was acceptable.

This scheme still proposes 9 parking spaces but now for only 6 houses. 3 parking spaces will still be given over to Adrian's Lodge. This is a better situation than previously proposed. As Adrian’s Lodge is shown as blue land a condition can be attached to require that the 3 parking spaces are retained for use by that building.

The Gaywood Road access is to be closed off due to the inability to satisfy visibility splay requirements in the Manual for Streets in the non-trafficked direction by virtue of the railings that are at the back edge of the footpath on Dodmans Bridge. The access in question is not in the red-line area of the application but is blue land. A condition can therefore be attached to ensure that the access is closed off.

Flood Risk

Third Party representations are concerned about localised flooding.

The site lies within Flood Zone 1, the least restrictive flood zone. However, breach modelling of the area indicates that the site is susceptible to flooding of between 500mm-1m above ground level in the event of a breach of the flood defences. The Flood Risk Assessment and addendum highlights that finished floor levels will need to be 500mm above existing ground levels and flood resilient measures built into the design of the properties.

The Environment Agency have no objection to the scheme subject to conditions that floor levels are raised by 500mm and flood resilient measures are implemented.

The Emergency Planner requests that future occupiers of the dwellings sign up to the Environment Agency Flood line Warnings Direct (FWD) service – this can be an informative attached to the decision notice. The flood evacuation plan is not considered to be necessary or enforceable in terms of paragraph 005 of the National Planning Practice Guidance.

Drainage

The Environmental Health and Housing - CSNN team and Internal Drainage Board have no objection to proposed surface water drainage system which involves the use of Rainwater attenuation tanks and soakaways. The council has not received has not received localised surface water flooding issues. There is no further requirement to ensure that sustainable drainage systems for the management of run-off are put in place, unless demonstrated to be inappropriate, for schemes of this size.

Foul water will go to mains sewer. The Environment Agency has stated that Anglian Water Service ltd should consult by the Local Planning Authority and be requested to demonstrate 15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

that the sewerage and sewage disposal systems serving the development have sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional flows. Anglia Water has been consulted and their comments in regards to flow water drainage will be reported in late correspondence.

Other Material Considerations

The Inspector in dismissing the previous scheme commented that there was a lack of natural surveillance of the vehicles parking adjacent to the footway of Gaywood Road, but did not consider this such an issue so that the application would be refused. The proposal has nevertheless has addressed this issue by providing a window to plot 6 that overlooks this parking area.

CONCLUSION

This proposal seeks to redevelop a longstanding brownfield site close to the town centre. The most recent application on the site for 7 terrace dwellings was dismissed at appeal on the grounds that the layout advocated a poor design. The overlapping gardens and single storey side additions were criticised. The Inspector considered that neighbouring relationships and the level parking provision were acceptable

The proposed scheme is considered to have adequately addressed the Inspectors reasons for dismissing the previous appeal. There are no detrimental neighbour relationships that occur from the revised layout and parking provision is better than the previous scheme.

Therefore, subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal can be approved, and is in general compliance with the NPPF and LDF Core Strategy.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

2 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans;

• Drawing no. 1022-13-7 Rev E dated January 2014 received 23rd March 2015 • Drawing no. 1022-13-8 Rev E dated January 2014 received 23rd March 2015 • Drawing no. 1022-13-9 Rev D dated April 2014 received 19th May 2015.

2 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the vehicular access shall be provided and thereafter retained at the position shown on the approved plan 1022-13-9D in accordance with the highway specification drawing No: TRAD 1. Arrangement shall be made for surface water drainage to be intercepted and disposed of separately so that it does not discharge from or onto the highway carriageway.

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

3 Reason To ensure satisfactory access into the site and avoid carriage of extraneous material or surface water from or onto the highway.

4 Condition Vehicular, pedestrian and cyclist access to and egress from the adjoining highway shall be limited to the access (es) shown on drawing No 1022-13-9 rev D only. Any other access (es) or egresses shall be permanently closed, and the footway verge shall be reinstated in accordance with a detailed scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority concurrently with the bringing into use of the new access.

4 Reason In the interests of highway safety.

5 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted a visibility splay measuring 2.4 x 25 metres shall be provided to each side of the access where it meets the highway and such splays shall thereafter be maintained at all times free from any obstruction exceeding 0.3 metres above the level of the adjacent highway carriageway (existing telegraph pole excluded).

5 Reason In the interests of highway safety.

6 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the proposed access / on-site car parking/ turning area shall be laid out, demarcated, surfaced and drained in accordance with the approved plan and retained thereafter available for that specific use.

6 Reason To ensure the permanent availability of the parking / manoeuvring area, in the interests of highway safety.

7 Condition The development hereby permitted by this planning permission shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment produced by Engineering Support Practice Ltd and Addendum received 14th May 2015 and the following mitigation measures as detailed within the FRA:-

1. Finished floor levels are set no lower than 500mm above the existing ground levels. 2. Flood resilient construction methods are to be included within the design as detailed in site development 7 dwellings, Drawing no. 1022-13-7 Rev E dated January 2014.

7 Reason To reduce the risk of internal flooding to the proposed development and future occupants.

8 Condition The screen walls and fences shown on the approved plans shall be erected prior to the occupation of the dwelling to which they relate.

8 Reason In the interests of the residential amenities of the future occupants of the development in accordance with the NPPF.

9 Condition Prior to commencement of development a detailed construction management plan must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority; this must include proposed timescales and hours of construction phase. The scheme shall also specify the sound power levels of the equipment, their location, and proposed mitigation methods to protect residents from noise and dust. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

9 Reason To ensure that the amenities of future occupants are safeguarded in accordance with the NPPF.

10 Condition The bathroom windows detailed to be inserted at first floor in the rear elevation of the proposed properties hereby approved shall be fitted with obscure glazing and non-opening below 1.7m above the floor level of the bathroom to which they will be installed. The windows shall be retained thereafter in such condition.

10 Reason In order to protect neighbour amenity.

11 Condition Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby approved details of how the 3 parking spaces retained for use by Adrian’s Lodge on the approved plan are to be reserved for use by that building shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the agreed details prior to occupation of any of the dwellings hereby approved.

11 Reason To ensure the provision of adequate car parking in the interests of highway safety

15/00445/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 26 November 2014 by D J Barnes MBA BSc(Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Decision date: 18 December 2014

Appeal Ref: APP/V2635/A/14/2225873 Land North of 19 Gaywood Road, King’s Lynn, Norfolk PE30 1QT • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by David Taylor against the decision of the Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk. • The application Ref 14/00309/F, dated 1 March 2014, was refused by notice dated 17 June 2014. • The development proposed is 7 dwellings and associated landscape works.

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed.

Main Issue

2. It is considered that the main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

Reasons

3. The appeal site comprises an area of vacant land situated within a predominantly residential area of Victorian terraced dwellings. The development of this site for residential purposes would satisfy the principles of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) concerning the effective use of land, especially for housing purposes. Policy CS03 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (CS) encourages developments within the urban area of King’s Lynn that positively contribute to the regeneration of the town.

4. The Framework also states that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Previously the Council has granted planning permission for the erection of an apartment scheme (Ref 05/02611/FM) but the proposed development includes the erection of 7 terraced dwellings.

5. There is a difference of opinion between local residents and the appellant concerning the ability for future occupiers of the proposed development to use a footway to the rear of Archdale Street. The appellant claims that the footway would enable the future occupiers to access their rear gardens where the bin storage and cycle parking are proposed. Whether such a right of access exists

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate

Appeal Decision APP/V2635/A/14/2225873 82

is not a matter for me to determine as part of this appeal and I have considered the location of the bin and cycle storage areas based upon the scheme before me to assess.

6. The type of proposed dwellings would be similar to the surrounding 2-storey terraced properties, including those fronting Archdale Street and Eastgate Street. Reflecting the properties fronting Archdale Street, the proposed dwellings would form a crescent of terraced properties. The proposed dwellings would not face towards Eastgate Street but would front their own access road. For this reason the appeal scheme would be capable of creating its own character albeit taking clear references from the neighbouring properties.

7. Because the proposed development would not front the existing roads the differences in the fenestration and the proposed porches are not reasons for this appeal to fail, particularly because some of these features are associated with other near-by properties. I acknowledge the Council’s claims that the appeal scheme currently fails to replicate some of the detailed design features of the neighbouring properties, including the lack of a string course and omission of chimneys. However, as suggested by the Council, some design details and the choice of materials could be the subject of conditions.

8. Although the site would be capable of accommodating 7 dwellings, I share the Council’s concerns about the layout of the proposed development. The proposed private amenity spaces would be adequate in size but the overlapping nature of some of the gardens does not represent a high quality of design. Further, the single storey side additions do not reflect or reference the neighbouring properties and would fail to respect the character of the surrounding area. Accordingly, I agree with the Council that the layout of the appeal scheme would not be of a high quality of design and would result in the appearance of a cramped and contrived form of development contrary to the aims of CS Policies CS08 and CS12 concerning proposals needing to protect the special qualities of an area.

9. Off-street parking is proposed which would not achieve the provision of 2 spaces per 2-bedroom dwelling, plus appropriate visitor spaces, identified in the Norfolk County Council Parking Standards. However, these Standards are maxima and allow for reduction in parking provision where there is good access to jobs and services by means other than private cars. The appeal site is situated close to the town centre, railway station and other facilities and because of this good access the level of off-street parking proposed would be appropriate. This is similar to the assessment reached by my colleague when determining the appeal at 16-20 Gaywood Road.

10. However, I have sympathy with the Council’s concerns about the natural surveillance by the future residents of their vehicles parked in the proposed spaces located adjacent to the footway of Gaywood Road. I have noted the appellant’s comments about the location of other windows. The lack of natural surveillance of the spaces by the future occupiers of the proposed dwellings would not be a reason for this appeal to fail but it does add to my concerns about the quality of the scheme’s layout.

11. There are benefits associated with the re-use of vacant land within the urban area for residential proposals and some of the Council’s concerns could be

2 Appeal Decision APP/V2635/A/14/2225873 83

addressed by the imposition of suitable conditions. However, these benefits are substantially and demonstrably outweighed by the adverse harm caused by the layout of the appeal scheme not being a sufficiently high quality of design. Accordingly, it is concluded that the proposed development would cause adverse harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area and, as such, it would conflict with CS Policies CS08 and CS12. These policies are consistent with the Framework’s core principle of securing high quality design and permission being refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area.

Other Matters

12. Although the comments of local residents have been noted, the Council has not objected to the proposed development by reason of adverse harm being caused to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. Because of the character of the area and the relationship between the existing and the proposed dwellings layout there are no reasons for me to disagree with the Council’s assessment.

13. I have noted the comments of local residents about the level of on-street parking, including by users of the railway station, but there were spaces available during my morning site visit and, in any event, there are other procedures which could be adopted to restrict parking. Therefore, and taking into account my assessment of the number of off-street parking spaces proposed, the appeal scheme would not be detrimental to the safety of other highway users and the transport network in general.

14. However, these matters do not alter the main issue in this case and are not sufficient to outweigh the adverse harm which has been identified. Accordingly, and taking into account all other matters including the Framework's presumption in favour of sustainable development, it is concluded that this appeal should fail.

D J Barnes

INSPECTOR

3 84 15/00137/F

Oakley Nurseries Hall Road Outwell

D r a in in Dra

in ra D

D r a in

Dr ain D ra in

Drain Great Sandy Field

Drain

in a r D n C i E aPond a x r r l ce D i n

g l si

t B o rain D W o D r n u r H a e

H n o m l H l r u - o o l o V s e u u a i e y e s s m L H a 2.0mw e e B i o n South View n Sandy u g y Lodge ANE h w 'S L s o a RN e r y HO n FB NG s s LA L Drain in o a d Drain r g D 2.5m e in Drain a r D

Dr ain

Dr ain Tanholt T ra Allotment Gardens Drain ck

Scale: 1:5,000

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:5000

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 19/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Outwell

Proposal: Supply and install 2 x Victory 24-60 wind turbines (22m)

Location: Oakley House Nurseries Hall Road Outwell Wisbech

Applicant: Oakley Nurseries

Case No: 15/00137/F (Full Application)

Case Officer: Mr K Wilkinson Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616794 6 April 2015 Extension of Time Expiry Date: 5 June 2015

Reasons for Referral to Planning Committee – The views of the Parish Council are contrary to the Officer recommendation

Case Summary

The land is agricultural, under the ownership of Oakley House Nurseries, situated on the southern side of Hall Road, Outwell, in the Countryside, as designated in the Development Plan.

The application relates to the construction of an additional two x 3 bladed wind turbines on the land, each with an overall turbine tip height of 34m. Members may recall that two turbines of this size were granted permission under application ref: 14/00605/F. This application seeks to add two further turbines in a line to the east of those already approved with similar separation.

The National Planning Policy Framework 2012, the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Core Strategy 2011 plus the emerging policies contained in the Submitted Site Allocations & Development Management Policies Document are relevant to this application.

Key Issues

Principle of development Visual impact Ecology Heritage assets Amenity Highway safety Other material considerations

Recommendation:

APPROVE

15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

THE APPLICATION

The land is situated on the southern side of Hall Road, Outwell and accessed via existing farm tracks. The area is rural in nature, although there are dwellings located to the west of the site in Wisbech Road and north and north-west of the site along Hall Road.

There are two sites, both located on the northern side of an existing drain and to the east of the previously approved two turbines. The new turbines will be located approximately 110 metres apart and a distance of approximately 530m south of Hall Road and 650 metres east of A1101 Wisbech Road.

Planning consent is sought for the installation of two further wind turbines (Victory 24-60) – the first of the two previously approved has already been erected. The proposed turbines would have a tower height of 20 metres (hub 22 metres) and an overall height of 36 metres. Each turbine will have three blades and each blade will have a length of approx. 12 metres. The tower will be of galvanised steel with hub and blades coloured white.

SUPPORTING CASE

The application is supported by a Design and Access Statement, an Ecology Assessment and Noise Assessment.

The Design and Access Statement summarises that the foundations shall be installed to a design, which has been developed specifically for Victory 24-60 turbines. Unlike other wind turbines, the Victory product does not require an additional concrete pad to allow for erection.

Following the preparation of groundworks and foundations each turbine shall be erected in one working day (subject to site and weather conditions). There will be no disruption caused to occupants of any buildings or dwellings within the vicinity in terms of noise or traffic during the period of installation.

There are no public rights of way within the vicinity of the proposed site and access to the site will be via Beaupre Farm.

The proposed location of the turbines is approx. 330m to the nearest property which is not owned by the applicant, which is situated on Langhorns Lane. The turbines are installed more than 200m from the nearest neighbour so no shadow flicker should occur.

The technical drawings demonstrate that the scale, height and location of the proposed turbines will not pose significant harm to the open landscape.

There are not believed to be any known archaeological remains at the proposed location. In the event of future decommissioning of the turbines the foundations required for the Victory turbine require minimal disturbance of the ground beneath the tower.

No ancillary structures or buildings are required to house electrical equipment or controllers as these shall be housed in existing buildings.

The Noise Assessment concludes that noise emissions associated with the operation of the proposed wind turbines would operate within the target levels set using guidance in ETSU R97, provided that the source data does not vary significantly from that used in the assessment and that there is no tonality.

15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

An Ecology Assessment concludes that the proposal would have a low likelihood of collision for bats. The reasons for this are that the boundary feature is not likely to be well used by bats; and the turbine blades maintain a considerable minimum height from the ground (12 metres). This does not preclude the remote possibility of a collision occurring, but it could not reasonably be predicted. Minor negative impacts on populations of common bats are therefore extremely unlikely. In terms of avoidance there is at worst a minor negative impact predicted.

A number of common bird species will use the area around the turbines, including ground- nesting species such as skylark. There may be limited use by small numbers of wintering waders, although large numbers are unlikely due to reasons outlined above. The data search revealed two records of separate flocks of 50 whooper swan within 2 km of the site, although, as in the case of wintering waders, the presence of nearby settlements and farm units are thought likely to deter the swans from foraging close to the area of the turbines. Barn owls may occasionally forage and transit up and down the ditch lines.

The scale of the turbines (relatively small hazard area) and the rotor height suggests they will not be a collision hazard for barn owls. This species generally hunts low to the ground, and flying at height would be a rare event.

The unlikely event of a collision might result in an intermediate negative effect on the local population; however there is a possibility of displacement for all bird species, though there is now a body of evidence which suggests by and large farmland birds are little affected by displacement from wind turbines. At most, minor negative effects from displacement are predicted. In order to avoid any negative effects from construction, the breeding bird season should be avoided.

The site consists of the following items which will require power:

Large onion drying floor A grain drying store Controlled atmosphere store – 38 workers caravans Large fans 3 offices and 2 large workshops Potato store with 12kw drying fans 3 seeding machines

Also, along with the standard lighting for his buildings, there are floodlights for night time packing during busy periods. Our client is looking to turn his potato store into a large cold store as well as putting in a drying wall which would require a lot more power. He is also looking to future proof his business energy costs for the next 20 years.

PLANNING HISTORY

14/00045/F: Refused 4/03/14 following Planning Committee decision 3/03/14: Installation of 2 x EC55 (34m) wind turbines

14/00605/F: Approved 29.07.14: Installation of 2 x Victory 24-60 (20m tower) wind turbines

15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Parish Council: OBJECT- There is fear that this will become a wind farm in the centre of a built up community. The location seems to be too close to the residential area. A visual blot on the landscape.

Environmental Health & Housing - Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance: NO OBJECTION

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Protection: NO OBJECTION

Local Highway Authority (NCC): NO OBJECTION

Ministry of Defence: NO OBJECTION

Civil Aviation Authority: NO OBJECTION

National Air Traffic Service: NO OBJECTION

Natural England: NO OBJECTION to previous application

Norwich International Airport: NO OBJECTION

REPRESENTATIONS

ONE letter of OBJECTION received direct to this application raising the following concerns: I live in a house which is completely surrounded by land owned by Oakley House Nurseries. The greenhouses and offices of this business are next door to my property, separated by a hedge. The business has recently constructed one wind turbine, with a second under construction, less than two hundred metres from my property.

The reason given by the business for the construction of these two turbines was to reduce electricity costs to the business. It is only a small family agricultural business. There is no justification for constructing more wind turbines for such a small business, they would produce far more electricity than the business could possibly consume. The construction of two more turbines, the only purpose of which is to increase the business revenue through selling electricity back to the energy companies, is not acceptable to me. Private homes should not be in danger of being encircled, in close proximity to wind turbines.

TWO further adverse reactions to the pre-application consultation procedure.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

National Planning Policy Framework – sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

National Planning Practice Guidance - Provides National Planning Practice Guidance, in support of and in addition to the NPPF

15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS06 - Development in Rural Areas

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS11 - Transport

CS12 - Environmental Assets

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM20 - Renewable Energy

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

Key issues:

• Principle of Development; • Visual Impact; • Ecology; • Heritage Assets; • Amenity; • Highway Safety; and • Other Material Considerations.

Principle of development

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) encourages the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate through the use of renewable resources whilst ensuring any adverse impacts are addressed satisfactorily.

Paragraph 17,'meeting the challenge of climate change' supports the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and recognises the responsibility on communities to contribute to 'energy generation' from renewable or low carbon sources. Paragraph 93 refers to the need to support the 'delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure'. Local Planning Authorities are advised to approve applications for renewable technology (unless material considerations indicate otherwise) if its impact is acceptable. Paragraph 93 refers to the need to support the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure.

A positive stance with regards to renewable energy is also taken in the Core Strategy 2011 (Policy CS08 Sustainable Development) which supports and encourages the generation of energy from renewable sources and states that applications will be permitted unless there are unacceptable locational or other impacts that could not be outweighed by wider environmental, social, economic and other benefits. 15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

Furthermore recent National Guidance has been issued; 'Planning Practice Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy' (issued July 2013). This document identifies issues that should be considered when determining applications for wind turbines. This includes matters pertaining to noise, safety, electromagnetic transmissions, ecology, heritage, shadow flicker and reflected light. Advice is also given on how cumulative landscape and visual impacts should be assessed. Visual impact is covered in more detail below; in relation to cumulative impact, there are no other turbines in the immediate vicinity of the site.

The site is located within the countryside and approximately 7.5km away from any designated statutory site.

Policy DM20 – Renewable Energy - of the Pre-Submission Site Allocations & Development Management Policies Document also applies, and places emphasis on the significant loss of agricultural land. However the land-take of these turbines is relatively minimal and does not greatly affect agricultural production.

Visual impact

This application seeks permission for the construction of two wind turbines with a tip height of 34m.

The Council's Landscape Character Assessment (LCA) identifies this wider area as being within D5-Outwell. This document describes this area as:

"The sinuous, practically merged, villages of Outwell and Upwell, within a backdrop of arable farmland and plantations, dominate this very flat, low-lying landscape with its vast open skies. The small to medium, mainly regular fields are demarcated by dykes and ditches, which are often lined with reeds and rushes and other low vegetation...Both Outwell and Upwell encompass two roads on either side of a watercourse (the old course of the River Nene) with the buildings lining the roads. The presence of several small bridges giving access to the houses contributes to the unique, distinctive nature of the area. Settlement pattern further consists of several isolated farmsteads with associated farm buildings, dotted linearly along the rural roads... A strong sense of tranquillity is notable throughout the entire area, despite the presence of busy transport corridors such as the A1101 and the A1122. Views are generally open but the horizon is cluttered in places with a wide array of vertical elements such as buildings, mature trees, communication masts and overhead wires, rows of poplars and orchards. Structures and fences associated with horse and pony paddocks are also apparent landscape features. Fruit orchards are generally set back from the roads, channelling views and creating a sense of enclosure in places."

The visual impact of turbines in this area was assessed under the earlier application for two turbines.

The proposed turbines are once again 60kW wind turbines at 34m height to tip. In consideration of general appearance and siting, the turbines are of a relatively slim format, with the closest point of the new units to Hall Road being approximately 520 metres.

From the west the turbines would be seen behind the bungalows within Oak Drive further away from those already approved, but due to their height and the distance from Wisbech Road they would not dominate these bungalows.

In addition the turbines would be seen from various locations along Hall Road to the north, and due to the lack of field hedging immediately adjacent to the road, long views would be gained. It is however appreciated that there is a tree screen, further into the field, which will obscure the turbines in part. In the distance electricity pylons can be seen.

15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The turbines would also be seen from Langhorns Lane to the south, approx. 350m away at the nearest point, in a similar context as those views from the north/Hall Road.

There are existing vertical features within the vicinity of the proposal, trees, telegraph poles and pylons, and the introduction of further vertical features is not considered to detract from the open views of the fen landscape or create a cluttered skyline. The cumulative impact of effectively a row of 4 turbines would not detract from the appearance of this locality to a degree that would warrant refusal.

Ecology

A site specific Ecology report prepared by suitably qualified ecologists accompanies this application. This report states that the turbines are both within 10 metres of a seasonally wet ditch. The ditch is not considered to be a preferred route for bats to use, because of its inherent lack of shelter and invertebrate habitat. The semi-improved broad-leaf woodland area to the north, group of mature Oak trees to the west and tree lined garden wall and the ditch to the south with scattered bushes and trees are considered to be more favourable to bats. Taking into account the features of the site the report indicates that the likelihood of collision from bats is predicted to be low and accordingly minor negative impacts on populations of common bats are therefore extremely unlikely. In addition at worst minor negative impacts are predicated in terms of avoidance.

In relation to birds, it is stated that due to "the scale of the turbines and the rotor height suggest they will not be a collision hazard for barn owls. This species generally hunts low to the ground, and flying at height would be a rare event. The unlikely event of a collision might result in an intermediate negative effect on the local population; however, there is a possibility of displacement for all bird species, though there is now a body of evidence which suggests by and large farmland birds are little affected by displacement from wind turbines. At most, minor negative effects from displacement are predicted."

The report therefore suggests that mitigation is put in place; construction works should avoid the main bird breeding season; 1st March to 1st August, if however this cannot be avoided, the area affected should be inspected by a suitably qualified ecologist for ground nesting bird species. This could be secured by condition.

Heritage Assets

The site is not within a Conservation Area, nor is it adjacent to listed buildings. The nearest listed building is to the west of the site Beaupre Hall Farm, 98 Wisbech Road, which is Grade II listed. This dwelling is approximately 800 metres away from the site. The dwelling is two-storey with a Flemish gable to the road frontage. The dwelling and turbines would not be seen in conjunction with one another. To the south-west of the application site, over 1km from the site, is the Church of St. Clement (Grade I listed). Given the distance of separation and the intervening structures between the two sites they would not been seen together.

The proposed turbines are therefore not considered to harm the setting of these designated heritage assets.

Amenity

The Council's Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team (CSNN) have reviewed and assessed the information submitted with the application, and state:

15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

“Using the data provided within the report, it is predicted that the maximum noise likely at any of the noise sensitive receptors will be LA90 34dBa or less. Although a different calculation method was used in the previous application for two turbines, the report shows that noise levels will be similar to those previously predicted for two turbines and was approved and much closer receptors were assumed inaccurately. It is difficult to predict in reality how much noise will be apparent from the turbines but the report suggests that any disturbance would be unlikely and I therefore do not object to the proposal.”

An informative note is recommended to draw the applicants’ attention to the requirements of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

Highway Safety

Norfolk County Council Highways has reviewed the information accompanying this application and confirms that they have no objection to the proposal.

Other Material Considerations

There are no concerns relating to the relevant aviation authorities.

There are no issues relating to contaminated land or air quality.

The site is within flood zone 1, and therefore this application raises no flood risk issues.

There are no issues relative to 'crime and disorder'.

CONCLUSION

Renewable energy is generally supported in Planning Policy, subject to there being no significant adverse impacts upon issues such as air traffic control, ecological, visual and neighbour amenities. This proposal seeks permission for two wind turbines with a tip height of 34m, which takes the total approved up to 4, which will be seen as a row. Given the siting, height and design of the turbines, it is considered that the proposal would not create an adverse effect upon the landscape (including cumulative), highway safety, air traffic control, heritage assets, neighbour amenity or ecology. As such a recommendation of approval is made

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

2 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan, Block Plan and turbine elevation drawing.

2 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

3 Condition No construction works shall take place on site during the main bird breeding season 1st March to 1st August unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

3 Reason To protect breeding birds in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.

4 Condition Within 2 months of the cessation of electricity production from the turbines hereby approved, the units shall be decommissioned and the structures and all their above ground associated infrastructure shall be removed from the site.

4 Reason In the interests of the visual amenity of the locality in accordance with the NPPF.

15/00137/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

94 15/00237/F

The Compasses 16 Lynn Road Snettisham

4 9

3 6 4 7 15.4m 5

4 P 7 o a s ts

3 P e 1 Snettisham d 1 a The 1 rs 6 2 M 1 Courtyard Primary Scho e Surgery w s 6 1 9 Walnut 5 1 S 2 T Cottage CH COUR O 1 OUSE Grooms OL 4 MALTH RO 10 Cottage AD

4 14

5 PH

1 16

1 4 Clifto

5 C El Sub Sta HURCH ROAD

L 8 Lancaster A 1 N 4 C Cottages A

1 S T E 6 R P L

1 Seawind 2 8 8

0 Temperley 3 4 DA 4 0 W 4 ES 1 2 1 1 LA 5 3 NE 5 B

Scale: 1:1,250

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:1250

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 20/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Snettisham

Proposal: Change of use and extension to provide ground floor retail and first floor office space Location: The Compasses 16 Lynn Road Snettisham Norfolk

Applicant: Co-Operative Group Food Ltd

Case No: 15/00237/F (Full Application)

Case Officer: Mrs K Lawty Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616403 16 April 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – The application is referred given the scale of concerns raised.

Case Summary

The site comprises The Compasses Inn, a two storey and part single storey building with associated parking and private amenity land. The site has been unused for nearly five years but was last used as a public house.

The site is surrounded predominantly by residential development whilst to the North West is a commercial office property.

This application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of the building and extensions to provide ground floor retail and first floor office space.

The site is within the settlement of Snettisham, within the Built Environment Type C and within the Conservation Area.

Key Issues

Principle of development Loss of the public house Design issues and Impact upon the Conservation Area; Amenity issues; Highway issues; and Other material considerations.

Recommendation

APPROVE

THE APPLICATION

The site is surrounded predominantly by residential development whilst to the North West is a commercial office property.

This application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of the building and extensions to provide ground floor retail and first floor office space. The ground floor retail unit shows approximately 209 sqm gross internal sales floor area with 99 sqm storage. The lobby and first floor office use amounts to approximately 265 sqm.

The site is within the settlement of Snettisham, within the Built Environment Type C and within the Conservation Area.

SUPPORTING CASE

The application has been supported by a Design and Access Statement which refers:

This site is set within the Built Environment Type C and within the Conservation Area.

The site comprises of the former Compasses Inn (Public House). The property is a two storey and part single storey building with associated parking with rear private amenity space. The Public House has been unused for more than three years.

The Application site is located on the corner of Lynn Road and Church Road with access into the site via Lynn Road. The existing vehicular access is to be retained for the new / proposed use.

There will be 19 parking spaces in total, 4 for the exclusive use of the offices. Of the 15 for the retail unit (10 approved in last application) one will be a “family / toddler” space and another for Disabled use only. Storage and refuse will all be handled in the rear yard with pedestrian gates accessing the site.

The proposal is to extend the ground floor to allow for a single use as a retail unit with storage. The gross ground floor internal area is 310m² (including storage). The proposal also allows for an entrance and lobby at ground floor accessing the first floor offices. The lobby and first floor internal area is 265m².

The rear yard will serve as such for the proposed retail unit and also enable means of escape from the first floor offices via a flat roof area and stair to ground level.

The scale is governed by the existing 2 storey element. The 2 storey extension has lower eaves than the existing (front elevation) and with the existing parapet and chimney details being retained the “old and new” are able to join together well.

The proposed first floor windows would be in a style to match the existing, set lower due to the eaves level. The ground floor openings are a practical application, suited to the proposed use and typical of such retail proposals seen locally.

The front and side elevations will be constructed in materials to match existing. The necessary rebuild of the existing front elevation wall is in effect a sample of the finish that will be achieved.

To the rear the roof will be of a lean-to design. This will be separated into 2 parts by the proposed flat roof area to the offices and the means of escape. At this junction, glazed doors and lights (set back to the “original” line of the existing building allow for the emergency exit

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

and light into the office space. 2 large dormers are proposed with painted timber boarding to the sides and separating 2 sets of windows in each.

This allows for extended floor space and light and air to the office spaces. The dormers will have flat roofs falling back to the main roof. Again, materials to match existing with carstone, red brick and clay pantiles proposed.

The proposal is to reinstate all surfaces and boundary treatments as necessary. Simply, the tarmac to the front will be replaced with new and allowance is made for concrete pavers for pedestrian walkways, separating the vehicular parking and turning area from the building. The rear yard, reduced in size further to extension proposals, will have the concrete, slabs and public house garden area replaced with tarmac finish.

There is allowance for the gated entrance within the existing boundary wall.

There are no trees on the site.

PLANNING HISTORY

13/00712/CA: Application Permitted: 19/07/13 - Proposed alterations, extension and partial demolition of the existing building for change of use to: 2 No. 3 bedroom dwellings on two storeys, 3 No. 2 bedroom flats at first floor and 1 no. retail unit at ground floor

13/00711/F: Application Permitted: 19/07/13 - Proposed alterations, extension and partial demolition of the existing building for change of use to: 2 No: 3 x bedroom dwellings on two storeys; 3 No: 2 x bedroom flats at First Floor; and 1 No: Retail Unit at Ground Floor

11/01140/F: Application Withdrawn: 29/09/11 - Change of use of ground floor to retail and subdivision to 3No flats

11/01141/CA: Application Withdrawn: 29/09/11 - Conservation Area Consent - Demolition in connection with Change of use of ground floor to retail and subdivision to 3No

12/00017/CA: Application Permitted: 03/05/12 - Change of use from former public house to residential, retail and office

12/00016/CU: Application Permitted: 03/05/12 - Change of use from former public house to residential, retail and office

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Parish Council: NO OBJECTION – Council welcomed the nature of the application and look forward to the site finally being developed. The new supermarket is something which many in the Village will welcome.

However, they have reservations about the delivery situation. They are unclear on when/how deliveries are proposed, and are concerned that delivery lorries, being near an existing traffic bottleneck, will create problems if this is not carefully managed. Council particularly would like to stress its objection to overnight deliveries in a quiet semi-rural setting.

Given that NCC are proposing to place double yellow lines around the adjacent “chicane” in the Lynn Road, they suggest that in the event that work proceeds quickly if approved, that those lines are rushed through to tie in with this project.

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

The Parish Council note that the (Traffic Regulation Order) TRO has already been published and cannot now change on the basis of a possible development. The Parish Council therefore requests that, should the application be approved, a condition is made that the question of on-street parking in the vicinity is agreed with Highways and consultation with the Parish Council.

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION – conditionally and subject to amended plans re: parking allocation and surface water drainage

Environmental Health & Housing - CSNN: NO OBJECTION - conditionally

Conservation Area Advisory Panel: NO OBJECTION subject to amendments to design, fenestration, signage, demarcation of parking spaces and boundary treatment.

REPRESENTATIONS

A petition with 393 signatures has been submitted by the owner of Snettisham Village Stores objecting to the proposal for the following reasons:-

1. More traffic in the village with small roads 2. Very close to the school, not safe for the kids using the roads to school, dangerous parking and big vehicles and other villagers using the road frequently. 3. Parking (Insufficient parking – where will users of the site and neighbouring Hair86 park?) 4. Delivery Lorries to the Co-op will block the whole road for an hour. And it will create more problems for the village.

In addition 6 third party comments objecting to the scheme referring to the following:-

• Village Stores struggling to compete with other big shops in Dersingham and Heacham; this will kill my business straight away • My shop serves 400 elderly people who can’t leave their home by delivering daily newspapers to them. They would miss this service if I were to close • Support the proposal but concerned about impact of brightly lit plastic signage which would be inappropriate and create light pollution • Concern over deliveries in an articulated lorry • Lack of parking – only 19 spaces provided • The hairdressers next door will have nowhere to park • Would prefer housing on this site • Cars parked on road locally cause a problem now and will get worse • Should be restrictions on delivery vehicles • No green landscape within site • No need for another retail shop in the village as there are facilities in Heacham and Dersingham • Headlights from vehicles delivering at night and impact on residents • The existing road network cannot cope and this will make it worse • Need double yellow lines in the area

4 third party comments supporting the scheme received referring to the following:-

• A larger shop in the village is well overdue; many older people do not drive and younger ones cannot afford to so just for basic items you have to get a bus

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

• Many people have not signed the petition against the proposal as they would like a larger shop, but no petition has been undertaken in support. • The village could support a high quality food store and an independent newsagent.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS01 - Spatial Strategy

CS02 - The Settlement Hierarchy

CS06 - Development in Rural Areas

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS10 - The Economy

CS11 – Transport

CS12 - Environmental Assets

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development

DM10 – Retail Development Outside Town Centres

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

DM17 - Parking Provision in New Development

OTHER GUIDANCE

Snettisham Conservation Area Character Statement

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

100

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The key planning considerations relevant to the determination of this application are:

• Principle of development • Loss of the public house • Design issues and Impact upon the Conservation Area; • Amenity issues; • Impact upon trees within the site; and • Highway issues.

Principle of development

The site is located within Built Environment Type C as depicted on the Local Plan Proposals Map and also within the Conservation Area. The proposal would result in the loss of a public house but would provide additional retail and employment facilities.

Local Plan policy 4/21 states that in principle new development will be permitted provided it has regard for and is in harmony with the building characteristics of the locality.

The LDF Core Strategy identifies Snettisham as a Key Rural Service Centre where limited growth of a scale and nature appropriate to secure the sustainability of each settlement will be supported within the development limits.

Nationally, the NPPF seeks a high standard of design, and design that takes the opportunity to improve an area. Some of the key objectives referred to in the NPPF are for development which responds to their local context and creates or reinforces local distinctiveness, are visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping.

Government Guidance also seeks quality design in housing, and states that Local Planning Authorities should encourage applicants to bring forward sustainable and environmentally friendly development. It also states that design should be well integrated with, and complements neighbouring buildings and the local area more generally in terms of scale, density, layout and access. Design should promote local distinctiveness.

The NPPF states that new development should make a positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the historic environment and preserve the heritage assets of the Conservation Area.

Previously planning permission has been approved for the conversion of the building and extensions to it for mixed retail and residential uses (lpa ref: 12/00016/CU, 13/00711/F). These earlier schemes have not been implemented and this current proposal removes the residential use from the site, replacing it with a separate, independent office use.

In principle, the proposed use of the site for retail has previously been considered acceptable for this site. The current amended scheme, which sees an increase in employment space and the removal of residential use, accords with the provisions of national and local policy.

Loss of the Public House

National planning policy and guidance seek to provide sustainable development and keep villages as self-contained settlements, thus reducing the need to travel. The provision of local facilities such as public houses, shops and post offices are vital to sustain and

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

101

contribute towards meeting the needs of rural communities. The loss of such a facility which is of social value to a community is therefore a material planning consideration.

Furthermore rural settlements provide essential services and facilities to serve visitors to the borough as well as the local communities. Maintaining the vitality and viability of village centres such as Snettisham is therefore critical to the continued development of tourism in the rural areas.

One of the objectives of the NPPF is to promote the retention and development of local services and community facilities in villages (paragraph 28).

Snettisham is defined as a ‘Key Rural Service Centre’ in the emerging Core Strategy. This type of settlement helps to sustain the wider rural community. They provide a range of services that can meet basic day-to-day needs and a level of public transport that can enable access to and from the settlement. The supporting text to Policy CS02 of the emerging Core Strategy advises that the Borough Council will seek to maintain and enhance facilities to support this function.

Policies CS06 and CS10 of the emerging Core Strategy advise that within all centres and villages priority will be given to retaining local business sites unless it can be clearly demonstrated that continued use for employment (including tourism or leisure) of the site is economically unviable, or cannot overcome an overriding environmental objection, or a mixed use can continue to provide local employment opportunities and also meet other local needs.

In this case the proposal is for the loss of the public house, albeit one that has not been in operation since 2010, but it is to be replaced by a shop unit which will provide local employment as well as facilities for local people and visitors and an office unit which, again, will provide employment in the village.

The village also has two other public houses in the centre of the village so there will still be access to these for the residents. Whilst a change of use of the pub to Class A1 (retail) by itself would not normally require planning permission, the change of use to the office use (B1a) does require permission.

With this regard, therefore, there is no objection in principle to the loss of the public house or the change of use of the site to a mixed retail and office use given that facilities for the village will remain. In this respect the proposal accords with the national and local policies, specifically Policies CS06, CS08 and CS10 of the emerging Core Strategy as well as the provisions of the NPPF.

Design Issues and Impact upon the Conservation Area

The existing main building, although not listed, is of some age and the carstone detailing to the front of the building, which includes galleting, is of interest. The building, on this prominent corner position within the village, adds to the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area and is a heritage asset.

The NPPF advises that local planning authorities should require an applicant to provide a description of the significance of the heritage assets affected and the contribution of their setting to that significance. The level of detail should be proportionate to the importance of the heritage asset and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on the significance of the heritage asset. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets themselves should

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

102

have been assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary given the application’s impact.

Government guidance advises that in decision-making local planning authorities should seek to identify and assess the particular significance of any element of the historic environment that may be affected by the relevant proposal. In this case it is established that the main building and its principal elevation which is of particular significance and is an element which should be retained.

The NPPF advises that local planning authorities should take into account the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the historic environment.

A Design and Impact Assessment has been submitted with the application.

The proposal retains the historic frontage of the existing building and replaces the unsympathetic side extension with a two storey extension. This two storey extension reflects the building characteristics found along this part of Lynn Road. Simple, wider glazed areas have been introduced to the shop frontage at ground floor level to the front of the extension.

There is no objection to the loss of the existing extension and no overall objection to the replacement extension, subject to the use of high quality materials.

This amended application has been considered by the Conservation Area Advisory Panel. In summary the Panel supported the proposal; however, they made comments regarding the details of the scheme, including fenestration, the insertion of a chimney to the extension, signage and boundary treatment.

The applicant has considered these comments and plans have now been amended to reflect the key issues raised by the Conservation Area Advisory Panel. Some of the changes, including boundary treatment and details of the car park, can be covered by planning condition.

With regard to design issues the proposal as submitted is now considered acceptable with regard to the impact upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The scheme accords with the provisions of the NPPF and Core Strategy Policy CS12.

Amenity issues

Immediately to the north of the existing main public house building is an attached residential unit. The main windows to rooms within the property face west. Planning history reveals that this is an annexe to a larger property but it is used for residential accommodation. The proposed two storey extensions to the rear of the building are set off the boundary with this neighbouring property to the north. They do not project as far as the existing ground floor rear section and the roof is mono-pitched to reduce the mass.

Accordingly, it is not considered the height of the additional built form would be overbearing or cause significant overshadowing or loss of light for the occupants of this neighbouring property. There are no windows to the rear of this building.

The impact on other residential properties which adjoin the site has been considered. There will be first floor windows facing east but these face the garages of neighbouring properties and will not directly overlook the windows of adjoining properties. Other windows are separated from existing dwellings by the width of carriageways and do not directly overlook the windows of adjoining properties.

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

103

The rear extensions will cause some overshadowing to the north and east at certain times of the day, but this will be to a small area of garden land which is already partially overshadowed by existing boundary features and planting.

In summary, there will be no significantly detrimental impact upon the amenity of the occupants of neighbouring properties in terms of overlooking, being overshadowed or the extensions being over bearing, as a result of this proposal.

Highway Issues

Norfolk County Highways have been consulted with regard to this application. They have commented on the division of the parking spaces between the retail and office use and require details of the surface water drainage to prevent surface water flowing onto the public highway. This is recommended to be incorporated into a planning condition.

They raise no objection to this scheme subject to the imposition of appropriately worded conditions.

The parking facilities and main access to the site are to the front of the building and deliveries will be to the front of the site. Refuse storage is shown to the rear of the site and a pedestrian door is shown in the walling to the southern part of the site. This arrangement was approved under earlier planning permissions on the site for the mixed retail and residential schemes.

The Parish Council and third parties have reservations about deliveries to the site, and are concerned that this will create problems if not carefully managed. This concern relates to deliveries by articulated lorries in the village centre and the disruption this might cause to other road users. The type of delivery vehicles using the site cannot always be controlled by the occupant of the site. The Highways Authority raises no concern regarding the use of the site and deliveries to it.

The Parish Council and third parties have commented about the need for double yellow lines in this part of the village. Initially they requested that parking restrictions are introduced on this part of Lynn Road, but have since written in to confirm they are aware of the arrangements already in place for a double yellow line scheme to the north of the site and they acknowledge that it is too late to extend the area to incorporate the road network outside this application site.

Third party concern has been raised regarding a lack of parking on the site. However the site does provide adequate parking facilities for its own use and the Highways Authority has confirmed they are happy with the number of spaces able to be provided. The applicant cannot be expected to provide for visitors to adjoining commercial premises or residential units as a result of this development proposal.

The Parish Council also have concerns regarding overnight deliveries in a quiet semi-rural setting. It is possible to control this by planning condition and this is also a recommendation from the Environmental Health Officer.

Other matters

Crime and Disorder Act 1998

Section 17 of the above act requires Local Authorities to consider the implications for crime and disorder in the carrying out of their duties. The application will not have a material impact upon crime and disorder.

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

104

There are no flood risk issues.

The Environmental Health Officer (CSNN) raises no objection to the proposed scheme subject to conditions relating to hours of use, hours of deliveries, details of refrigeration and ventilation and a construction management plan. It is not considered that the application would result in such major construction works to warrant a construction management plan, but the other conditions recommended by the Environmental Health Officer are considered necessary and therefore are recommended to be imposed. With regards the hours of use, 0700 – 2300 is considered appropriate in balancing the needs of the business with the nearby residences. Although the CSNN team recommend 0800 – 2000 on Sundays, Bank and Public Holidays, this is considered to be overly cautious and restrictive.

The Parish Council welcomes the nature of the application and look forward to the site finally being developed. They comment that a new supermarket is something which many in the Village will welcome.

The owner of the Snettisham Village Store has raised concerns that this new retail unit will put him out of business with consequential repercussions for his customers, many of whom are elderly and rely on his newspaper delivery service. This concern is noted and understood. However, this concern relates to market forces and competition, which are not material planning considerations in this case, given the location of the proposal within the centre of the village. Further, the NPPF refers at paragraph 28 that to support a prosperous rural economy local planning authorities should support economic growth in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity by taking a positive approach to sustainable new development.

Third party concern about the signage for the businesses is noted. A use of this nature would have certain rights to erect certain signage through the Advertisement Regulations. Anything outside of the regulations will require advertisement consent in its own right.

Third party comment has been made that housing would be the preferred option for this site. However, this is not the proposal being considered through this planning application.

Third party comment has been made that there is no green landscape within the site. There were trees to the back of the site a few years ago but these have been removed with consent. However, there is no scope within the site for formal planting as it would cause issues with buildings or parking arrangements. It is a site within the Conservation Area however, and details of any boundary treatment will be required prior to its installation.

Third party comment has been made that there is no need for another retail shop in the village as there are facilities in Heacham and Dersingham. However, this is not a matter for consideration as part of this application. The local planning authority has an obligation to determine the application presented to it.

Third party concern has been made regarding headlights from vehicles delivering at night and the impact on neighbouring residents. However, the existing use of the site is a public house where activity occurred at night. It is not considered this will be worse than the current situation.

The third party comments which support the proposal are noted.

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

105

CONCLUSION

The proposed mixed use of retail and office units accords with national and local planning policy. The loss of the existing poor quality side extension to the building is supported and the replacement extension is considered appropriate, subject to the appropriate use of materials.

The integrity of the existing building is retained, and the proposed extension to the building is considered to preserve and enhance the character of the building and that of the wider Conservation Area.

The scheme is appropriate in terms of neighbour amenity and highway safety. There are no outstanding landscaping or flood risk issues.

In the light of National Guidance and local plan policy and other material considerations it is recommended that planning permission be granted for the development as proposed.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

2 Condition No development shall commence on any external surface of the development until a sample panel of the materials to be used for the external surfaces of the building(s) and/or extension(s) hereby permitted has been erected on the site for the inspection and written approval of the Local Planning Authority. The sample panel shall measure at least 1 metre x 1 metre using the proposed materials, mortar type, bond and pointing technique. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

2 Reason To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and grouping of materials in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.

3 Condition Prior to the first use or occupation of the development hereby approved, full details of hard landscape works shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include finished levels or contours, hard surface materials, refuse or other storage units, street furniture, structures and other minor artefacts.

3 Reason To ensure that the development is properly landscaped in the interests of the visual amenities of the locality in accordance with the NPPF and CS12.

4 Condition All hard landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation or use of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

106

4 Reason To ensure that the work is carried out within a reasonable period in accordance with the NPPF.

5 Condition No development over or above foundations shall take place on site until full details of the window style, reveal, cill and header treatment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

5 Reason To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and grouping of materials in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.

6 Condition Prior to the commencement of the development 1:20 drawings of the shop front shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

6 Reason To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and grouping of materials in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.

7 Condition Vehicular access to and egress from the adjoining highway shall be limited to the access onto the B1440 Lynn Road as shown on drawing No 20151/P11 E only. Any other access (es) or egresses shall be permanently closed, and the footway shall be reinstated in accordance with a detailed scheme to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority, concurrently with the bringing into use of the new access. Arrangement shall be made for surface water drainage to be intercepted and disposed of separately so that it does not discharge from or onto the highway carriageway.

7 Reason In the interests of highway safety.

8 Condition Notwithstanding the provision of Class A of Schedule 2, Part 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order revoking, amending or re-enacting that Order) no gates, bollard, chain or other means of obstruction shall be erected across the approved access unless details have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

8 Reason In the interests of highway safety.

9 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the residential units and prior to the commencement of the commercial use hereby permitted the proposed access / on-site parking / servicing / loading, unloading / turning / waiting area shall be laid out, demarcated, levelled, surfaced and drained in accordance with the approved plan and retained thereafter available for that specific use.

9 Reason To ensure the permanent availability of the parking / manoeuvring area, in the interests of highway safety.

10 Condition No development shall commence until full details of the foul and surface water drainage arrangements for the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage details shall be constructed as approved before any part of the development hereby permitted is brought into use.

10 Reason To ensure that there is a satisfactory means of drainage in accordance with the provisions of the NPPF.

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

107

11 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, a detailed outdoor lighting scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the type of lights, the orientation/angle of the luminaries, the spacing and height of the lighting columns, the extent/levels of illumination over the site and on adjacent land and the measures to contain light within the curtilage of the site. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with approved scheme and thereafter maintained and retained as agreed.

11 Reason In the interests of minimising light pollution and to safeguard the amenities of the locality in accordance with the provisions of the NPPF.

12 Condition The retail unit shall only be open between the hours of 07.00 to 23.00, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

12 Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may retain control over the development in the interests of the amenities of the locality in accordance with the provisions of the NPPF.

13 Condition No deliveries shall be taken at or despatched from the retail unit outside the hours of 08.00 to 18.00 on weekdays, 08.00 to 18.00 on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.

13 Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may retain control over the development in the interests of the amenities of the locality in accordance with the provisions of the NPPF.

14 Condition Prior to the installation of any refrigeration plant a detailed scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall specify the noise/power levels of the equipment and provide details of anti-vibration mounts. The scheme shall be implemented as approved and thereafter maintained as such.

14 Reason To ensure that the amenities of future occupants are safeguarded in accordance with the NPPF.

15 Condition The use hereby permitted shall not commence until a detailed scheme for all air ventilation systems has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall specify the noise/power levels of the equipment and provide details of anti-vibration mounts. The scheme shall be implemented as approved prior to the commencement of the use and thereafter maintained as such.

15 Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may retain control over the development in the interests of the amenities of the locality in accordance with the NPPF.

16 Condition The proposed development shall be carried out in complete accordance with the amended plan(s) received by the Local Planning Authority specifically drawing(s) referenced:

• Drawing No. 191-01, Existing Site & Location Plan • Drawing No. 191-06, Proposed and Existing Elevations and Proposed Site Plan • Drawing No. 191-04, Proposed Floor Plans • Drawing No. 191-05A, Proposed Elevations • Drawing No. 191-07, Proposed Elevation

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

108

16 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

15/00237/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

109 15/00455/F

20 Small Lode Upwell M U L B E R R Y 2 L 4 E1 6 A 10

4 12a 2 Lode Cottage

1 0 1 1 1 7 A 6 2

8 2

3.7m R A N 6 S O 2 MC 3 25 1 EL The O'S S Barn E 7 5 1 3 15 Low Side Lodge 7 3 3.4m 44 9 3 PO 3 20 5 3 6 4 2 GP 4 4 Walnut Lodge 5 9 3.9m 4 4 41 8 74 4 0 5 T 1 E 6 5 E 3 40 63 R 53 NT WS TO St Peter's 56 Church 46 58 12 14 TCB B Church Bridge 1 4.1m F 1 iv 2 e 5 (P B Tower 6 6 H e 4 ) l 0 ls 1 4 Tower a 9 3 6 Hall Health Centre 3.5m 5 Upwell

Scale: 1:2,500

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments Not Set

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 18/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Upwell

Proposal: Alterations to garage to form study

Location: 20 Small Lode Upwell Wisbech Norfolk

Applicant: Mr And Mrs David Pope

Case No: 15/00455/F (Full Application)

Case Officer: Mr M Broughton Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616418 18 May 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – Referred to the Planning Committee for determination, as one of the applicants is a Borough Councillor.

Case Summary

The land is situated on the south side of Small Lode, Upwell, approximately 190m north-east of the Church Bridge / St Peters Road / New Road junction and in the Conservation Area.

The application seeks to convert the garage / utility element of a detached double garage to form a study / utility combination, whilst retaining the other garage unit.

The National Planning Policy Framework 2012, the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Core Strategy 2011, the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan 1998 and the emerging King’s Lynn and West Norfolk ‘Development Management Policies’ 2014 are relevant to this application

Key Issues

Development in the Conservation Area / Permitted Development Other considerations

Recommendation:

APPROVE

THE APPLICATION

The land is situated on Small Lode, Upwell, 190m north-east of Church Bridge and in the Conservation Area. This is a triangular shaped plot, central to the village and the setting of St Peter’s Church (Grade 11 Listed - south-west).

Set back on the south side of an ‘L’ shaped bend in Small Lode, with the Churchyard wall on the south-west boundary, the site comprises a detached bungalow, with a detached double garage adjacent to the north-east elevation of the dwelling.

15/00455/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

111

There is adequate parking on-site with various forms of hedge / low trees providing screening and enclosing the garden, in well landscaped grounds. There are also mature shrubs planted on the ‘open land’ fronting the dwelling. There are two bungalows opposite (north) and another to the east with the Well Creek bordering Small Lode (north-west).

The application seeks to convert one garage to form a study / utility facility, whilst retaining the other garage in its current format. The development requires the removal of the existing garage door and insertion of a window and door, styled to match the bungalow and serve the future study, with bricking-up as required to match that existing

SUPPORTING CASE

A brief design and access statement submitted by the Agent supports the application, with detail not dissimilar to that above.

PLANNING HISTORY

None recent

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

Parish Council: SUPPORT

Landscape/Tree Officer: NO OBJECTION

Conservation Officer: NO OBJECTION

REPRESENTATIONS

None

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

National Planning Policy Framework – sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS08 - Sustainable Development

15/00455/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

112

CS11 - Transport

CS12 - Environmental Assets

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

OTHER GUIDANCE

Upwell Parish Plans

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

Key Issues:

• Development in the Conservation Area / Permitted Development • Other considerations

Development in the Conservation Area / Permitted Development

The land is within the built-up area of the village, designated a Conservation Area and identified as ‘Article 2(3) Land’ in The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, Schedule 1, Part 1.

The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, Schedule 2, Part 1, Class E identifies, as permitted development, the provision within the curtilage of a dwelling of: ‘any building required for a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling or the maintenance, improvement or other alteration of such building’.

The proposal identifies works which often fall within the remit of ‘permitted development’.

However, taking into account the designation of the land and the relationship between the dwelling, the building and the boundary of the site, the requirement for this application is borne out by Class E3 of the aforementioned Order which identifies:

‘In the case of any land within the curtilage of the dwelling which is classified as ‘article 2(3) land’, development is not permitted by Class E if any part of the building is situated on land forming a side elevation of the dwelling and the boundary of the curtilage of the dwelling’.

Notwithstanding mixed development in the locality, the site is a well landscaped, relatively tranquil spot on Small Lode, within the setting of St Peter’s Church and the course of Well Creek.

The works to convert one garage to form a study / utility room are considered minimalistic. The development is of an acceptable design, in harmony with that existing and will create negligible impact, in terms of visual amenity, on the setting of the Church, the Conservation Area or the neighbours.

15/00455/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

113

Other considerations

There are no known crime related issues affecting this proposal and no other relevant material considerations.

CONCLUSION

In terms of scale and design, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework 2012, Policies CS08 and CS12 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Core Strategy 2011, Policy 4/21 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan 1998 and Policy DM15 of the emerging King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Development Management Polices 2014, the proposed alterations to the building are considered to be appropriate to that existing, without adversely impacting on the Conservation Area or neighbouring amenity

In the light of National Guidance, Development Plan Policies and other material considerations it is recommended that this application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004.

2 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan:

• Block plan, elevations and layout – drawing 15/3/1917/1 – receipt dated 23/03/15

2 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

15/00455/F Planning Committee 1 June 2015

114 15/00150/RM

Church Meadow Farm (Plot 1) 9 Lynn Road Wiggenhall St Mary Magdalen

r n Drai D

ck ra ain T Dr

St Mary Magdalen's Church a 1 11 Vicarage 2.7m 6 War 6 Memorial 3 32 4 17 AD 4 11 RO 3 RCH 28 CHU

3 6 1 1 Ouse House TCB 2.1m 2 Shrub 1 Cottage

1 3 Orchardlee 3 Riverbank House Stow House b

2 25 3 15 2 37 3b 1 2 1 3a Hall 7 2 ck Tra 21 E Becketts Autumn Cottage9 S LO Cottages C r H Rivendell e 1 RC 3 t U a 1 H Arlington 5 C W Kontiki h

g d rn i 2 e e u F g H a tt M o n C e Y a E s L e S 1 L u A ) 1 T 9 S M 8 T O O E m PH t W O u R ( a P Riverside e R 2 h r 1 Lodge t O G a A r P D e v Scale: 1:2,500 i R

Organisation BCKLWN Department Department Comments 1:1250

Tel. 01553 616200 - Fax. 01553 691663 Date 19/05/2015 MSA Number 0100024314

Parish: Wiggenhall St Mary Magdalen

Proposal: Reserved Matters Application for construction of residential dwelling Location: Church Meadow Farm (Plot 1) 9 Lynn Road Wiggenhall St Mary Magdalen King's Lynn Applicant: Mr Andrew Wright

Case No: 15/00150/RM (Reserved Matters Application)

Case Officer: Mr K Wilkinson Date for Determination: Tel: 01553 616794 1 May 2015

Reason for Referral to Planning Committee – The Parish Council’s views are contrary to the Officer‘s recommendation

Case Summary

The site is the southern-most of two plots of land situated on either side of Church Meadow Farmhouse to the western side of Lynn Road, Wiggenhall St Mary Magdalen. It lies approximately 70m north of the Church Road junction in an area designated as Built Environment Type D on the Local Plan map for this ‘rural village’.

Outline permission was granted on appeal under ref: 12/01792/EXO on 30 October 2013, with access considered at that stage. Reserved matters were approved for a detached house with integral garage under application ref: 13/00106/RM in March 2013, but this was not implemented.

This application seeks further reserved matters approval for the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of a new house with a detached double garage (containing roof storage) to the front.

Key Issues

Principle of development Impact upon character and appearance of this locality Impact upon adjoining properties Highway implications Crime and disorder

Recommendation:

APPROVE

THE APPLICATION

The site is the southern-most of two plots of land situated on either side of Church Meadow Farmhouse to the western side of Lynn Road, Wiggenhall St Mary Magdalen.

15/00150/RM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

116

It lies approximately 70m north of the Church Road junction in an area designated as Built Environment Type D on the Local Plan map for this ‘rural village’.

This application seeks further reserved matters approval for the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of a new house with a detached double garage (containing roof storage) to the front.

SUPPORTING CASE

This is a reserved matters application which does not require a Design & Access Statement.

PLANNING HISTORY (Relevant)

13/00106/RM: Application Permitted: 28/03/13 - Reserved Matters Application: Site development, house plans and elevations, highways requirement

12/01792/EXO: Application Refused: 14/03/13 - Extension of time for the implementation of planning permission reference: 09/02093/O: Construction of 2 residential dwellings – Allowed on appeal 30.10.2013

09/02093/O: Approved 1/2/10: Construction of 2 dwellings

CONSULTATIONS

Parish Council: OBJECTION – it was considered that it did not fit in with the characteristics of neighbouring properties in particular the row of bungalows opposite.

Local Highway Authority (NCC): NO OBJECTION subject to condition

REPRESENTATIONS

None received

NATIONAL GUIDANCE

National Planning Policy Framework – sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.

National Planning Practice Guidance - Provides National Planning Practice Guidance, in support of and in addition to the NPPF

15/00150/RM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

117

PLANNING POLICIES

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies that are relevant to the proposal:

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the locality.

LDF CORE STRATEGY POLICIES

CS02 - The Settlement Hierarchy

CS06 - Development in Rural Areas

CS08 - Sustainable Development

CS11 - Transport

SITE ALLOCATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES PRE- SUBMISSION DOCUMENT

DM15 – Environment, Design and Amenity

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The key considerations in assessing this application are as follows:

• Principle of development • Impact upon character and appearance of this locality • Impact upon adjoining properties • Highway implications • Crime and disorder

Principle of the development

This was previously established by outline planning permission granted under ref: 09/02093/O in February 2010. A recent application to extend this outline permission (ref: 12/01792/EXO) was refused on the basis of Core Strategy policy CS10 with regards to retention of employment land in villages. This was appealed and allowed by the Planning Inspectorate in October 2013 – a copy is attached to this report for reference. The principle of the development of a house on this site has therefore already been established.

The matters for consideration with this current application are appearance, scale, layout and landscaping and must be considered against the appearance and character of this locality, plus impact upon adjoining properties. Saved Local Plan Policy 4/21 and Core Strategy Policies CS06 & CS08 apply, along with Policy DM15 of the Pre-Submission Site Allocations & Development Plan Policies Document (SA&DMPD).

15/00150/RM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

118

Impact upon appearance and character

The overall site contains a two storey detached dwelling of traditional Victorian farmhouse proportions, sited central to the site and orientated with gable end towards the road. This lies to the immediate north of the application plot.

To the south there is a contemporary two storey house (Sunset Meadow) sited well back from the road in substantial grounds. On the opposite/eastern side of the road are a row of bungalows, leading north from the Church Road junction, with a two storey detached Listed Building (‘Priory Farm’) set well back from the road.

There is therefore a mix of dwelling types and styles in this locality. Previous reserved matters were approved under application ref: 13/00106/RM for a detached 4 bedroomed house with integral double garage on this plot.

The design of the dwelling is greatly influenced by the flood risk implications (site within Flood Zone 3 & Hazard Zone of the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment) in that the finished floor level needs to be 1.3m above existing ground level and there is to be no sleeping accommodation at ‘ground floor’ level.

The house is sited approx. 18m back from the road roughly centrally on the plot, with a detached double garage and store to the front but some 7m back from the road and positioned close to the southern boundary. The access is located in the position agreed at the outline stage with parking and turning space afforded in front of the house.

Given the variety of styles and positions of dwellings relative to the road, this configuration is considered to respect the form and character of this locality and it broadly accords with the indicative plans submitted with the outline application.

With regards to the appearance of the buildings, the house has traditional proportions albeit elevated from ground level, with symmetrical window placement punctuated with an oak framed projecting porch. To the rear elevation there is a raised patio area plus an oak framed balcony at first floor level. The implications of these features will be addressed below in terms of impact on neighbours.

The palette of materials chosen (red facing bricks and pantiled roofs) is considered to be compatible to this vicinity.

The landscaping indicates retention of two trees within the site, a new hedgerow to the frontage and shrubs around the parking and turning area. The remainder of the site is to be lawned. From the public areas this is considered to be acceptable.

Generally the proposal has regards to, and would be in harmony with, the building characteristics of this locality. The scheme therefore is considered to accord with the provisions of the NPPF, saved Local Plan Policy 4/21 and Core Strategy policies CS06 & CS08 of the LDF.

Impact upon adjoining properties

As stated above, the Victorian farmhouse is to be retained. The relationship between the existing house and that proposed is considered to be acceptable, given that this is the donor property and the layout generally accords with that indicated in the outline permission.

15/00150/RM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

119

The raised patio and balcony create a potentially awkward relationship in terms of overlooking given the difference in levels. This has however been negated by the inclusion within the design of obscure glazed panels along the northern-most sides of these features. The implementation and maintenance of this screening may be controlled via condition. The introduction of suitably high common boundary fencing (condition 15 attached to outline permission) could also assist with this relationship.

With regards to the relationship with the house to the south (Sunset Meadow), this is considered to be acceptable given the separation distances involved.

Other material considerations

There are no significant crime and disorder issues raised by this proposal.

The accesses and turning facilities plus visibility splay and off-site works are covered via conditions attached to the outline consent; the conditions currently requested by County Highways are therefore already covered.

All other matters are controlled via conditions attached to the outline consent granted on appeal.

CONCLUSION

This application seeks reserved matters approval for the appearance, scale, layout and landscaping of a detached house and garage; the principle of development having been established by outline permission granted in October 2013 under ref: 12/01792/EXO. Even though the dwelling would be elevated, the appearance, scale and positioning of the house and garage are compatible to those that exist in this street scene, and the landscaping is appropriate to the locality. The proposal therefore accords with national policy contained in the National Planning Policy Framework, plus saved Policy 4/21 of the Local Plan, and Core Strategy Policies CS06 & CS08 of the Local Development Framework plus Policy DM15 of the SA&DMPD.

The application is therefore recommended for approval subject to certain additional conditions identified below. The majority of principle issues are already covered by the outline approval.

RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s):

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 14-P56-PL002G & 14-P56-PL003K.

1 Reason For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, the proposed access, on-site car parking and turning areas shall be laid out, levelled, surfaced and drained in accordance with the approved plan and retained thereafter available for that specific use.

2 Reason To ensure the permanent availability of the parking / manoeuvring area, in the interests of highway safety.

15/00150/RM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

120

3 Condition Prior to occupation of the dwelling hereby approved, the obscure glazing to the northern sides of both the raised patio area and first floor balcony shall be installed as per the approved plans and maintained in that condition thereafter.

3 Reason In the interests of the amenities of the adjoining residents to the immediate north of the site and to accord with the requirements of the NPPF, Core Strategy Policy CS08 of the LDF and Policy DM15 of the SA&DMPD.

4 Condition The garage and store shall only be used for purposes incidental to the needs and personal enjoyment of the occupants of the dwelling and shall at no time be used for business or commercial purposes.

4 Reason In the interests of the amenities of the adjoining residents to the immediate north of the site and to accord with the requirements of the NPPF, Core Strategy Policy CS08 of the LDF and Policy DM15 of the SA&DMPD.

15/00150/RM Planning Committee 1 June 2015

121 122 123 124 125 126 127 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9 PLANNING COMMITTEE – 1 JUNE 2015

APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

PURPOSE OF REPORT

(1) To inform Members of the number of decisions issued between the production of the April Planning Committee Agenda and the June agenda. 124 decisions issued, 116 decisions issued under delegated powers with 8 decided by the Planning Committee.

(2) To inform Members of those applications which have been determined under the officer delegation scheme since your last meeting. These decisions are made in accordance with the Authority’s powers contained in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and have no financial implications.

(3) This report does not include the following applications – Prior Notifications, Discharge of Conditions, Pre Applications, County Matters, TPO and Works to Trees in a Conservation Area

(4) Majors are assessed against a national target of 40% determined in time. Failure to meet this target could result in the application being dealt with by PINS, who would also receive any associated planning fee.

RECOMMENDATION

That the reports be noted.

Number of decisions issued from 16 April 2015 – 15 May 2015

Total Approved Refused Under 8 Under 13 Performance Former Current Planning Committee weeks or weeks or % National National decision within agreed within agreed target % target % ext of time ext of time (Minor/Other) (Major) Approved Refused

Major 2 2 0 1 50% 60 40 2 0

Minor 55 45 10 50 91% 65 1 4

Other 67 63 4 61 91% 80 0 1

Total 124 110 14

Planning Committee made 8 of the 116 decisions, 7%

128

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 1 JUNE 2015

APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

PURPOSE OF REPORT

To inform Members of those applications which have been determined under the officer delegation scheme since your last meeting. These decisions are made in accordance with the Authority’s powers contained in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and have no financial implications.

RECOMMENDATION

That the report be noted.

DETAILS OF DECISIONS

DATE DATE REF NUMBER APPLICANT PARISH/AREA RECEIVED DETERMINED/ PROPOSED DEV DECISION

14.01.2015 24.04.2015 15/00054/F Mr Terry Hayward Bircham Application 8 Lynn Road Great Bircham King's Permitted Lynn Norfolk Change of use of land from dog kennel business to the rebuilding of 4x4 vehicles including the construction of steel portal frame structure and new access to and from Lynn Road 129

13.02.2015 17.04.2015 15/00232/F Miss Abigail Taylor Bircham Application 15 Windmill Hill Great Bircham Permitted Norfolk PE31 6SW Orangery to side and rear (retrospective) 09.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00364/F C I T B Construction Industry Bircham Application Training Centre Permitted C I T B Construction Industry Training Centre Stanhoe Road Bircham Newton Norfolk Erection of two new cranes and retrospective application for two existing cranes 07.02.2014 22.04.2015 14/00192/F Wood Cottages Ltd Brancaster Application The Old Orchard Main Road Permitted Brancaster Staithe Norfolk Variation of condition 2 of planning permission 12/00099/F: Replacment of previously approved drawings to amend design 23.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00285/F Jo And Tim Kisiel Brancaster Application The Well House Main Road Permitted Brancaster King's Lynn New extension to dwelling and cladding to southern elevation 27.02.2015 11.05.2015 15/00316/F Mr Simon Brewer Brancaster Application Postings Barn Main Road Permitted Brancaster Staithe King's Lynn Single storey extensions to dwelling and addition of dormer and roof lights 130

16.02.2015 11.05.2015 15/00241/F Burnham Motors Garage Ltd Burnham Market Application A B Mason Creake Road Burnham Permitted Market Norfolk Siting of storage containers at back of Station Garage 18.02.2015 16.04.2015 15/00260/F Mr F Chapman Burnham Market Application National Westminster Bank P L C Permitted North Street Burnham Market King's Lynn Removal of rear lower roof and alter and extend structure at rear modifying internal doorway openings. Change of use of whole building from A2 to A3 restaurant use 17.03.2015 12.05.2015 15/00410/F Mr Daniel Grocott Burnham Market Application The Old Police House Creake Permitted Road Burnham Market Norfolk Proposed alterations with balcony and new brick boundary wall 131

09.04.2015 07.05.2015 13/01810/NMAM_1 Fleur Hill BM Llp Burnham Market Application Land At Foundry Field Burnham Permitted Market Norfolk PE31 8HG NON-MATERIAL AMENDMENT TO PLANNING CONSENT 13/01810/NMAM_1: Construction of 32 new dwellings, the provision of a public car park (186 spaces), retail units (Class A1, A2 or A3), public toilets and public open space and proposed Pedestrian Works and the demolition of the former day care centre and replacement with dwelling (previously approved under planning reference 10/01582/F) 20.01.2015 06.05.2015 15/00079/CU Mr Philip Brown Burnham Overy Application Westering Tower Road Burnham Permitted Overy Staithe King's Lynn Change of use for strip of agricultural farmland to domestic garden 16.02.2015 01.05.2015 15/00245/F Mr David Morris Castle Acre Application Cuckstool Cottage Cuckstool Lane Permitted Castle Acre Norfolk Single storey extension to existing cottage to give shower room and study 02.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00329/F Dr & Mrs A Jennings Castle Acre Application Gresham House Town Lane Permitted Castle Acre King's Lynn Garden store extension 132

23.03.2015 13.05.2015 15/00450/F Mr And Mrs P Grange Castle Acre Application Sandals 9 Back Lane Castle Acre Permitted King's Lynn Rear/side extensions and alterations 24.03.2015 13.05.2015 15/00459/F Mr S Holt Castle Acre Application 31 Town Lane Castle Acre King's Permitted Lynn Norfolk Replace existing shed with garden room 05.03.2015 30.04.2015 15/00350/F Ms L Millington Clenchwarton Application 11 Coronation Road Clenchwarton Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk Proposed alterations and extension 12.03.2015 30.04.2015 15/00382/F Elgood & Sons Ltd Clenchwarton Application The Victory Inn 243 - 245 Main Permitted Road Clenchwarton King's Lynn Extension to front to form new porch 27.02.2015 24.04.2015 15/00313/F Mrs L Drewery Dersingham Application 2 West Hall Road Dersingham Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk New dwelling to plot 1 proposed garden room to rear and the erection of a shed 27.02.2015 05.05.2015 15/00320/F Mr Mick Stringer Dersingham Application 12 Hawthorn Drive Dersingham Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk Construction of single storey extension to front of existing bungalow 133

13.03.2015 12.05.2015 15/00390/F Mr Barry Judd Dersingham Application Torn Acres 33 Lynn Road Permitted Dersingham King's Lynn Proposed front entrance porch (incorporating bay window) 20.03.2015 15.05.2015 15/00434/F Mr Wayne Dunn Dersingham Application 9 Pakenham Drive Dersingham Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk Construction of new driveway and access 13.03.2015 12.05.2015 15/00386/F Mr And Mrs G Ellisdon Docking Application The Old Rectory Sedgeford Road Permitted Docking King's Lynn Proposed detached single storey outbuilding 16.02.2015 11.05.2015 15/00235/O Mr & Mrs David Green Downham Market Application St Mary's Lodge 119 London Road Permitted Downham Market Norfolk OUTLINE WITH SOME MATTERS RESERVED: Small development of 2No executive style houses in the garden to the south of the existing property 16.02.2015 05.05.2015 15/00238/F Mr Barry Hobbs Downham Market Application The Priory 4 London Road Refused Downham Market Norfolk Partial demolition of boundary wall to provide vehicular access to rear garden from Priory Road 134

16.02.2015 29.04.2015 15/00239/LB Mr Barry Hobbs Downham Market Application The Priory 4 London Road Refused Downham Market Norfolk Listed Building Application: Partial demolition of boundary wall to provide vehicular access to rear garden from Priory Road 24.02.2015 13.05.2015 15/00290/LDP Mr Chris Carter Downham Market Not Lawful 16 Oak View Drive Downham Market Norfolk PE38 9PB Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a proposed single storey dwelling extension 16.03.2015 27.04.2015 15/00407/LB Mr T Hansell East Rudham Application Caradon House The Green East Permitted Rudham Norfolk Listed Building Application: Proposal of new stair to loft and additional internal alterations as amendment to previously approved application 12.03.2015 06.05.2015 15/00378/F Mr Lee Reynolds East Winch Application The Brambles Ashwicken Road Permitted East Winch Norfolk Extension to existing property 17.03.2015 22.04.2015 14/00764/NMA_1 Mrs Rosemary Raimondo East Winch Application Carrstone House Gayton Road Permitted East Winch King's Lynn NON-MATERIAL AMENDMENT TO PLANNING CONSENT 14/00764/F: Construction of dwelling and detached garage 135

10.02.2015 29.04.2015 15/00209/F Mr Brian J Rutterford Feltwell Application The West End 43 Long Lane Refused Feltwell Thetford Change of use of public house into two ground floor apartments with retention of first floor flat over 30.03.2015 07.05.2015 15/00492/PAGPD Mrs P Hall Feltwell Prior Approval - 4 Hill Street Feltwell Thetford Not Required Norfolk Single storey rear extension which extends beyond the rear wall by 6 metres with a maximum height of 2.63 metres and a height of 2.63 metres to the eaves 25.11.2014 01.05.2015 14/01682/F Mr Barrie Colvin Gayton Application The Old Workhouse Eastgate Permitted Drove Gayton King's Lynn Erection of a barn to house tractor and associated equipment and the erection of 4x 8m lighting columns for floodlighting existing tennis court 09.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00366/F Clients of David Taylor Associates Gayton Application Plot 1 West of White Lodge Permitted Litcham Road Gayton Construction of a detached dwelling and associated landscaping 25.03.2015 13.05.2015 15/00477/LDP Mr And Mrs A Littler Gayton Would be Lawful 4 Birch Road Gayton King's Lynn Norfolk Lawful Development Certificate: Erection of single storey extension 136

13.02.2015 13.05.2015 15/00225/F Mr Eric Grange Grimston Application Field Lodge Back Lane Pott Row Permitted Norfolk Conservatory extension to dwelling 23.02.2015 17.04.2015 15/00280/F Mr Ben Rasberry Grimston Application 23 Bracken Way Grimston King's Permitted Lynn Norfolk Erection of single storey rear extension 22.12.2014 06.05.2015 14/01814/F Mr & Mrs Spencer McCarthy Heacham Application 30 Ringstead Road Heacham Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk Construction of single storey rear extension and loft extension 26.02.2015 24.04.2015 15/00308/F Mr Wilson Heacham Application 35 Rolfe Crescent Heacham King's Permitted Lynn Norfolk Single storey extension to bungalow 28.10.2014 06.05.2015 14/01542/F Mrs Jane Seddon Hilgay Application Orchard House Church Road Ten Permitted Mile Bank Norfolk Retention of air source heat pump 04.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00345/F Mr & Mrs Pryer Hockwold cum Wilton Application 37 Main Street Hockwold cum Permitted Wilton Norfolk IP26 4LQ Side and rear single storey extension 24.03.2015 11.05.2015 15/00462/F Mr R Bland Hockwold cum Wilton Application 75 Main Street Hockwold cum Permitted Wilton Norfolk IP26 4LJ Single storey side and rear extension 137

30.01.2015 16.04.2015 15/00145/A K & K Machines Ltd Hunstanton Application 20 Beach Terrace Harlequin Refused House Hunstanton Norfolk Advertisement application for 3 x non-illuminated directional sign 09.03.2015 12.05.2015 15/00367/F Willers Brothers (I.O.M) Properties Hunstanton Application 9 York Avenue Hunstanton Norfolk Refused PE36 6BU Construction of two bedroom house 02.03.2015 20.04.2015 15/00332/F Dr Gillian Devine Ingoldisthorpe Application The Keys Shernborne Road Permitted Ingoldisthorpe King's Lynn Extension to existing balcony at front of property 10.02.2015 17.04.2015 15/00208/F E N Suiter And Sons Ltd King's Lynn Application E N Suiter & Sons Ltd 31 North Permitted Everard Street King's Lynn Norfolk Change of use to form residential flat to first floor and ground floor business storage 20.02.2015 23.04.2015 15/00272/F King's Lynn Worfolk Boat Trust King's Lynn Application Performance Area Kings Staithe Withdrawn Square King's Lynn Norfolk Change of use of land for the temporary location of a 7m by 3m carter cabin to be used as a tool store and workshop for boat repairs 138

24.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00296/T3 CTIL And Telefonica UK King's Lynn Consent Not Mast Telecom Kettlewell Lane Required King's Lynn Norfolk Replacement of existing 13.8m pole and installation of replacement 15m pole supporting 3no. antennas, 3no. new cabinets and removal of 1no. cabinet at ground level and ancillary development thereto 26.02.2015 05.05.2015 15/00310/CU IBA Insurance Services Ltd King's Lynn Application Save the Children 111 High Street Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk Change of use from A1 to A2 (financial services) 02.03.2015 08.05.2015 15/00333/CU Mr S A Moeil King's Lynn Application 3A King Street King's Lynn Norfolk Permitted PE30 1ET Change of use of first floor from Dental surgery to residential use 06.03.2015 06.05.2015 15/00354/CU Bourn Hall Clinic King's Lynn Application 9 North Lynn Business Village Permitted Bergen Way North Lynn Industrial Estate King's Lynn Change of use from Office (B1) to a Clinic (D1) 06.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00355/A Bourn Hall Clinic King's Lynn Application 9 North Lynn Business Village Permitted Bergen Way North Lynn Industrial Estate King's Lynn Advertisement Application: 1x non- illuminated fascia sign 139

06.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00359/F Mr Lee Bone King's Lynn Application 27 Suffolk Road King's Lynn Permitted Norfolk PE30 4AH Construction of single storey extension to rear of existing two storey dwelling 09.03.2015 12.05.2015 15/00363/F Enterprise Inn PLC King's Lynn Application Ye Olde Maydens Heade 7 Permitted Tuesday Market Place King's Lynn Norfolk Formation of lantern style roof light to existing flat roof (retrospective) 12.03.2015 07.05.2015 15/00375/F Clients of W R Skipper King's Lynn Application Architecture Permitted Mandalay Hall Lane South Wootton King's Lynn Variation of condition 2 and 3 of planning permission 14/00395/F: Variation of Conditions 2 and 4 attached to Planning Permission 13/01269/F to allow security gates to be installed 12.03.2015 07.05.2015 15/00377/F Wisbech Road Post Office King's Lynn Application Wisbech Road Post Office 42 Permitted Wisbech Road King's Lynn Norfolk Change of use to seperate C3 accommodation from A1 Post Office 16.03.2015 11.05.2015 15/00399/F Mr D Nguyen King's Lynn Application 23 Railway Road King's Lynn Permitted Norfolk PE30 1NF Change of use from empty hot food takeaway A5 to residential dwelling C3 140

18.03.2015 20.04.2015 15/00420/PAGPD Mr & Mrs Fryatt King's Lynn Prior Approval - 50 Rainsthorpe South Wootton Not Required King's Lynn Norfolk Single storey rear extension which extends beyond the rear wall by 4.165 metres with a maximum height of 3.50 metres and a height of 2.45 metres to the eaves 19.03.2015 14.05.2015 15/00429/F Mr & Mrs Woodcock King's Lynn Application 56 Langland King's Lynn Norfolk Refused PE30 4TH Two storey front extension to dwelling 20.03.2015 13.05.2015 15/00435/CU Freebridge Community Housing King's Lynn Application 4 Walpole Road King's Lynn Permitted Norfolk PE30 2DZ Change of Use from Class B1 (office accommodation) to Class D1 (drop-in care/assessment facility for pre-school children) 27.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00486/PAGPD Mr Matthew Pettifar King's Lynn Prior Approval - 67 Holcombe Avenue King's Lynn Not Required Norfolk PE30 5NY Single storey rear extension which extends beyond the rear wall by 5 metres with a maximum height of 4 metres and a height of 3 metres to the eaves 22.12.2014 11.05.2015 14/01810/F Little Pet Lodgings Marham Application Chapel Cottage The Street Permitted Marham Norfolk 10m x 3m log cabin for home office/storage 141

11.02.2015 16.04.2015 15/00004/CUPD Mr John Askew Marshland St James Application Barns North of Marshland Farm Refused Barn Moyses Bank Marshland St James Norfolk Change of use from agricultural grain store and implement store to dwelling 09.03.2015 30.04.2015 15/00006/CUPD Mrs Emma Watling Marshland St James Prior Approval - Outbuilding Rustons Road Refused Marshland St James Wisbech Change of use from redundant piggery to dwelling 16.03.2015 11.05.2015 15/00396/F Mr Garham Rutterford Methwold Application 60 Hythe Road Methwold Thetford Permitted Norfolk Erection of domestic garage 25.03.2015 28.04.2015 15/00468/CM Warren Power Ltd Methwold NO OBJECTION Methwold Farm Warren Road TO NCC APP Methwold Norfolk County Matters Application for an underground gas pipeline and associated compound/structures (additional works in conjunction with approved anerobic digestion plant) 25.02.2015 30.04.2015 15/00301/LDE Mr Brian Douglas Rayner Middleton Was Lawful 5A Willow Close Middleton King's Lynn Norfolk Lawful Development Certificate: Existing solar panels 05.02.2015 16.04.2015 15/00172/F Mrs Sandra Fullerlove North Creake Application 113 Burnham Road North Creake Permitted Fakenham Norfolk Car port and extension over 142

24.02.2015 23.04.2015 15/00287/F Mr Alisdair Mercer North Creake Application 35 West Street North Creake Permitted Fakenham Norfolk Construction of two self-contained single bedroom holiday let properties (based of existing permission 09/01503/F) 25.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00299/A Esso Petroleum Co Ltd North Runcton Application Service Station 36 West Winch Permitted Road West Winch Norfolk Advertisement application: 6x externally illuminated signs and 14x non-illuminated signs 25.03.2015 30.04.2015 15/00467/PAGPD Mr And Mrs Gates North Wootton Prior Approval - 1 Wesley Road North Wootton Not Required King's Lynn Norfolk Single storey rear extension which extends beyond the rear wall by 4.6 metres with a maximum height of 3.636 metres and a height of 2.562 metres to the eaves 27.02.2015 01.05.2015 15/00314/F Professor Warwick Rodwell Northwold Application The Manor House 52 High Street Permitted Northwold Thetford Restoration of and additions to an existing Grade II listed residence 27.02.2015 05.05.2015 15/00315/LB Professor Warwick Rodwell Northwold Application The Manor House 52 High Street Permitted Northwold Thetford Listed building application for restoration of and additions to an existing Grade II listed residence 143

09.03.2015 05.05.2015 15/00365/F Norfolk Egg Ltd Northwold Application Land Off Methwold Road Permitted Northwold Norfolk Proposed agricultural building (muck store) 18.02.2015 16.04.2015 15/00257/F Mr Brian Coy Old Hunstanton Application 40 Old Hunstanton Road Old Permitted Hunstanton Hunstanton Norfolk Variation of condition 8 of planning permission 12/00251/F 13.03.2015 11.05.2015 15/00387/F Mr S Harding Old Hunstanton Application 6 Howards Close Old Hunstanton Permitted Hunstanton Norfolk Alterations and extension 26.02.2015 23.04.2015 15/00304/F Mr R Newton Outwell Application Outwell Lodge 88 Wisbech Road Permitted Outwell Wisbech The demolition of a dwelling and replacement with 2 houses and a double garage 23.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00283/F Mr Hugh Cameron Ringstead Application The Crows Nest 80 Peddars Way Permitted North Ringstead Norfolk Erection of garden shed 02.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00327/F Mrs M Hutchinson Ringstead Application Hillside 60 High Street Ringstead Permitted Hunstanton Extension and alterations to create office space at ground floor and additional bedroom to first floor 144

11.03.2015 11.05.2015 15/00373/F Mr And Mrs Mitchley Roydon Application The Whins 25 Low Road Roydon Refused King's Lynn Proposed 2no. 4 bed dwellings and detached garages 07.04.2014 23.04.2015 14/00515/F Woodlakes Leisure Ltd Runcton Holme Application Woodlakes Leisure Ltd Woodlakes Permitted Caravan & Camping Park Holme Road Stow Bridge Variation of conditions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of planning permission 09/01679/FM 25.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00298/A Downham Country Garden Store Ryston Application Downham Country Garden Store Permitted Stonecross Road Bexwell Downham Market Retrospective advertisement application for 1 x illuminated double sided freestanding sign 20.03.2015 13.05.2015 15/00443/CU Clients of David Taylor Associates Ryston Application (UK) Ltd Permitted Ryston Hall Ryston Road Ryston Norfolk Change of use from offices to spa facility 27.02.2015 24.04.2015 15/00312/F Mr Edward McDonnell Sedgeford Application Jaed Cole Green Sedgeford Permitted Norfolk VARIATION OF CONDITION 2 ATTACHED TO PLANNING PERMISSION 13/01632/F: Rear extension to dwelling 145

02.03.2015 28.04.2015 15/00324/F Mr And Mrs Rob Maddox Sedgeford Application Station House Ringstead Road Permitted Sedgeford Hunstanton Conversion of existing flat roof to pitched roof. Two side extensions to northern elevation 13.03.2015 13.05.2015 15/00389/F Mr C Campbell Sedgeford Application Agricultural Barn Fring Road Permitted Sedgeford Norfolk Conversion to residential of existing barn including provision of accommodation at lower ground floor 19.03.2015 14.05.2015 15/00431/F Mr And Mrs A Hitchins Sedgeford Application 7 Rose Court Docking Road Permitted Sedgeford Hunstanton Replacement Windows and front door 24.02.2015 21.04.2015 15/00288/F Mr & Mrs N Broad Shouldham Application Between 45 And 49 Westgate Permitted Street Shouldham King's Lynn Norfolk Construction of one dwelling 02.03.2015 28.04.2015 15/00334/F Shouldham Community Shouldham Application Enterprises Ltd Permitted The Kings Arms The Green Shouldham Norfolk Extension to public house, revised design (13/01843/F) 23.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00279/F Mrs Butler Snettisham Application 46 Shelduck Drive Snettisham Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk Single storey extension to rear of property 146

06.03.2015 08.05.2015 15/00357/F Mr Craig Yarham South Creake Application 14 Winston Drive South Creake Permitted Fakenham Norfolk Variation of conditions 2 and 6 of planning permission 11/01657/F: One and a half storey dwelling in the garden (amended design) 24.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00291/F Mr And Mrs Baxter South Wootton Application 5 Furness Close South Wootton Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk Two storey side extension to dwelling 24.02.2015 22.04.2015 15/00293/F Dr Jon Higgins South Wootton Application Stone House 31 Grimston Road Permitted South Wootton King's Lynn Proposed construction of two detached dwellings and formation of new vehicular access 26.02.2015 29.04.2015 15/00302/F Mr Adam Leveille South Wootton Application 36 Avon Road South Wootton Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk Single storey extension to form sun room and games room 10.03.2015 06.05.2015 15/00369/F Mr & Mrs S Snowden South Wootton Application Farmend 89 Nursery Lane South Permitted Wootton Norfolk Garage extension to form study office area 147

02.04.2015 22.04.2015 15/00048/NMA_1 Mr S Hudson South Wootton Application 1 Nursery Lane South Wootton Permitted King's Lynn Norfolk NON MATERIAL AMENDMENT TO PLANNING CONSENT 15/00048/F: Rear extension, replace flat roof with pitched roof and alterations to dwelling 11.02.2015 29.04.2015 15/00218/F Mr & Mrs D Miller Stanhoe Application Station Farm Cottage Station Road Refused Stanhoe King's Lynn Demolition of existing dwelling and replacement with a new dwelling 07.01.2015 01.05.2015 15/00019/F Mrs P Barham Stoke Ferry Application Oak Bungalow Oxborough Road Refused Stoke Ferry King's Lynn Construction of single storey replacement self-contained residential annexe 09.02.2015 17.04.2015 15/00186/CU Primrose Equestrian Centre Stow Bardolph Application Primrose House 167 the Drove Permitted Barroway Drove Norfolk Change of use of existing livery stables to riding school 09.02.2015 17.04.2015 15/00188/F Primrose Craft Centre Stow Bardolph Application Primrose House 167 the Drove Permitted Barroway Drove Norfolk Alpacha related craft centre 148

24.02.2015 21.04.2015 15/00295/F Pleasant Cottage Kennels Stow Bardolph Application Pleasant Cottage The Causeway Permitted Stow Bridge King's Lynn VARIATION OF CONDITION 1 ATTACHED TO PLANNING PERMISSION 2/96/0875/F: Continued use as dog boarding kennels 10.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00370/F Mr Gary Wright Stow Bardolph Application Claxton Cottage The Causeway Permitted Stow Bridge King's Lynn Two storey side extension 16.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00408/LB Mr T Hansel Syderstone Application Manor Farm House The Street Permitted Syderstone King's Lynn Listed Building Application: Removal of stair to North Wing 11.02.2015 17.04.2015 15/00219/F The Old School Community Terrington St Clement Application Heritage Project Permitted Village Hall Churchgate Way Terrington St Clement King's Lynn Elevational and internal alterations. Single storey front extensions to create a Heritage Community Centre (Single storey front projection demolished) - Renewal of 12/00071/LB and 12/00070/F 10.02.2015 24.04.2015 15/00211/F Dr Cyril Dodd Terrington St John Application Sunnyside Main Road Terrington Refused St John Wisbech Extension of existing drop kerb to provide exit from Sunnyside 149

25.02.2015 28.04.2015 15/00297/F C/o Agent Terrington St John Application School Farm School Road St Refused John's Fen End Terrington St John Construction of 3 x 4 bedroom and 1 x 5 bedroom executive homes to code level 4 of the code for sustainable homes 02.03.2015 29.04.2015 15/00328/F Mr Roger Oglesby Terrington St John Application 6 Gambles Terrace School Road Permitted Terrington St John Wisbech Proposed materials and vehicle store to rear of dwelling for vehicle storage for client's hobby (Land Rover collection etc) 03.03.2015 29.04.2015 15/00335/F Mr B Yeomanson Terrington St John Application Bloomfield House Farm School Permitted Road Terrington St John Wisbech Retention of land for use as equestrian, retention of buildings for stables, livery and riding school and re-opening of existing unused access 03.03.2015 29.04.2015 15/00337/F Mr B Yeomanson Terrington St John Application Bloomfield House Farm School Permitted Road Terrington St John Wisbech Retention of manege 20.02.2015 16.04.2015 15/00273/F Mr P Wilson Thornham Application Baytree Cottage High Street Permitted Thornham Hunstanton Variation of condition 2 of planning permission 12/00521/F: Demolition of garage element, replaced with 2 storey cottage and first floor extension to main dwelling 150

20.02.2015 16.04.2015 15/00276/LB Mr P Wilson Thornham Application Baytree Cottage High Street Permitted Thornham Hunstanton Variation of conditions 2 and 3 of Listed Building consent 12/00892/LB: Replacement and repair of windows 06.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00358/LDE Ms Luisa Di-Pietro Thornham Was Lawful The Coal Barn Staithe Lane Thornham Norfolk Lawful Development Certificate: Conversion of Coal Barn to Art Studio 17.03.2015 12.05.2015 15/00412/F Mr & Mrs M Dennis Tilney St Lawrence Application Former Fox And Goose Inn 68 Permitted High Road Tilney cum Islington Norfolk Variation of condition 8 of planning permission 11/01108/F 24.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00464/PAGPD Mr & Mrs Overland Tilney St Lawrence Prior Approval - Aysgarth New Road Terrington St Refused John Wisbech Single storey rear extension which extends beyond the rear wall by 3.2 metres with a maximum height of 3.8 metres and a height of 2.35 metres to the eaves 20.03.2015 15.05.2015 15/00447/CU Mr And Mrs R D King Upwell Application 14 New Bridge Road Upwell Permitted Wisbech Norfolk Change of use of land to garden of dwelling 151

29.01.2015 23.04.2015 15/00129/F Dong Energy (UK) Limited Walpole Application Land East of Walpole Marsh Permitted Substation Walpole Bank Walpole St Andrew Norfolk Installation of generator bays south of the approved Race Bank substation (planning permission ref 14/01059/FM) 06.02.2015 24.04.2015 15/00181/F Clients of David Taylor Associates Walpole Application Site South West of the Willows Permitted Pyecroft Lane Walpole St Peter Norfolk Retention of detached dwelling (revised design) 03.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00336/F Mr & Mrs Pepper Walpole Application 69 Springfield Road Walpole St Permitted Andrew Wisbech Norfolk Erection of new double garage with studio space above 16.04.2015 13.05.2015 14/01653/NMA_1 Mr David Galloway Walpole Application The Sycamores Church Road Permitted Walpole St Peter Norfolk NON-MATERIAL AMENDMENT TO PLANNING PERMISSION 14/01653/F: Two storey side extension and detached car port 17.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00256/F Mr Michael Lennon Walpole Cross Keys Application Bank House Low Road Walpole Permitted Cross Keys King's Lynn Rear addition to main house, alterations to roof and addition of 2no bonnets. Fit 2no. windows to rear elevation, alterations to existing carport 152

26.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00309/F Mr Nick Ruff Walpole Cross Keys Application The Laurels 10 Little Holme Road Permitted Walpole Cross Keys King's Lynn Single storey rear extension to dwelling 13.03.2015 30.04.2015 15/00388/F Mrs Karen Scott Walpole Cross Keys Application Highfields Market Lane Walpole St Permitted Andrew Wisbech Side extensions and addition of porch to domestic bungalow 26.03.2015 15.05.2015 15/00481/PACU3 Laura Carnell Walpole Cross Keys Prior Approval - Barn At 103 Station Road Walpole Approved St Andrew Wisbech Change of use from storage building associated with agricultural activities of small holding to dwellinghouse 20.03.2015 15.05.2015 15/00441/O Mr C Wilson Walpole Highway Application Land Adj To 3 Mill Road Walpole Permitted Highway Norfolk Outline Application: 1 dwelling 30.01.2015 01.05.2015 15/00139/FM Dominic Harrington Nurseries Walsoken Application Land To the South of Amberwood Permitted Wheatley Bank Walsoken Wisbech Use of land as a nursery involving a new access, drive-way, vehicle turning area and the erection of glasshouses/shed and water storage tanks 23.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00277/F Mr & Mrs R Vine Walsoken Application The Vineyard Wilkins Road Permitted Walsoken Wisbech Proposed replacement dwelling 153

05.02.2015 17.04.2015 15/00168/F West Acre Theatre West Acre Application River Studios River Road West Permitted Acre King's Lynn Variation of conditions 2, 12, 13 and 17 of planning permission reference 12/00922/F 18.03.2015 14.05.2015 15/00423/F Mr And Mrs G Keaney West Acre Application The Old Rectory River Road West Permitted Acre King's Lynn Demolish existing timber garage and erect new garage with first floor accommodation above and single storey extension to side and rear 27.02.2015 23.04.2015 15/00318/F Hazel Greenard West Dereham Application Chapel Farm House The Row Permitted West Dereham King's Lynn Two storey and single storey extension to dwelling 16.03.2015 11.05.2015 15/00406/F Mr & Mrs G Wenn West Walton Application Florence House 217A Salts Road Permitted West Walton Norfolk Variation of condition 8 of planning permission 10/02147/F 23.02.2015 29.04.2015 15/00284/F Mr & Mrs Fysh West Winch Application West View 145 Main Road West Permitted Winch King's Lynn Construction of single storey detached dwelling and associated garage following demolition of existing sub standard dwelling 154

24.02.2015 20.04.2015 15/00294/F Mr Robert Reeve Wiggenhall St Germans Application Willow Tree Forge High Road Permitted Saddlebow Norfolk Completion and retention of manege for private use 04.03.2015 01.05.2015 15/00343/F Mrs Louise Chenery-Taylor Wiggenhall St Germans Application The Tile Shop Fitton Oake 65 Permitted Fitton Road Wiggenhall St Germans King's Lynn Installation of new access door for showroom entrance 04.03.2015 21.04.2015 15/00344/LB Mrs Louise Chenery-Taylor Wiggenhall St Germans Application The Tile Shop Fitton Oake 65 Permitted Fitton Road Wiggenhall St Germans King's Lynn Listed Building Application: Installation of new access door for showroom entrance 04.03.2015 15.05.2015 15/00346/F Laen Ltd Wimbotsham Application 26 Honey Hill Wimbotsham King's Permitted Lynn Norfolk Installation of drainage system to facilitate Reserved Matters consent ref: 13/00206/RM 28.01.2015 01.05.2015 15/00120/F Mr K Boon Wormegay Application Middle Farm House Castle Road Permitted Wormegay Norfolk Proposal for a new dwelling within grounds of existing property 155

10.03.2015 05.05.2015 15/00371/F Mr Adrian Blumfield Wretton Application West View Cromer Lane Wretton Permitted King's Lynn Proposed replacement dwelling and garage (existing dwelling and outbuildings already demolished)

156

AGENDA ITEM NO.10

PLANNING ENFORCEMENT REPORT

PLANNING COMMITTEE 01 JUNE 2015

Report of the Executive Director of Environment and Planning, pursuant to the Scheme of Delegation

Parish: KING’S LYNN

Purpose of report: TO UPDATE MEMBERS IN RESPECT OF A CONTINUING BREACH OF PLANNING CONTROL AND TO SEEK A RESOLUTION IN RESPECT OF WHAT FURTHER ENFORCEMENT ACTION IS REQUIRED, IF ANY, TO REMEDY THE BREACH OF PLANNING CONTROL

Location: Land at Garwood Close, King’s Lynn, Norfolk

Site owner/occupier: Ms Emma Louise Walker

Summary – That Members of the Planning Committee:

a) Note the update in respect of the continuing breach of planning control; and

b) Grant authority to the Executive Director of Environment and Planning for the implementation and execution of direct action under Section 219 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) to comply with requirements set out in paragraph 3 of the Section 215 Notice.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 This report is brought to the Planning Committee so that Members can note the continuing breach of planning control and for a resolution to remedy the breach of planning control following non-compliance with a Section 215 Notice. I attach a copy of the Section 215 Notice at Appendix 1.

2.0 THE LAND

2.1 The wall is situated on land the east side of Garwood Close, King’s Lynn, Norfolk (“the Land”). The wall forms the boundary treatment of the carpark area. Each owner within the immediate area has at least one parking bay allocated and registered with the property. A plan identifying the Land can be found attached to the Section 215 Notice at appendix 1.

2.3 It is apparent that the wall has been damaged for a considerable period of time and there has been no attempt to rebuild, repair or maintain it. At the request of the Planning Enforcement Team a section of the wall under 157

different ownership has been rebuilt. This is the remaining area of wall to be repaired.

2.4 I attach a photograph showing the condition of the wall at Appendix 2.

3.0 RELEVANT LEGISLATION

3.1 The following legislation is relevant:

3.1.1 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (“the 1990 Act”), Section 215 and 219 3.1.2 Law of Property Act 1925 (“the 1925 Act”), Section 103 3.1.3 Public Health Act 1936 (“the 1936 Act”), Section 276, 289 and 294

4.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 The following planning considerations are relevant:

4.1.1 National Planning Policy Framework 4.1.2 Planning Practice Guidance – Ensuring effective enforcement 4.1.3 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Section 215: best practice guidance

5.0 PLANNING HISTORY

5.1 There is no specific planning history relevant to this matter.

6.0 THE BREACH OF PLANNING CONTROL

6.1 The breach of planning control is set out in paragraph 1 of the Section 215 Notice as:

‘This notice is served by the Council under section 215 of the Act because it appears to them that the amenity of a part of their area is adversely affected by the condition of the land described below.’

7.0 ENFORCEMENT HISTORY

7.1 The concerns of local residents about the condition of the wall and the impact on the character and appearance of the street were brought to the attention of the Planning Enforcement Team in September 2012.

7.2 Negotiations with two landowners resulted in partial compliance, i.e. a section of the wall has been rebuilt. However, Ms Walker, the owner of the wall that remains in a poor condition advised the Council that she is of ill health and with little financial means. To avoid the need to take formal enforcement action Ms Walker agreed to save the money over a considerable period of time and then rebuild the wall.

158

7.3 However, at the end of this informal compliance period Ms Walker was unable to save and rebuild and make good the wall. Authority was therefore granted and a formal notice under section 215 of the 1990 Act was served.

7.4 The Section 215 Notice required the following step to be taken:

a. Rebuild and make good the wall using material to match the existing.

7.5 The Notice was served on 01 October 2014, came into effect on 03 November 204 and provided a one calendar month compliance period.

8.0 OPTIONS FOR REMEDYING THE BREACH OF PLANNING CONTROL

8.1 Option 1 – Prosecution

8.2 Section 216(2) of the 1990 Act provides that if any owner or occupier of land on whom a notice was served fails to take steps required by the notice within the period specified in it for compliance with it, she shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

8.3 It is considered that this is not the most proportionate, appropriate and reasonable option. The court has no power to order compliance with the terms of the notice and Ms Walker’s financial means will be taken into consideration when considering what sentence to impose. Under the circumstances it is therefore more likely than not that the court would sentence Ms Walker by way of a conditional discharge and only award partial costs, if any.

8.4 It is also considered that court action is unlikely to persuade Ms Walker to comply with the notice.

8.5 Option 2 – Injunction

8.6 Section 187B(1) of the 1990 Act provides that where a local planning authority consider it necessary or expedient for any actual or apprehended breach of planning control to be restrained by injunction, they may apply to the high court or the county court for an injunction, whether or not they have exercised or are proposing to exercise any of their other powers under Part VII (Enforcement) of the 1990 Act.

8.7 Whilst an application may be made to the court in respect of the above breach of planning control, the court would need to be satisfied that the granting of an order to force compliance will achieve the required aim and that intervention is as a last resort. This is because the court would also need to be satisfied that if Ms Walker fails to obey the order they would be prepared to commit her to prison for contempt of court.

8.9 In this particular case it is considered that the Council will have some difficulty in persuading the court to grant injunctive relief, particularly as it is not the 159

only options open to them, nor is it the last report. Also, the court may consider that injunctive relief is a draconian and disproportionate tool under the circumstances and one that would put Ms Walker a immediate risk of contempt given her limited financial means.

8.10 Members would therefore have to commit to the costs involved with obtaining and enforcing the order, with no realistic prospects of success. This option is therefore not considered to be the most appropriate and proportionate action to take.

8.11 Option 3 – Direct Action (Section 219 of the 1990 TCPA)

8.12 Section 219(1) of the Act provides that if, within the period specified in a notice under section 215 in accordance with subsection (2) of that section, or within such extended period as the local planning authority who served the notice may allow, any steps required by the notice to be taken have not been taken, the local planning authority who served the notice may:

(a) enter the land and take those steps, and (b) recover from the person who is then the owner of the land any expenses reasonably incurred by them in doing so.

8.13 Enforcement action taken must be proportionate, necessary, reasonable, appropriate and justifiable, and commensurate to the breach of planning control. Some incidents or breaches of regulatory requirements have the potential to cause serious risks to the public, environmental damage or loss of public or residential amenity. One of the Council’s responsibilities is to protect the public and prevent harm to the environment from occurring or continuing.

8.14 The condition of the Land is causing an adverse impact on the amenity due to the fact that the wall has not be rebuilt and made good, nor is it being properly maintained to prevent further deterioration. In its current state it is also at increased risk of further vandalism, which would potentially affect the work already undertaken. It is considered that the best option for remedying the continuing breach of planning control is to take direct action.

8.15 Paragraph 3 of the Section 215 Notice requires the following step to be taken:

a. Rebuild and make good the wall using material to match the existing.

8.16 In this particular case, it is considered that direct action pursuant to Section 219 of the Act is justifiably, reasonable, appropriate, proportionate and necessary and the best option open to Member to remedy the breach of planning control, to protect the public, amenity and prevent harm to the environment from occurring or continuing.

160

8.17 Option 4 – Take No Further Action

8.18 The Section 215 Notice will remain extant indefinitely and therefore a decision to take formal enforcement action could be reconsidered at a later date. However Members must consider that whilst the LPA has a general discretion to take enforcement action, the continued failure to resolve the breach of planning control may affect public perception and confidence in the planning system. In addition, owners of other parts of the wall have rebuilt their sections, and there is an issue of fairness and equality in dealing with the case. Therefore, in this particular case, taking no further action is not considered the most appropriate and proportionate response to the continued breach of planning control.

8.19 Option 5 – Discretionary Extension of Compliance Period

8.20 Ms Walker has already been afforded an extended period of time to save the funds and carry out the works specified in the notice. This approach may therefore incorrectly be viewed as a negation of the notice. Moreover, there has been no indication from Ms Walker that extending the compliance period will result in compliance with the notice. In this particular case, extending the compliance period on the notice is not considered the best option as it is likely to result in a delay in the need to take further enforcement action.

9.0 COST IMPLICATIONS

9.1 The cost to rebuild and make good the wall is expected to be circa £1,000.

9.2 Members should note that the costs of taking direct action, including the establishment costs are recoverable. Therefore the costs associated with the taking of direct action must be reasonable and justifiable. In this respect, direct action will be carried out in accordance with the law, best practice and guidance, and the Council’s own procedures.

10.0 THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT AND THE EQUALITY ACT

10.1 The Council has a duty to consider Ms Walker’s rights under the Human Rights Act (HRA), in particular Article 8 and Article 1 of the first protocol to the Convention on Human Rights, which state that a person is entitled to the right to respect for private and family life, and the peaceful enjoyment of his/her property.

10.2 However, these rights are qualified in that they must be set against the general interest and the protection of the rights and freedom of others. Therefore, on balance it is considered that the wider adverse impact due to the condition of the Land outweighs the landowner’s right under the HRA.

10.3 The Council must also have due regard to the provisions of the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) contained in the Equality Act 2010. Amongst other things, this requires consideration to be given to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and to advance equality 161

of opportunity and foster good relations between people who share protected characteristic and people who do not share it.

10.4 It is not known whether Ms Walker falls within one of the protected characteristics. However, even if she did it does not follow from the PSED that formal enforcement action should not be taken. The adverse impact the condition of the wall is having on the amenity is demonstrable and therefore it is not considered that the requirement to have due regard to meet the needs of people with protected characteristics is of sufficient weight in this instance to justify taking no action.

10.5 On balance, it is considered justifiable and proportionate to remedy the ongoing breach of planning control by the taking of further enforcement action using the above options.

11.0 RECOMMENDATION

10.1 That Members of the Planning Committee:

a) Note the update in respect of the continuing breach of planning control; and

162 163 164 165 166 167

AGENDA ITEM NO: 11

PLANNING COMMITTEE – PLANNING ENFORCEMENT REPORT

1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT

1.1 This report provides Members with an update on service performance for planning enforcement during the first quarter of 2015.

2.0 PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SERVICE PERFORMANCE

2.1 Set out below is a breakdown of figures in relation to received, closed and live cases. The total number of received cases remains relatively high at 165. There is a slight overall increase in the number of live cases compared to the previous quarter from 271 to 280.

Number of received general cases* 141 Number of received monitoring cases 2 Number of received S106 monitoring cases 22

Total received cases 165

Number of closed general cases* 150 Number of closed monitoring cases 0 Number of closed S106 monitoring cases 6

Total closed cases 156

Number of live general cases* 257 Number of live monitoring cases 3 Number of live S106 monitoring cases 20

Total live cases* 280

(*Includes High Hedge cases)

2.2 A list of all live cases as produced on 15 May 2015 2015 can be found at Appendix 2.

2.3 Below is a breakdown of all 156 closed cases during the fourth quarter, including the reason for closure.

Reason Count

Advertisement Consent Granted 0 Amendment Approved 0 Case Closed 2 168

Conditions Discharged 1 De minimis 3 Delegated Authority - no further action 12 Listed Building Consent granted 0 No breach established 41 Notice issued - complied 9 Permitted development 11 Planning App Approved 20 Prosecution 2 Referred to other service 5 Remedied following informal action 30 S106 Obligation(s) Complied With 0 Use/operational development lawful 20

Total 156

2.4 During the fourth quarter the following formal notices were served:

Notice Count

Enforcement Notice 5 Listed Building Enforcement Notice 0 Planning Contravention Notice 10 Requisition for Information 1 Breach of Condition Notice 2 Stop Notice (excluding Temporary Stop Notice) 0 Temporary Stop Notice 0 Enforcement Injunction granted 0 Section 215 Notice 1 Repairs Notice 0 High Hedge Remedial Notice 0

Total 19

2.5 The overall number of notices served has increased from 14 to 19 compared to the previous quarter.

2.6 The Council successfully prosecuted and defended appeals in respect of the following matters: 169

 BCKLWN v Thomas – This case concerns the failure to comply with an Enforcement Notice served by the Council. On 19 March 2015, Mr Thomas attended the King’s Lynn Magistrates Court and pleaded guilty. The court fined him £1,000.00 and ordered him to pay the Councils costs in full and victim surcharge of £100.00. It is noteworthy that the notice has been complied with.

 BCKLWN v Dickens & Hill – This case concerns the failure to comply with an Enforcement Notice served by the Council. On 02 April 2015 Dickens attended the King’s Lynn Magistrates Court and pleaded guilty to 3 breaches of the enforcement notice. The court fined Mr Dickens £2,000.00 for each breach and ordered him to pay the Councils costs of £1,195.00 and victim surcharge of £200.00, totalling £7,395.00. Co accused Hill pleaded not guilty and a trial date has been set.

2.7 The Council has carried out direct action in respect of the following:

 54-56 Ladys Drove, Emneth – I am pleased to confirm that on 25 March 2015 the Council and its employed contractors entered the property and carried out the steps specified in a Section 215 Notice, as authorised by Members. I have attached a before and after photograph of the property at Appendix 1.

3.0 RECOMMENDATION

3.1 That this report is noted.

Case Officer: Mr N Langley, Team Leader - Enforcement  (01553) 616449. 170

Appendix 1

Direct Action - 54-56 Ladys Drove, Emneth

Before:

After:

171 Appendix 2

Priority Parish Date Reference Site Breach Status

Ha Penny Toll Farm Ha Penny Toll Road Lotts Bridge Three Holes alleged unauthorised operational P2 11-Sep-14 14/00542/UNOPDE Norfolk development Notice Issued

Alleged unauthorised change of roof materials and addition of 29 Norfolk Street King's Lynn UPVC replacement windows in P3 11-Jun-07 07/00189/UWCA Norfolk PE30 1AL conservation area Notice Issued

B1145 Gayton Road Bawsey alleged unauthorised P3 Bawsey 03-Mar-15 15/00114/UADV Norfolk advertisement Pending Consideration

Disused Building On the B1145 P3 Bawsey 03-Mar-15 15/00115/UNTIDY Gayton Road Bawsey Norfolk alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

Alleged breach of condition 5 of Moor Farm Barn Docking Road planning permission P2 Bircham 01-Oct-10 10/00453/BOC Great Bircham Norfolk PE31 6QP 2/03/1638/CU Notice Issued

Moor Farm Stables Docking Road Alleged Failure to discharge Great Bircham King's Lynn Norfolk conditions prior to occupation - P2 Bircham 24-Jan-11 11/00053/BOC PE31 6QP 08/01529/F Notice Issued

23 Church Lane Bircham Tofts alleged unauthorised operational P2 Bircham 27-Aug-14 14/00513/UNOPDE Norfolk PE31 6EF development Pending Consideration

Long Meadow Fring Road Great Bircham King's Lynn Norfolk PE31 P2 Bircham 06-Jan-15 15/00005/S106 6RE Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued 172 The Nodd Orchard Close Brancaster Staithe King's Lynn P2 Brancaster 09-Jun-14 14/00305/UNAUTU Norfolk PE31 8BN alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Little Saltings Broad Lane Brancaster King's Lynn Norfolk Alleged breach of condition DC Application P3 Brancaster 24-Oct-14 14/00659/BOC PE31 8AU relating to 11/00188/F Submitted

Burnham Mables Paint Pot 16 Ulph Place alleged unauthorised works in a P2 Market 14-Aug-14 14/00478/UWCA Burnham Market Norfolk PE31 8HQ conservation area Pending Consideration

Land And Buildings On the North Burnham Side of North Street Burnham P2 Market 12-Jan-15 15/00023/S106 Market Norfolk PE31 8HG Section 106 Monintoring Notice Issued

Plumms Yard Cottage 12 Ulph Burnham Place Burnham Market Norfolk alleged breach of condition P2 Market 24-Apr-15 15/00199/BOC PE31 8HQ relating to 04/01897/F Pending Consideration

Redwalls Station Road Burnham Burnham Market King's Lynn Norfolk PE31 alleged breach of condition P3 Market 16-Sep-14 14/00574/BOC 8HA relating to 11/00793/F Pending Consideration

Burnham 55 Market Place Burnham Market alleged unauthorised P3 Market 05-May-15 15/00227/UADV Norfolk PE31 8HD advertisement and illiuminations Pending Consideration

monitoring conditions attached Land South of Old School Site Pales to Planning Application P2 Castle Acre 06-Jan-15 15/00001/MON Green Castle Acre Norfolk 14/00632/F Pending Consideration

The Annex Mill House Cottage Queen Elizabeth Way Castle Rising P2 Castle Rising 03-Mar-15 15/00117/UNAUTU Norfolk PE31 6AL alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration Without planning permission, the unauthorised change of use of the Land for the siting of a Land At Main Road Clenchwarton caravan used for residential P2 Clenchwarton 15-Oct-12 12/00497/UNAUTU Norfolk PE34 4BQ purposes Notice Issued 173 East View Farm 20 Church Road Clenchwarton King's Lynn Norfolk alleged unauthorised operation P2 Clenchwarton 14-May-15 15/00243/UNOPDE PE34 4EA development Pending Consideration

The Former Fosters Sports Pavilion alleged property adversely 105 Ferry Road Clenchwarton affecting the amenity of the P3 Clenchwarton 18-Jul-12 12/00354/UNTIDY King's Lynn Norfolk PE34 4BP neighbourhood Notice Issued

Wood Farm Cottage Lynn Road Alleged unauthorised works to Hillington King's Lynn Norfolk PE31 old stable block to create 1 bed DC Application P3 Congham 29-May-13 13/00291/UNAUTU 6BZ home Submitted

West Hall Farm 80 Sluice Road Denver Downham Market Norfolk P2 Denver 06-Jan-15 15/00001/UNAUTU PE38 0DZ alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

College Farm 10 Whin Common Road Denver Downham Market Alleged unauthorised works to a P3 Denver 30-Sep-14 14/00609/UWLB Norfolk PE38 0DX listed building Pending Consideration

Life Wood Hunstanton Road Alleged unauthorised large DC Application P2 Dersingham 04-Apr-12 12/00172/UNOPDE Dersingham Norfolk structure being erected in wood Submitted

Richardson Trailers Old Station Yard 67 Station Road Dersingham P2 Dersingham 27-Apr-15 15/00219/UNAUTU Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

2 Manor Road Dersingham King's alleged unauthorised operational P3 Dersingham 10-Oct-13 13/00612/UNOPDE Lynn Norfolk PE31 6LD development Pending Consideration

75 Manor Road Dersingham King's P3 Dersingham 11-Sep-14 14/00550/BOC Lynn Norfolk PE31 6LN alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration

Sunnyvale 2 Fakenham Road alleged unathorised operational P3 Docking 24-Apr-15 15/00196/UNOPDE Docking Norfolk PE31 8NW development Pending Consideration 174 Beech House Snape Lane Downham Downham Market Norfolk PE38 Monitoring - Section 106 P1 Market 02-Aug-11 11/00390/S106 9JH Agreement Notice Issued Without planning permission, the material Change of Use of the Land from car sales and light van hire to a mixed use as a commercial car park, a car valeting service, the assembly The Quality 4x4 Sales 91 Railway and sale of garden buildings, the Downham Road Downham Market Norfolk provision of general storage, a P2 Market 02-Oct-13 13/00590/UNAUTU PE38 9EP vehicle r Notice Issued

Amenity Area Opposite 81 Downham Rosemary Way Downham Market P2 Market 27-Jan-14 14/00052/BOC Norfolk alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration

Downham 23 Glebe Road Downham Market P2 Market 28-Jan-14 14/00054/UNAUTU Norfolk PE38 9QJ Alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Downham Land To the South of 17 Railway P2 Market 30-Oct-14 14/00672/BOC Road Downham Market Norfolk alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration

Martin the Newsagent 10 Bridge Downham Street Downham Market Norfolk alleged unauthorised satellite P2 Market 12-Nov-14 14/00690/UWCA PE38 9DH dishes in a Conservation Area Pending Consideration

Land Between Railway Road And Downham Richmond Road Downham Market P2 Market 06-Jan-15 15/00004/S106 Norfolk Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

The White Hart 58 Bridge Street Downham Downham Market Norfolk PE38 alleged unauthorised works to a DC Application P2 Market 09-Feb-15 15/00079/UWLB 9DH Listed Building Submitted

Downham 118 Bexwell Road Downham alleged unauthorised operational P2 Market 05-Mar-15 15/00124/UNOPDE Market Norfolk PE38 9LJ development Pending Consideration 175

Downham The Bungalow 28A Nelson Avenue alleged unauthorised operational P2 Market 30-Mar-15 15/00162/UNOPDE Downham Market Norfolk PE38 9JJ development Pending Consideration

Land And Buildings On the South Downham Side of Railway Road Downham P3 Market 22-May-12 12/00242/S106 Market Norfolk PE38 9EL Monitoring - Section 106 Notice Issued

Williams Refrigeration Ltd Bennett Downham Street Downham Market Norfolk P3 Market 27-Jun-12 12/00305/S106 PE38 9EE S106-Monitoring Notice Issued

Land East of Lancaster Crescent Alleged unauthorised breach of Downham Lancaster Crescent Downham conditions relating to Planning P3 Market 26-Sep-12 12/00479/BOC Market Norfolk Approval 08/00122/FM Notice Issued

The Willows Brickfields Lane Downham Downham Market Norfolk PE38 P3 Market 01-May-13 13/00229/UNTIDY 9ED alleged untidy land Notice Issued

Unit 2 12 St Johns Way St John's Downham Business Estate Downham Market P3 Market 12-Sep-14 14/00559/UNAUTU Norfolk PE38 0QQ alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Lawnboy Farm Services Railway Downham Road Downham Market Norfolk alleged unauthorised P3 Market 29-Oct-14 14/00671/UADV PE38 9EB advertisements Pending Consideration

Ho Wong 70 Bridge Street Downham Downham Market Norfolk PE38 P3 Market 09-Feb-15 15/00078/UNTIDY 9DJ alleged unatidy land Pending Consideration

Open Space Primrose Avenue Downham Downham Market Norfolk PE38 alleged unauthorised operational DC Application P4 Market 15-Sep-14 14/00562/UNOPDE 9GF development Submitted

Chapel Farm House Downham Downham Road Salters Lode Norfolk PE38 DC Application P2 West 26-Jan-15 15/00047/BOC 0BA alleged breach of condition Submitted 176

Downham Bank Farm House Downham Road P3 West 08-Jan-13 13/00003/UNTIDY Salters Lode Norfolk PE38 0AZ alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

Downham Appletree Cottage The Lane Salters Alleged unauthorised operational P3 West 02-Oct-14 14/00627/UNOPDE Lode Norfolk PE38 0DL development Pending Consideration

Church Cottage Fakenham Road East Rudham King's Lynn Norfolk P3 East Rudham 29-Aug-12 12/00399/UNTIDY PE31 8QZ alleged untidy land Notice Issued

44 Bagthorpe Road East Rudham alleged unauthorised use - P3 East Rudham 22-Apr-15 15/00186/UNAUTU King's Lynn Norfolk PE31 8RA Extension Pending Consideration

Old Station Yard Gayton Road East P2 East Winch 23-Jan-12 12/00053/UNAUTU Winch Norfolk PE32 1LG alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Land SW Area of Bilney Wood N of Holder Carr Common Road West alleged unauthorised operational P2 East Winch 09-Jan-15 15/00015/UNOPDE Bilney Norfolk developmernt Pending Consideration

The Rose Cottage Main Road West Alleged unautorised building P2 East Winch 14-Apr-15 15/00177/UNAUTU Bilney Norfolk PE32 1HP work Pending Consideration

South of Broadwater Lane Gayton P3 East Winch 07-Aug-13 13/00431/UNAUTU Norfolk PE32 1QP alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued

W W S Tarpaulins Gayton Road alleged unauthorised operational P3 East Winch 29-Apr-14 14/00226/UNOPDE East Winch Norfolk PE32 1LQ development Pending Consideration

3 Bilney Barns Paws Lane West P3 East Winch 20-Nov-14 14/00705/UNAUTU Bilney Norfolk PE32 1XQ alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration 177

62 Church Road Emneth Wisbech alleged breach of Condition P2 Emneth 22-Jul-14 14/00430/BOC Norfolk PE14 8AA relating to 06/02089/F Pending Consideration

Banyer Hall 121 Ladys Drove alleged breach of condition P2 Emneth 20-Oct-14 14/00648/BOC Emneth Wisbech Norfolk PE14 8DG relating to 10/00871/F Pending Consideration

Alleged unauthorised UPVC Banyer Cottage 117 Ladys Drove windows and door in a Listed P2 Emneth 18-Dec-14 14/00730/UWLB Emneth Norfolk PE14 8DG Building Pending Consideration

Roundabout Wisbech Bypass A47 Elm High Road Emneth Elm High alleged unauthorised P2 Emneth 05-Mar-15 15/00126/UADV Road Emneth Norfolk advertisement Pending Consideration

Starlight 52 Elmside Emneth alleged unauthorised operational P2 Emneth 27-Mar-15 15/00159/UNOPDE Norfolk PE14 8BQ development Pending Consideration

Westfield Guesthouse 85 Elm High Alleged numerous business uses P2 Emneth 14-Apr-15 15/00176/OTHER Road Emneth Norfolk PE14 0DH which are unauthorised. Pending Consideration

Sexton House 15 Hall Farm Close P2 Feltwell 12-Jan-15 15/00020/S106 Feltwell Norfolk IP26 4DS Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

2 Leonards Lane Feltwell Thetford alleged breach of condition P3 Feltwell 27-Apr-15 15/00209/BOC Norfolk IP26 4EQ relating to 12/01683/RM Pending Consideration

Fairswell Manor Main Road Fincham King's Lynn Norfolk PE33 alleged breach of condition P2 Fincham 12-May-14 14/00252/BOC 9ET relating to 09/00594/F Notice Issued

Timbers Lynn Road Fincham King's alleged unauthorised works to a P2 Fincham 03-Feb-15 15/00057/UWLB Lynn Norfolk PE33 9HE Listed Building Pending Consideration 178 Former Hills Garage Lynn Road Gayton King's Lynn Norfolk PE32 P2 Gayton 26-Jun-14 14/00374/UNAUTU 1QJ alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Allens Garage Lynn Road Gayton P2 Gayton 12-Jan-15 15/00019/S106 King's Lynn Norfolk PE32 1QJ Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

Former Works Adj Gayton Mill P2 Gayton 13-Jan-15 15/00031/S106 Litcham Road Gayton Norfolk Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

Soleda Lime Kiln Road Gayton alleged unauthorised operational P3 Gayton 26-Nov-14 14/00716/UNOPDE King's Lynn Norfolk PE32 1QT development Pending Consideration

Oakwood Common Lane Gayton alleged breach of condition P4 Gayton 16-Sep-14 14/00573/BOC Thorpe Norfolk PE32 1PN relating to 11/01016/F Pending Consideration

7 - 8 Rectory Row Sandy Lane Great Great Massingham King's Lynn Norfolk P3 Massingham 26-Oct-12 12/00519/UNTIDY PE32 2EZ Alleged untidy land Notice Issued

Great 5 Weasenham Road Great DC Application P3 Massingham 27-Feb-15 15/00106/UNAUTU Massingham Norfolk PE32 2EY alleged unauthorised use Submitted

St Clement 16 Castleacre Road Great Great Massingham King's Lynn alleged unauthorised operational P3 Massingham 23-Mar-15 15/00148/UNOPDE Norfolk PE32 2HD development Pending Consideration

Ramblewood Farm Cliffe En Howe Breach of condition attached P2 Grimston 23-Nov-12 12/00565/UNAUTU Road Pott Row Norfolk PE32 1BY planning permission 10/01544/F Notice Issued

Fairview 10 Back Lane Pott Row P2 Grimston 10-Jul-14 14/00415/UNAUTU King's Lynn Norfolk PE32 1BT alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration 179 The Consulting Rooms Willow House Watery Lane Grimston alleged unauthorised use - P3 Grimston 06-Jan-15 15/00002/UNAUTU King's Lynn Norfolk PE32 1BQ Change of Use Pending Consideration

Land N of Chequers Road And E of Chapel Road Chequers Road Pott alleged unauthorised operational P3 Grimston 11-Mar-15 15/00138/UNOPDE Row Norfolk development Pending Consideration

4 Vong Lane Pott Row King's Lynn P3 Grimston 17-Mar-15 15/00141/UNOPDE Norfolk PE32 1BW alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Land West of A149 Lynn Road P2 Heacham 17-Feb-15 15/00090/S106 Heacham Norfolk Section 106 Monitoring Pending Consideration

Rhino Sheds Dairy Farm School P2 Heacham 23-Mar-15 15/00147/BOC Road Heacham Norfolk alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration

Chez Nous 14 the South Beach Heacham King's Lynn Norfolk PE31 P3 Heacham 11-Sep-14 14/00534/UNTIDY 7LH alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

Re-Jo 1 Kenwood Road Heacham P3 Heacham 11-Sep-14 14/00544/UNTIDY King's Lynn Norfolk PE31 7DD alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

53 Neville Road Heacham King's alleged unauthorised operational P3 Heacham 27-Jan-15 15/00049/UNOPDE Lynn Norfolk PE31 7HB development Pending Consideration

Barnaby Cottage Hall Close Heacham King's Lynn Norfolk PE31 alleged unauthorised operational P3 Heacham 09-Feb-15 15/00075/UNOPDE 7JT development Pending Consideration

Land E of Hunstanton Road And S of Robin Hill Hunstanton Road alleged unauthorised operational P3 Heacham 10-Mar-15 15/00134/UNOPDE Heacham Norfolk development Pending Consideration 180

18 Kenwood Road Heacham King's alleged not in accordance with P3 Heacham 17-Mar-15 15/00140/NIA Lynn Norfolk PE31 7DD Planning Permission 13/00749/F Pending Consideration

Dents Hilgay Farm Shop & Garden Centre Steels Drove Hilgay Norfolk Alleged breach of condition P2 Hilgay 25-Mar-14 14/00167/BOC PE38 0QH attached to 12/01331/F Notice Issued

Martins Farm Station Road Ten Mile Bank Downham Market P2 Hilgay 19-Feb-15 15/00098/S106 Norfolk PE38 0EP Section 106 Monitoring Pending Consideration

Blackberry Barn Ely Road Hilgay Downham Market Norfolk PE38 P3 Hilgay 08-Jan-13 13/00005/UNAUTU 0HL alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Bridge House Bridge Street Hilgay alleged breach of condition P3 Hilgay 16-Sep-14 14/00567/BOC Downham Market Norfolk PE38 0LJ relating to 12/01648/F Pending Consideration

Island Farm Cowles Drove Hockwold cum Hockwold cum Wilton Norfolk IP26 P2 Wilton 30-May-14 14/00291/UNAUTU 4JQ alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

White Dyke Farm Black Dyke Road Alleged unauthorised use of Hockwold cum Hockwold cum Wilton Norfolk IP26 annexe as separate living P3 Wilton 18-Dec-14 14/00738/UNAUTU 4JW accommodation Pending Consideration

Twelve Acre Farm Moor Drove Hockwold cum (East) Hockwold cum Wilton P3 Wilton 19-Jan-15 15/00037/UNAUTU Norfolk IP26 4JU alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

White Dyke Farm Black Dyke Road Hockwold cum Hockwold cum Wilton Norfolk IP26 alleged Breach of Condition P3 Wilton 07-May-15 15/00237/BOC 4JW relating to 14/00265/F Pending Consideration

Land North of High Road Farm Holme next Main Road Holme next the Sea P2 the Sea 08-Aug-14 14/00463/UNAUTU Norfolk PE36 6LA alleged unauthoirised use Notice Issued 181 alleged breach of condition Holme next Meadow Corner 29 Kirkgate Holme relating to 14/00327/F and P2 the Sea 09-Mar-15 15/00129/BOC next the Sea Norfolk PE36 6LH 13/00833/F Pending Consideration

Holme next Land East of Seabank Broadwater alleged breach of condition P2 the Sea 09-Mar-15 15/00132/BOC Road Holme next the Sea Norfolk relating to 14/00435/F Pending Consideration

The Marine Hotel 10 St Edmunds Terrace Hunstanton Norfolk PE36 alleged unauthorised works in a P3 Hunstanton 01-Apr-14 14/00218/UWCA 5EH conservation area Pending Consideration

Rockafellas American Diner 19 the Green Hunstanton Norfolk PE36 alleged uanuthorised operational P3 Hunstanton 23-Jun-14 14/00363/UNOPDE 5AH development Pending Consideration

33 Northgate Hunstanton Norfolk alleged unauthorised works in a P3 Hunstanton 30-Jun-14 14/00381/UWCA PE36 6AP Conservation Area Pending Consideration

71 Victoria Avenue Hunstanton alleged unauthorised operational P3 Hunstanton 24-Apr-15 15/00195/UNOPDE Norfolk PE36 6BY development - sheds Pending Consideration

Family Support Centre Church Lane Alleged replacement windows P2 King's Lynn 30-Sep-10 10/00431/UWCA King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 5AE without consent Notice Issued Without planning permission, the installation of Un-Plasticised 18 North Everard Street King's Lynn Polyvinyl Chloride (UPVC) P2 King's Lynn 17-Mar-11 11/00155/UNOPDE Norfolk PE30 5HQ windows and door Pending Consideration

15A St James Street King's Lynn Alleged unauthorised satellite P2 King's Lynn 14-Nov-11 11/00615/UNOPDE Norfolk PE30 5DA dish Pending Consideration

27 North Everard Street King's Lynn Alleged unauthorised white UPVC P2 King's Lynn 20-Jan-12 12/00051/UWCA Norfolk PE30 5HQ windows and door. Notice Issued 182 11 St Johns Terrace Blackfriars Removal of plaster surround of Road King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 front (South) entrance of Grade II P2 King's Lynn 30-Jul-12 12/00371/UWLB 1NW Listed Building. Notice Issued

Unit 11 Willow Road Willows Business Park King's Lynn Norfolk Alleged Breach of condition 5 DC Application P2 King's Lynn 24-Apr-13 13/00217/BOC PE34 3RD attached to 12/00912/F Submitted

50 Kings Green King's Lynn Norfolk P2 King's Lynn 03-Jul-13 13/00359/UNAUTU PE30 4SH alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Hanse House South Quay King's alleged unauthorised works to a P2 King's Lynn 08-Jan-14 14/00006/UWLB Lynn Norfolk PE30 5GN Listed Building Pending Consideration

7 Blackfriars Road King's Lynn alleged other breach - derelict P2 King's Lynn 26-Feb-14 14/00109/OTHER Norfolk PE30 1NR land and buildings Pending Consideration

Land At East Coast Music Co 71 - 72 Norfolk Street King's Lynn Norfolk alleged unauthorised operational P2 King's Lynn 06-May-14 14/00242/UNOPDE PE30 1AD development Pending Consideration

66 London Road King's Lynn alleged unauthorised works to a P2 King's Lynn 12-Jun-14 14/00314/UWLB Norfolk PE30 5EU Listed Building Pending Consideration

Ferryside 4 Ferry Square West Lynn P2 King's Lynn 12-Jun-14 14/00316/UNTIDY King's Lynn Norfolk PE34 3JQ alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

1 King Street King's Lynn Norfolk alleged unauthorised works to a P2 King's Lynn 15-Jul-14 14/00428/UWLB PE30 1ET Listed Building Pending Consideration

Tesco Campbells Meadow King's P2 King's Lynn 30-Jul-14 14/00440/S106 Lynn Norfolk PE30 4YN Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued 183 Land R/o 27 - 36 Peddars Way Holme next the Sea Norfolk PE36 P2 King's Lynn 07-Aug-14 14/00460/UNAUTU 6LE alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

6 St Anns Street King's Lynn Norfolk Derelict building having an P2 King's Lynn 10-Sep-14 14/00523/UNTIDY PE30 1LT adverse impact on the amenity Notice Issued

The Cosmopolitan 2 - 4 Blackfriars Street King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 P2 King's Lynn 10-Oct-14 14/00634/UADV 1NP alleged unauthorised advert Pending Consideration

Land South of 9 Orchard Lane Monitoring - Section 106 P2 King's Lynn 06-Jan-15 15/00003/S106 Gaywood Agreement Notice Issued

Marsh House Marsh Lane King's P2 King's Lynn 13-Jan-15 15/00024/S106 Lynn Norfolk PE30 3AD Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

Harvey House 50 Ferry Road West P2 King's Lynn 13-Jan-15 15/00025/S106 Lynn King's Lynn Norfolk Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

Land East of 21 Tower Street King's P2 King's Lynn 14-Jan-15 15/00032/S106 Lynn Norfolk Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

John Lake Shellfish Cross Bank DC Application P2 King's Lynn 19-Jan-15 15/00038/BOC Road King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 2ET alleged breach of condition Submitted

Sports Direct 6 - 8 Hamburg Way North Lynn Industrial Estate King's alleged unauthorised P2 King's Lynn 12-Feb-15 15/00086/UADV Lynn Norfolk PE30 2ND advertisement Pending Consideration Warehouse Clearance Shops Oldmedow Road Hardwick Industrial Estate King's Lynn P2 King's Lynn 25-Feb-15 15/00104/UADV Norfolk Alleged unauthorised advert Pending Consideration 184 The Old Police House 29 St Alleged untidy site causing Edmundsbury Road King's Lynn disamenity to the area P2 King's Lynn 31-Mar-15 15/00172/UNTIDY Norfolk PE30 2DU 010000045724 Pending Consideration Alleged Breach of Conditions: Fencing positions and entrance 4 Larkspur Close Gaywood King's not installed in accordance with P2 King's Lynn 14-Apr-15 15/00175/BOC Lynn Norfolk PE30 4FU drawing 10k Pending Consideration

59C Lynn Road Gaywood King's Alleged extended shop from 59B P2 King's Lynn 15-Apr-15 15/00180/UNAUTU Lynn Norfolk PE30 4PR into 59C Pending Consideration

7 King Street King's Lynn Norfolk alleged unauthorised works to a P2 King's Lynn 27-Apr-15 15/00212/UWLB PE30 1ET Listed Building Pending Consideration

alleged breach of condition 100 Norfolk Street King's Lynn relating to 13/01482 and P2 King's Lynn 30-Apr-15 15/00225/BOC Norfolk 14/00927 Pending Consideration

King's Lynn Silos Ltd South Quay P2 King's Lynn 01-May-15 15/00226/S106 King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 5DT Section 106 Monitoring Pending Consideration Unauthorised scaffolding stair case at rear of property. Breach 10 Tower Street King's Lynn of condition 2 attached to P3 King's Lynn 24-Mar-11 11/00163/UNOPDE Norfolk PE30 1EJ planning permission 06/01942/F Notice Issued

Alleged breach of conditions Ciao Coffee 42 Broad Street King's attached to 09/00369/F, P3 King's Lynn 07-Jun-11 11/00300/BOC Lynn Norfolk PE30 1DP 11/00583/F Notice Issued

Car Parking Area Off Corbyn Shaw P3 King's Lynn 21-Sep-12 12/00464/BOC Road King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 4UL Alleged breach of condition Notice Issued

18 Kent Road King's Lynn Norfolk Alleged unauthorised siting of a P3 King's Lynn 07-Dec-12 12/00574/UNAUTU PE30 4AU mobile home as a residence Pending Consideration 185

78 Chapel Street King's Lynn Alleged unauthorised works P3 King's Lynn 28-Jan-13 13/00073/UWCA Norfolk PE30 1EF within Conservation Area Pending Consideration alleged breach of condition 26 relating to 05/00691/OM and The Gatehouse Kellard Place King's Condition 23 relating to P3 King's Lynn 08-Jan-14 14/00009/BOC Lynn Norfolk PE30 5DG 09/021010/F Pending Consideration

Hogs Head 109 - 110 High Street alleged unauthorised works in a P3 King's Lynn 17-Apr-14 14/00223/UWCA King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 1DA Conservation Area Pending Consideration

7 Mount Street King's Lynn Norfolk P3 King's Lynn 06-May-14 14/00233/UNTIDY PE30 5NH alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

12 Thurlin Road Gaywood King's alleged unauthorised operational P3 King's Lynn 02-Jun-14 14/00293/UNOPDE Lynn Norfolk PE30 4PG develoment Pending Consideration

The Honest Lawyer 60A London alleged unauthorised works to a P3 King's Lynn 12-Jun-14 14/00313/UWLB Road King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 5EU Listed Building Pending Consideration

19 Beulah Street Gaywood King's P3 King's Lynn 22-Aug-14 14/00499/BOC Lynn Norfolk PE30 4DN alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration

Land And Buildings On the South Side of South Lynn Plain King's Lynn P3 King's Lynn 15-Sep-14 14/00563/UNAUTU Norfolk PE30 5HF Alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Erection of a wooden fence The Queens Arms 14 - 15 London without the necessary planning P3 King's Lynn 13-Oct-14 14/00638/UWCA Road King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 5PY permission having been obtained. Notice Issued

18 Harewood Drive King's Lynn P3 King's Lynn 07-Nov-14 14/00687/UNAUTU Norfolk PE30 2BS alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration 186

68 London Road King's Lynn P3 King's Lynn 19-Dec-14 14/00747/UNTIDY Norfolk PE30 5EU Alleged untidy property Pending Consideration

69 London Road King's Lynn Alleged unauthorised satellite P3 King's Lynn 19-Dec-14 14/00748/UWLB Norfolk PE30 5EU dish on a listed building Pending Consideration

78 Norfolk Street King's Lynn P3 King's Lynn 20-Feb-15 15/00099/UNAUTU Norfolk PE30 1AD alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

13 Reffley Lane King's Lynn Norfolk Alleged un authorised DC Application P3 King's Lynn 23-Mar-15 15/00146/UNOPDE PE30 3EF operational development Submitted

2A Waterside King's Lynn Norfolk P3 King's Lynn 25-Mar-15 15/00152/BOC PE30 2NA alleged breach of condiition Pending Consideration

Play Area In Front of 75 Dairy Way Gaywood King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 alleged other breach - Untidy P3 King's Lynn 31-Mar-15 15/00170/UNTIDY 4DU Land Pending Consideration

Vancouver Centre New Conduit P3 King's Lynn 24-Apr-15 15/00198/UNAUTU Street King's Lynn Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

1 Somerville Road King's Lynn P3 King's Lynn 27-Apr-15 15/00211/UNTIDY Norfolk PE30 5RG alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

5 Walsham Close King's Lynn P3 King's Lynn 27-Apr-15 15/00216/UNAUTU Norfolk PE30 4XE alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration 187

3 Harecroft Gardens King's Lynn P3 King's Lynn 05-May-15 15/00230/UNAUTU Norfolk PE30 2BY Alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

The Tower Trinity Quay Page Stair P4 King's Lynn 27-Apr-15 15/00210/UNOPDE Lane King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 1NQ alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

28 Alice Fisher Crescent King's Lynn alleged unauthorised operational P4 King's Lynn 07-May-15 15/00233/UNOPDE Norfolk PE30 2PD development Pending Consideration

Electricity Sub Station Wootton Road Gaywood King's Lynn Norfolk Breach of Conditions 8 and 9 on P3 King's Lynn 04-Aug-11 11/00007/MON PE30 4BP 09/00649/F Notice Issued

The Deeds Church Lane Ashwicken alleged unauthorised operational P3 Leziate 24-Mar-15 15/00151/UNOPDE King's Lynn Norfolk PE32 1LN development Pending Consideration

Poiana Fen Lane Marham Norfolk alleged breach of condition P2 Marham 03-Feb-15 15/00054/BOC PE33 9JG relating to 10/01565/F Pending Consideration

R & S Engineering Burnthouse Drove Upper Marham Norfolk PE33 P2 Marham 27-Mar-15 15/00158/UNOPDE 9JP alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

R & S Engineering Burnthouse Drove Upper Marham Norfolk PE33 alleged breach of condition P3 Marham 07-May-15 15/00234/BOC 9JP relating to 13/01472/CU Pending Consideration

alleged breach of condition Marshland St 195 Smeeth Road Marshland St relating to planning reference: P2 James 11-Feb-13 13/00082/BOC James Norfolk PE14 8JF 08/01173/CU Pending Consideration

Crown Farm 24 Trinity Road Marshland St Marshland St James Norfolk PE14 P2 James 09-Jun-14 14/00300/UNAUTU 8JA alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration 188

Marshland St Land North of Long Lots Drove P3 James 03-Jul-13 13/00356/UNAUTU Marshland St James Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued

Marshland Villa Farm House School Marshland St Road Marshland St James Norfolk alleged unauthorised operational P3 James 06-Sep-13 13/00509/UNOPDE PE14 8JR development Pending Consideration

Wings Farm Bonnetts Lane Marshland St Marshland St James Wisbech P3 James 12-Sep-14 14/00552/BOC Norfolk PE14 8JE alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration

Land W of 348 And 346 Smeeth Marshland St Road Long Lots Marshland St James P3 James 29-Oct-14 14/00668/UNAUTU Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Rose Cottage Rands Drove Marshland St Marshland St James Wisbech alleged residential mobile home P3 James 07-Nov-14 14/00685/UNAUTU Norfolk PE14 8HA sited on the land Pending Consideration

The Fairview 20 the Avenue Brookville Thetford Norfolk IP26 P2 Methwold 23-Mar-15 15/00149/UNAUTU 4RF alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Rosewell Cottage 34 White Road Methwold Thetford Norfolk IP26 P2 Methwold 30-Apr-15 15/00221/OTHER 4PA alleged other breach Pending Consideration

Methwold Methodist Church 2 High Street Methwold Norfolk IP26 alleged unauthorised operational P3 Methwold 02-Dec-14 14/00727/UNOPDE 4NX development Pending Consideration

Gerizim Ltd Poultry Farm College P3 Methwold 27-Feb-15 15/00107/UNAUTU Road Wereham Norfolk PE33 9SD alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration 189 Alleged works to property which 7 Parkhill Middleton King's Lynn are not in accordance with plans P2 Middleton 18-Dec-14 14/00736/NIA Norfolk PE32 1RJ approved under 14/00163/F Pending Consideration

Bramble Barn Sandy Lane Blackborough End King's Lynn alleged unauthorised residential P2 Middleton 12-May-15 15/00238/UNAUTU Norfolk PE32 1SE caravan Pending Consideration

alleged breach of condition Crown Cottages School Road relating to 08/02313/F Conditions P3 Middleton 20-Jan-14 14/00029/BOC Middleton Norfolk 11 and 12 Pending Consideration

Willow Cottage 82 West Street North Creake Fakenham Norfolk P2 North Creake 19-Nov-13 13/00663/HHC NR21 9LQ High hedge complaint Notice Issued

Willow Cottage 82 West Street North Creake Fakenham Norfolk High Hedge complaint between P2 North Creake 20-Mar-14 14/00160/HHC NR21 9LQ 12m and 20m Pending Consideration

35 West Street North Creake Alleged breach of conditions P2 North Creake 18-Dec-14 14/00735/BOC Fakenham Norfolk NR21 9LQ attached to 09/01503/F Pending Consideration

Abbey Farm Creake Abbey Burnham Road North Creake alleged breach of condition DC Application P3 North Creake 18-Jun-14 14/00349/BOC Norfolk NR21 9LF relating to 11/01998/F Submitted

Land Between Game Keepers Cottage And Westhall Lodge S Lynn P2 North Runcton 30-Mar-15 15/00160/UADV Road Middleton Norfolk alleged unauthorised advert Pending Consideration

Wyndham House Manor Road North North Wootton King's Lynn Norfolk alleged breach of condition P3 Wootton 24-Apr-15 15/00200/BOC PE30 3PZ relating to 14/00925/F Pending Consideration

Warren Farm Cottage Waterworks Old Road Old Hunstanton Hunstanton Alleged breach of planning P2 Hunstanton 02-Oct-14 14/00624/BOC Norfolk PE36 6JE condition Pending Consideration 190 Alleged unauthorised change of Land On the North East Side of use of agricultural building to P2 Outwell 19-Dec-14 14/00743/UNAUTU Robbs Lane Outwell Norfolk another use Pending Consideration

Oakwood Farm Marsh Road P2 Outwell 12-May-15 15/00239/UNAUTU Outwell Wisbech Norfolk PE14 8PY alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

The Post Office Church Terrace Alleged unauthorised P3 Outwell 26-Aug-14 14/00506/UADV Outwell Norfolk PE14 8RQ advertisement Pending Consideration

P3 Outwell 12-May-15 15/00241/UNTIDY 75A Church Drove Outwell Norfolk alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

Land At Oakwood Garden Supplies P2 Pentney 09-May-14 14/00251/UNAUTU Pentney Lane Pentney Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration Without planning permission, the storage of vehicles at a level in excess of an incidental level constituting a change of use to a 11 Church Close Pentney King's mixed use of residential and P3 Pentney 03-Jul-13 13/00352/S215 Lynn Norfolk PE32 1JJ storage of vehicles. Pending Consideration

73 Pentney Lakes Common Road P3 Pentney 09-Feb-15 15/00070/UNAUTU Pentney Norfolk PE32 1LE alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

94 High Street Ringstead P2 Ringstead 11-Oct-13 13/00620/UNAUTU Hunstanton Norfolk PE36 5JU alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

2 Top End Cottages Holme Road Ringstead Hunstanton Norfolk alleged unauthorised works in a P3 Ringstead 30-Mar-15 15/00165/UWCA PE36 5JS Conservation Area Pending Consideration 191 2 Top End Cottages Holme Road Ringstead Hunstanton Norfolk alleged not in accordance with P3 Ringstead 14-May-15 15/00242/NIA PE36 5JS approved plans Pending Consideration

Pig Farm 74 Station Road Roydon P2 Roydon 15-Apr-15 15/00182/UNAUTU King's Lynn Norfolk PE32 1AW Alleged unauthorised business Pending Consideration

Woodlakes Caravan & Camping Runcton Park Holme Road Stow Bridge P2 Holme 24-Apr-15 15/00193/S106 Norfolk PE34 3PX Section 106 Monitoring Pending Consideration

Staithe Cottage The Warren Warren Road Shouldham King's alleged unauthorised operational DC Application P2 Shouldham 03-Feb-15 15/00065/UNOPDE Lynn Norfolk PE33 0DH development Submitted

Brook Farm Cottage 42 Lynn Road Shouldham King's Lynn Norfolk Alleged unauthorised siting of P2 Shouldham 15-Apr-15 15/00179/UNAUTU PE33 0BW residential mobile home Pending Consideration

East View 11 Eastgate Street Shouldham King's Lynn Norfolk P3 Shouldham 22-Apr-14 14/00225/HHC PE33 0DD alleged high hedge Pending Consideration

38C Common Road Snettisham P2 Snettisham 10-Feb-15 15/00080/S106 Norfolk PE31 7PF S106 Monitoring Pending Consideration

alleged trees approx. 7-8mtrs tall 59 Lynn Road Snettisham King's and restricting light to the rear of P2 Snettisham 09-Mar-15 15/00127/HHC Lynn Norfolk PE31 7PX 48 Shelduck Drive. Notice Issued

14 Lynn Road Snettisham King's alleged uanuthorised P3 Snettisham 27-Jan-14 14/00051/UADV Lynn Norfolk PE31 7PT advertisement Pending Consideration

South South View 44 Low Road South Alleged unauthorised building P3 Wootton 17-May-13 13/00266/UNOPDE Wootton Norfolk PE30 3LF works Pending Consideration 192 The Beeches 122 Grimston Road South South Wootton King's Lynn Norfolk alleged not in accordance with P3 Wootton 07-Aug-14 14/00458/NIA PE30 3NS approved plans Pending Consideration

South 3 Pretoria Grove South Wootton Alleged unauthorised P3 Wootton 02-Oct-14 14/00619/UNOPDE King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 3SP development Pending Consideration

Land Known As Pells Farm Farthing P2 Southery 08-Jan-14 14/00005/UNAUTU Drove Southery Norfolk PE38 0PR alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued

The Piggery North West of Farthing Drove Southery Downham Market P2 Southery 28-Jan-14 14/00057/UNAUTU Norfolk PE38 0PR alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

The Bungalow Brandon Creek P2 Southery 03-Feb-15 15/00063/UNAUTU Southery Norfolk PE38 0PR alleged uanuthorised use Pending Consideration

Jolly Farmer Feltwell Road Southery Downham Market P2 Southery 18-Feb-15 15/00096/UNAUTU Norfolk PE38 0NS alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Lynn Road Barns 76A Lynn Road alleged unauthorised operational P3 Southery 24-Apr-15 15/00197/UNOPDE Southery Norfolk development Pending Consideration

Stanhoe Hall Docking Road Stanhoe King's Lynn Norfolk PE31 alleged unauthorised works to a P2 Stanhoe 14-Mar-14 14/00154/UWLB 8QF Listed Building Pending Consideration

9 Station Road Stanhoe King's Lynn Alleged unauthorised operational P3 Stanhoe 30-Apr-15 15/00224/UNOPDE Norfolk PE31 8QN development Pending Consideration

The Applestore Furlong Road Stoke alleged unauthorised operational P2 Stoke Ferry 08-Nov-12 12/00550/UNOPDE Ferry Norfolk PE33 9SU development Notice Issued 193

Sea Star Fish Bar Lynn Road Stoke alleged unauthorised P2 Stoke Ferry 07-May-14 14/00245/UADV Ferry Norfolk PE33 9SW advertisement Pending Consideration

Hybrid Farm 246 the Drove P2 Stow Bardolph 24-Oct-14 14/00651/UNAUTU Barroway Drove Norfolk PE38 0AN alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued

Willow Farm Stow Bridge Road Alleged Breach of Condition P2 Stow Bardolph 12-Nov-14 14/00688/BOC Stow Bardolph Norfolk PE34 3HZ relating to 09/00147/F Pending Consideration

The Baptist Chapel Gooding Close P3 Stow Bardolph 07-Aug-13 13/00429/UNAUTU Stow Bridge Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Unit 2 Primrose Farm 176 the Drove Barroway Drove Norfolk P3 Stow Bardolph 06-May-14 14/00235/BOC PE38 0AL alleged breach of condition Notice Issued

Primrose Farm Site The Drove alleged breach of condition P3 Stow Bardolph 06-May-14 14/00237/BOC Barroway Drove Norfolk relating to 12/01696/F Pending Consideration

MRC Commercial And Technical Centre 183 the Drove Barroway alleged breach of condition P3 Stow Bardolph 27-Apr-15 15/00213/BOC Drove Norfolk PE38 0AL relating to 14/00247/FM Pending Consideration

MRC Commercial And Technical Centre 183 the Drove Barroway alleged breach of condition P3 Stow Bardolph 27-Apr-15 15/00218/BOC Drove Norfolk PE38 0AL relating to 14/00247/FM Pending Consideration

The Foldgate Inn Downham Road Stradsett King's Lynn Norfolk PE33 P3 Stradsett 07-Jan-15 15/00009/UNAUTU 9HH alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Caravan Rose Cottage Waterlow Terrington St Road Terrington St Clement King's P2 Clement 08-Apr-14 14/00202/UNAUTU Lynn Norfolk PE34 4PS alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued 194 New Marsh Farmhouse Ongar Hill Terrington St Terrington St Clement Norfolk PE34 P2 Clement 07-Aug-14 14/00456/UNAUTU 4JF alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Myrabella Farm Long Road Terrington St Terrington St Clement King's Lynn P2 Clement 10-Oct-14 14/00635/UNAUTU Norfolk PE34 4JN alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

South Fork Waterlow Road Terrington St Terrington St Clement Norfolk PE34 P2 Clement 19-Nov-14 14/00702/UNAUTU 4PS alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

W H Kerkham Ltd Rhoon Farm 80 Terrington St Rhoon Road Terrington St Clement alleged unauthorised operational P3 Clement 11-Sep-14 14/00546/UNOPDE Norfolk PE34 4JA development Pending Consideration

14 Emorsgate Terrington St Terrington St Clement King's Lynn Norfolk PE34 P3 Clement 24-Oct-14 14/00663/UNAUTU 4NY alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

The Bungalow Farm Long Road Terrington St Terrington St Clement King's Lynn P3 Clement 18-Dec-14 14/00734/UNAUTU Norfolk PE34 4JN Alleged unauthorised annexe Pending Consideration

Marigold Lodge 73 Sutton Road Terrington St Terrington St Clement King's Lynn alleged breach of condition P3 Clement 27-Apr-15 15/00214/BOC Norfolk PE34 4PJ relating to 12/00199/F Pending Consideration

Russell Lodge 40 Old Church Road Terrington St Terrington St John Wisbech Norfolk P2 John 09-Jun-14 14/00303/UNAUTU PE14 7XA alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Terrington St Bloomfield School Road Terrington P3 John 17-Sep-14 14/00576/UNAUTU St John Wisbech Norfolk PE14 7SG alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Plumtrees Green Lane Thornham alleged breach of condition P1 Thornham 30-Mar-15 15/00163/BOC Hunstanton Norfolk PE36 6NG relating to 14/00511/F Pending Consideration 195

Redridge The Green Thornham alleged breach of Condition P3 Thornham 23-Jun-14 14/00366/BOC Norfolk PE36 6NH relating to 13/00260/F Pending Consideration

The Coach & Horses Lynn Road Tilney St Tilney All Saints King's Lynn Norfolk allleged unauthorised operational P2 Lawrence 25-Mar-14 14/00176/UNOPDE PE34 4RU development Notice Issued

Garden House 27 Magdalen Road Tilney St Tilney St Lawrence King's Lynn P2 Lawrence 22-Apr-15 15/00183/S106 Norfolk PE34 4QX Section 106 Monitoring Pending Consideration

Tilney St Holly Manor Lynn Road Tilney All P4 Lawrence 09-Jan-15 15/00002/MON Saints Norfolk PE34 4RT Monitoring conditions Pending Consideration

Unauthorised Encampment P3 Titchwell 07-May-15 15/00236/UNAUTU Choseley Road Brancaster Norfolk alleged Unauthorised Use Pending Consideration

Land At Tottenhill Retail Park Lynn P2 Tottenhill 30-Jun-14 14/00376/UNAUTU Road Tottenhill Norfolk PE33 0SR Alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued

Kevley Marketing 52 Baptist Road P2 Upwell 06-Jun-13 13/00314/UNAUTU Upwell Norfolk PE14 9EY alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Land At Baptist Road Upwell Breach of condition 6 attached to P2 Upwell 12-Jun-13 13/00316/NIA Norfolk 11/01409/F Pending Consideration

Harwins Farm Pingle Road Upwell P2 Upwell 19-Feb-14 14/00092/UNAUTU Wisbech Norfolk PE14 9BN alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued

Foxley Lodge New Bridge Upwell alleged breach to a tree(s) in a P2 Upwell 03-Nov-14 14/00678/BTCA Norfolk PE14 9DW Conservation Area Pending Consideration 196

Wadyngstow House Main Road alleged unauthorised operational P2 Upwell 28-Jan-15 15/00052/UNOPDE Three Holes Norfolk PE14 9JR development Pending Consideration

Kevley Marketing 52 Baptist Road alleged unauthorised operational P3 Upwell 17-Feb-14 14/00083/UNOPDE Upwell Norfolk PE14 9EY development Pending Consideration

White House Flint House Road Lotts Bridge Three Holes Norfolk alleged unauthorised operational P3 Upwell 01-Jul-14 14/00384/UNOPDE PE14 9JN development Pending Consideration

The Chalet West Drove North alleged unauthorised Operational P2 Walpole 27-Feb-15 15/00109/UNOPDE Walpole St Peter Norfolk Development Notice Issued

Land Opposite Newcroft Cottage West Drove North Walpole St Peter P2 Walpole 14-May-15 15/00240/UNAUTU Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Land South West of the Willows Pyecroft Lane Walpole St Peter alleged breach of condition P3 Walpole 08-Jan-15 15/00014/BOC Norfolk relating to 13/01286/F Pending Consideration

Land East of Walpole Marsh Substation Walpole Bank Walpole alleged breach of condition P3 Walpole 09-Mar-15 15/00128/BOC St Andrew Norfolk relating to 14/01059/FM Pending Consideration

Fenchurch Market Lane Walpole St P3 Walpole 07-May-15 15/00235/BOC Andrew Norfolk PE14 7LR alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration

Walpole Cross Anatevka Market Lane Walpole St alleged breach of condition P2 Keys 23-Jul-14 14/00434/BOC Andrew Wisbech Norfolk PE14 7LT relating to 14/00453/F Pending Consideration

Walpole Cross Old Farm Market Lane Walpole St P2 Keys 30-Mar-15 15/00164/UNAUTU Andrew Norfolk PE14 7LT alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration 197 Land At the Pine Centre Rampart Walpole House Lynn Road Walpole Highway P2 Highway 07-Aug-14 14/00455/UNAUTU Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued

Windyridge Mill Lane Walpole Walpole Highway Wisbech Norfolk PE14 P3 Highway 06-Jan-15 15/00006/UNOPDE 7RD alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

The Grange Biggs Road Walsoken P2 Walsoken 14-Jul-14 14/00426/UNAUTU Wisbech Norfolk PE14 7BE Alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Land West of Station House Station P2 Walsoken 07-Aug-14 14/00454/UNAUTU Road Walsoken Norfolk alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Maipop Farm Biggs Road Walsoken alleged unauthorised use- P3 Walsoken 01-Dec-14 14/00722/UNAUTU Norfolk PE14 7BD Caravan Pending Consideration

Plot S of Faster Lente Walton Road Alleged unauthorised residential P3 Walsoken 26-Feb-15 15/00105/UNAUTU Walsoken Norfolk occupation of building Pending Consideration

Eastfields 60 Sparrowgate Road Walsoken Wisbech Norfolk PE14 P3 Walsoken 27-Apr-15 15/00202/UNTIDY 7AY alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

78 Chapnall Road Walsoken P3 Walsoken 27-Apr-15 15/00205/UNTIDY Wisbech Norfolk PE13 3TU alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

alleged breach of highway Claybrook Park 38 Broadend Road condition relating to planning P4 Walsoken 10-Aug-10 10/00329/BOC Walsoken Norfolk PE14 7BQ permission 06/02009/FM Notice Issued

Land North of Topeka Walton Road P4 Walsoken 18-Jun-14 14/00348/UNAUTU Walsoken Norfolk PE14 7AF alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued 198 Land South of Willowdown alleged dwelling not built in Property On Barnards Lane accordance with planning P2 Watlington 27-Sep-11 11/00512/NIA Watlington Norfolk approval Notice Issued

1 Barnards Cottages Barnards Lane alleged breach of condition P2 Watlington 16-Sep-14 14/00570/BOC Watlington Norfolk PE33 0JN relating to 11/00484/F Pending Consideration

1 Willow Close Watlington Norfolk P2 Watlington 12-Jan-15 15/00022/S106 PE33 0JR Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

52A John Davis Way Watlington alleged unauthorised operational P3 Watlington 29-Apr-14 14/00229/UNOPDE King's Lynn Norfolk PE33 0TD development Pending Consideration

2 Barnards Cottages Barnards Lane alleged breach of condition P4 Watlington 16-Sep-14 14/00571/BOC Watlington Norfolk PE33 0JN relating to 11/00485/F Pending Consideration

Mill Cottage Bedford Bank Welney alleged unauthorised operational P3 Welney 29-Nov-13 13/00694/UNOPDE Norfolk PE14 9RJ development Pending Consideration

Old Welney Hotel Bedford Bank P3 Welney 27-Oct-14 14/00666/UNAUTU Welney Wisbech Norfolk PE14 9TB alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

High Hill Farm Main Street Welney P3 Welney 23-Apr-15 15/00192/UNTIDY Wisbech Norfolk PE14 9RB alleged untidy land Pending Consideration

Manor House Church Road Alleged unauthorised works to a P2 Wereham 14-Apr-15 15/00174/UWLB Wereham Norfolk PE33 9AP Listed Building. Pending Consideration

Greenhill Cottage 1A Green Hill P3 West Acre 27-Aug-14 14/00514/BOC Road West Acre Norfolk PE32 1TW alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration 199

Florence House 217A Salts Road Alleged breach of condition P2 West Walton 25-Mar-14 14/00168/BOC West Walton Norfolk PE14 7EB attached to 10/02147/F Pending Consideration

Berties Farm Poultry Shed Harps Hall Road Walton Highway Norfolk P2 West Walton 30-Jun-14 14/00377/UNAUTU PE14 7DL alleged unauthorised use Notice Issued

Walnut Farm 15 River Road West P2 West Walton 24-Oct-14 14/00661/UNAUTU Walton Wisbech Norfolk PE14 7EX alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Worzals Farm Shop Lynn Road alleged unauthorised P2 West Walton 01-Dec-14 14/00724/UADV Walsoken Norfolk PE14 7DA advertisement Pending Consideration

Alleged unauthorised use of barn Cooks Cottage St Pauls Road South conversion (holiday lets) as single P2 West Walton 19-Dec-14 14/00742/UNAUTU Walton Highway Norfolk PE14 7DD dwellinghouse Pending Consideration

Land Between 3 And 5 Trafford P2 West Walton 13-Jan-15 15/00026/S106 Estate West Walton Norfolk Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

GR Mckenna Alderton House Bellamys Lane West Walton Alleged unauthorised P3 West Walton 30-Sep-14 14/00603/UNAUTU Norfolk PE14 7EY development Pending Consideration

The Windmill 123 Main Road West Winch King's Lynn Norfolk PE33 alleged unauthorised works to a P2 West Winch 13-Jun-14 14/00332/UWLB 0LP Listed Building Pending Consideration

51 Coronation Avenue West Winch P2 West Winch 12-Jan-15 15/00021/S106 Norfolk PE33 0NS Section 106 Monitoring Notice Issued

Land And Car Parking SW 53 To 59 P3 West Winch 02-Dec-14 14/00729/UNTIDY Leete Way West Winch Norfolk alleged untidy land Pending Consideration 200 alleged breach of condition (s) Wiggenhall St 23 Mill Road Wiggenhall St relating to planning application P2 Germans 14-Jun-12 12/00266/BOC Germans Norfolk PE34 3HL 11/00326/F Notice Issued

Spriggs Hollow Magdalen High Wiggenhall St Road Wiggenhall St Mary P2 Germans 09-Feb-15 15/00076/BOC Magdalen Norfolk PE34 3BG alleged breach of condiiton Pending Consideration

New Farm House High Road Wiggenhall St Saddlebow King's Lynn Norfolk P3 Germans 23-Jun-14 14/00368/UNAUTU PE34 3AW alleged unauthorised use Pending Consideration

Wiggenhall St Holly House Farm Stow Road Mary Wiggenhall St Mary Magdalen alleged not in accordance with P2 Magdalen 03-Nov-14 14/00677/NIA Norfolk PE34 3BD Planning reference 12/00208/F Pending Consideration

Nar Valley Lodges Wormegay Road P2 Wormegay 11-Mar-15 15/00139/BOC Blackborough End Norfolk alleged breach of condition Pending Consideration

201

AGENDA ITEM NO: 12

PLANNING COMMITTEE 01 JUNE 2015

DECISION ON PLANNING AND ENFORCEMENT APPEALS - QUARTERLY REPORT -

1. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

1.1 To provide Members with the quarterly update covering performance for the period 1 January 2015 – 31 March 2015

2. REPORT

2.1 The Schedule is attached at Appendix 1 for the period 1 January 2015 – 31 March 2015 (Planning and Enforcement).

Appeals in New appeals Appeals Appeals in system at received decided (or system at beginning of withdrawn / end of period invalid) period 1 Jan – 31 Mar 19 17 13 23

2.2 For all appeals decided this quarter, the outcomes were as follows;-

Allowed Dismissed Total Withdrawn Invalid Split 1 Jan – 31 Mar 5 7 12 0 0 1 42% 58%

2.3 BVPI 204 was not retained as a new National Indicator although it has been retained as one of our local indicators. BVPI 204 was quite specific over which appeals it covers and for example does not include enforcement, advertisement, lawful development certificate, hedge and tree appeals, this is reflected in the table below.

Allowed Dismissed Total Withdrawn Invalid Split 1 Jan – 31 Mar 5 6 11 0 0 1 45% 55%

2.4 For all appeals decided over the last 4 quarters, the outcomes were as follows;-

2013/14 Allowed Dismissed Total Withdrawn Invalid Split 1 Apr – 30 Jun 3 6 9 0 1 1 1 Jul – 30 Sept 1 10 11 1 0 0 1 Oct – 31 Dec 5 9 14 0 0 0 1 Jan – 31 Mar 5 7 12 0 0 1 Total 14 32 46 1 1 2 30% 70%

This data shows that for the first quarter of 2015 42% of all appeals were allowed. For the 12 month period to 31 March 2015 an average of 30% of all appeals were allowed. This is below the traditional national average figure of around 33% of all appeals allowed. With regard to withdrawals it should be noted that appeals can be 202

withdrawn at any time, even after the statements have been exchanged or the appeal heard but whilst the Inspector’s decision is awaited. At that stage the LPA has undertaken all the work but without any commensurate result.

2.5 There is also the unusual situation that two of the appeal decisions received in this quarter are the subject of S.288 appeals to the High Court. These are appeals submitted by the Council against the Planning Inspectorate’s decision, on specific points of law, and these will be determined by a judge. These are the appeals for housing development at the former Fosters site in Clenchwarton, and at Common Road, Snettisham.

2.6 All decisions are viewable on the councils web site located on the planning appeals page and are e-mailed directly to the ward member, Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Appeal documentation for applications made in 2004 onwards can also be viewed on Public Access using the planning application search facility.

Contact Officer: Lee Osler, Office Manager  01553 616552