Agenda item

The Committee is asked to consider and determine the attached Schedules of Planning Applications submitted by the Assistant Director.

 

The Committee considered schedules of applications for planning permission submitted by the Assistant Director for Planning and Environment (copies of the schedules were published with the agenda).  Any changes to the schedules will be recorded in the minutes.

 

RESOLVED:That the application be determined, as set out at (i) – (iv) below, where appropriate, to the conditions and reasons or grounds of refusal, set out in the schedules signed by the Chair.

 

(i)              23/01446/F

Grimston:  Rose Cottage, Watery Lane:  Proposed extension and alterations to existing dwelling: Mr and Mrs Howling

 

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

 

The case officer reminded Members that the application had been deferred from the previous meeting held on 29 July 2024 in order to seek further clarification in relation to parking requirement, the status of neighbouring land to the north in terms of use as garden space, as well as the civil matters on site. 

 

The application site related to one of an existing pair of cottages within rural Grimston, outside of the development boundary for the village. The cottages were classed as non-designated heritage assets as they appeared on the first OS Map (1879-1886), and still retained their traditional form and character. The attached neighbouring cottage was to the east of the dwelling and site, with the neighbour’s plot wrapping around to the north of the application site. To the south and west was open agricultural fields.

 

The application sought planning permission for a two-storey side extension to the west of the property.

 

The application had been referred to the Committee for determination at the request of Councillor de Whalley.

 

The Committee noted the key issues for consideration when determining the application, as set out in the report.

 

In accordance with the adopted public speaking protocol, Mr Mark Dye (objecting) and Alan Loy (objecting on behalf of the Parish Council) addressed the Committee in relation to the application.

 

In response to comments raised by the public speakers the case officer advised that parking issues had been addressed within the report and NCC as statutory consultee had raised no objection on the parking or safety elements, the relationship with the adjoining property and area of land to the north of the site had been addressed in the report.  The issue of the pumping station had been addressed within the report.  The Committee needed to consider that a lot of the proposal could be carried out under permitted development rights.

 

Following the debate, the Planning Control Manager pointed out that there had been no statutory objection to the application on highways / drainage grounds.

 

Councillor de Whalley proposed that the application be refused on the grounds of overlooking and parking.  This was seconded by Councillor Devulapalli.

 

Following advice from the legal representative regarding going against the County Highways advice, Councillor de Whalley agreed to remove parking from the reasons for refusal.

 

For clarification, the Planning Control Manager explained that from what she had heard from the Committee the reasons for refusal related to the proposed additional window would lead to the intensification of overlooking of the adjacent garden which would be detrimental to neighbour amenity.

 

The Planning Control Manager stated that a condition could be imposed regarding a construction management plan.

 

The Democratic Services Officer carried out a roll call on the proposal to refuse the application and after having been put to the vote, was lost (7 votes for refusal, 9 votes against).

 

The Planning Control Manager added that an additional condition could be imposed to include a construction management plan, which was agreed by the Committee.

 

The Democratic Services Officer then carried out a roll call on the recommendation to approve the application subject to an additional condition requiring a Construction Management Plan and, after having been put to the vote, was carried (9 votes for 7 votes against).

 

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as recommended subject to the imposition of an additional condition requiring a Construction Management Plan.

 

(ii)            24/00622/FM

King’s Lynn:  NHS St James Medical Practice, County Court Road:  Conversion of St James Medical Centre to 11 flats (change of use):  Ruby Circle Ltd

 

The Committee had visited the site prior to the meeting.

 

Councillors Barclay, Bubb and Devulapalli took no part in the debate or decision as they had not been present for the site visit.

 

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

 

The case officer introduced the report and explained that the application related to St James Medical Centre (currently vacant), a two-storey detached building situated on the western side of County Court Road, King’s Lynn.

 

The site was located within the King’s Lynn Conservation Area and the building was considered to be a non-designated heritage asset.  Full planning permission was sought for the change of use of the building to 11 flats.

 

The application had been referred to the Committee for determination as the applicant was a relation of Councillor Ring.

 

The Committee noted the key issues for consideration when determining the application, as set out in the report.

 

It was proposed that condition 5 be amended to include external noise sources (including glazing details) which was agreed by the Committee.

 

The Democratic Services Officer then carried out a roll call on the recommendation to approve the application with the amendment to Condition 5 to include external noise sources (including glazing details) and, after having been put to the vote, was carried unanimously.

 

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as recommended subject to conditions 2, 5 and 13 being amended.

 

The Committee then adjourned at 11.15 am and reconvened at 11.25 am

 

(iii)          24/00349/F

Old Hunstanton:  Cedar Lodge, 2 Hamilton Road West:  Replacement dwelling:  Mr Dighton

 

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

 

The case officer introduced the report and explained that the application site related to an existing two storey detached dwelling located within a residential area and prominent corner plot within Old Hunstanton at the junction of Hamilton Road West and Sea Lane. The site was not located within the Norfolk Coast National Landscape but is directly adjacent to the Old Hunstanton Conservation Area. In addition, there are several Listed and Non-Designated vernacular cottages located on Sea Lane in close proximity to the site including directly to the south.

 

The application itself proposes the demolition of the existing dwelling and a replacement dwelling with associated landscaping.

 

The application had been referred to the Committee for determination at the request of the Planning Sifting Panel

 

The Committee noted the key issues for consideration when determining the application, as set out in the report.

 

In accordance with the adopted public speaking protocol, Mr G Hazell (objecting), Mark Roberts (objecting on behalf of Old Hunstanton Parish Council) and Jason Law (supporting) addressed the Committee in relation to the application.

 

The Committee then agreed to amend Condition 8 in relation to the boundary treatment.

 

The Democratic Services Officer then carried out a roll call on the recommendation to approve the application and, after having been put to the vote, was carried (8 votes for 7 votes against and 1 abstention).

 

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as recommended subject to Condition 8 being amended.

 

(iv)          24/01136/F

Tilney All Saints:  60 School Road, Tilney St Lawrence:  Removal of condition 5 of planning consent M.3950:  Site for erection of bungalow (Outline Application): Mr Whitear

 

Click here to view a recording of this item on You Tube

 

In presenting the report the case officer explained that the application sought permission for the removal of Condition 5 of Planning consent M.3950: Site for Erection of Bungalow (Outline Application).

 

Condition 5 stated 'The occupation of the dwelling shall be limited to persons employed or last employed locally in agriculture as defined in Section 221(1) of the Town and Country Planning act 1962, or in forestry and the dependants of such person'.

 

The application site is located within the development boundary of Tilney St Lawrence, which is classed as a Key Rural Service Centre within Policy DM2 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Plan (SADMPP 2016).

 

The application site is located to the west of School Road and the site consisted of a detached, single storey, buff brick bungalow.

 

The application had been referred to the Committee for determination as the applicant was related to a member of staff involved in the planning process.

 

The Committee noted the key issues for consideration when determining the application, as set out in the report.

 

In accordance with the adopted public speaking protocol, Mr Gareth Edwards (supporting) addressed the Committee in relation to the application.

 

The Democratic Services Officer then carried out a roll call on the recommendation to approve the application and, after having been put to the vote was carried unanimously.

 

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as recommended.