Docstoc

East Area Planning Committee 06 January 2005 - South

Document Sample
East Area Planning Committee 06 January 2005 - South Powered By Docstoc
					East Area Planning Committee                                                6 January 2005


                                                                                 Agenda Item No. 5a

       PLANNING APPLICATIONS AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MATTERS

                                 Report of Head of Planning Services

Key to letters included within application reference number to identify application type – e.g.
07/96/3000/A – application for consent to display an advert

A      Advert                                       G     Proposal by Government Department

AD     Certificate of Alternative Development       HZ    Hazardous Substance

CA     Conservation Area                            LB    Listed Building

CU     Change of Use                                LE    Certificate of Lawful Existing development

D      Reserved Matters                             LP    Certificate of Lawful Proposed
       (Detail following outline consent)                 development

F      Full (details included)                      O     Outline (details reserved for later)

H      Householder – Full application relating to   SU    Proposal by Statutory Undertaker
       residential property

C      Application to be determined by County
       Council

Key to abbreviations used in Recommendations

S.T.L.C          Standard Time Limit Condition (period in which to commence development)

S.P.             Structure Plan

S.N.L.P          South Norfolk Local Plan

P.D.             Permitted Development – buildings and works which do not normally require
                 planning permission. (The effect of the condition is to require planning permission
                 for the buildings and works specified).

HPS              Head of Planning Services
East Area Planning Committee                                                    6 January 2005



   1     Appl. No            :   2004/2233/F
         Parish              :   WHEATACRE


         Applicants Name :       Mr S Green
         Site Address :          Land adjoining Holly Cottage, Church Lane
         Proposal     :          Proposed erection of storage building for the storage and repair of
                                 historical tractor engine parts

         Recommendation:         Refuse

                                 1.   Outside development limits
                                 2.   No justification for agricultural or forestry requirements
                                 3.   Size and location of building
                                 4.   Contrary to ENV 8 of SNLP


   1.    Planning Policies

   1.1   ENV 8 – Development in the Open Countryside

   1.2   IMP 1 – Design

   2.    Planning History

   2.1   1983/1880/F         Conservatory                             Approved 29.7.83

   2.2   1992/1193/F         Erection of Extension                     Approved 21.9.92

   2.3   1997/0969/CU        Change of Use from Agricultural
                             Land to Residential Curtilage             Approved 7.8.97

   2.4   1997/1504/H         Erection of Storage Building
                             Ancillary to Dwelling                    Approved 14.12.97

   2.5   1998/0415/H         Two Storey Extension to Dwelling          Approved 5.5.98

   2.6   1998/1634/H         Erection of Conservatory to Dwelling Approved 14.12.98

   2.7   2003/1142/H         2no Storey Extension to Side of
                             Dwelling                                 Approved 23.7.03

   2.8   2004/1693/F         Proposed Tractor and Implement
                             Store with Hay Storage Area              Refused 8.9.04

   3.    Consultations

   3.1   Parish Council                           :   Consider the views of the
                                                      neighbours is most important in
                                                      determining the application.
East Area Planning Committee                                                6 January 2005



   3.2   District Member                      :   To Committee
                                                     • Construction of a building to
                                                        accommodate hobby/leisure
                                                        activity requiring specialist
                                                        structure.

   3.3   Local Residents                      :   One objection received
                                                     • The location of the building
                                                        and its use are inappropriate
                                                        for the local environment
                                                     • The building would have a
                                                        serious impact on this rural
                                                        location.
                                                     • Environmental issues -
                                                        industrial use, noise,
                                                        increased traffic, light
                                                        pollution and visual impact.
                                                     • Setting a precedent for
                                                        further development if
                                                        approved.
                                                     • Applicant already has large
                                                        workshops.
                                                     • Increasing amount of
                                                        machinery stored in the field
                                                        which has an impact.
                                                     • The area would be further
                                                        damaged by development on
                                                        this field.

   4. Assessment

   4.1 The property is situated within a very rural location in Wheatacre, outside the development
       boundary. The site of the proposed new building is on land which lies adjacent to the
       residential curtilage of Holly Cottage and measures 18.180m.in length x 12.120m width x
       6.5 m in height

   4.2 In 1995, under permitted development rights, the applicant erected a large timber building
       within the curtilage of Holly Cottage. In 1997 an application was approved to erect another
       large storage building adjacent to the existing timber building. In support of this application
       a letter received from the applicant on 13th November 1997 states that “the primary use of
       the building is a workshop for the restoration of large industrial stationary oil and steam
       engines which worked at the turn of the century”.

   4.3 In August 2004 an application was submitted to erect a tractor and implement store with
       hay storage above on the same site as this current application. The application was
       refused under delegated powers due to the location being outside the development
       boundary, the fact that there are already two large buildings on the site and insufficient
       agricultural need for a further large building being submitted.
East Area Planning Committee                                                 6 January 2005



   4.4 This current proposal is for a building of the same size and on the same site as the
       application refused in August 2004 with the exception that the large building is for storage
       and repair of historical tractor engines and parts. The applicant has submitted supporting
       documentation which outlines his hobby for restoring these historical engines.

   4.5 Concerns have been received from one local resident whose property is adjacent to the site
       which relate to the impact the building will have on the environment and locality as well as
       setting a precedent for further development on the site.

   4.6 Local Plan policies state there is a presumption against development in the open
       countryside unless requisite for agriculture or forestry. As the applicant has confirmed the
       building is for hobby purposes only it is considered the proposal is contrary to the
       provisions of Policy ENV 8 and therefore in conflict with the South Norfolk Local Plan.

   5. Reason for Refusal

   5.1 The site is outside of any established settlement and in an area where new buildings are
       strictly controlled unless essential for agricultural purposes. As there are already large
       outbuildings on the site and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary it is considered
       that there is insufficient agricultural need for the erection of a further large storage building.
       Furthermore, the scale of the building would be out of character in the locality. In view of
       the above the proposal is considered to be contrary to the provisions of Policies ENV 8 and
       IMP 1 of the South Norfolk Local Plan

                                    ________________________

   2     Appl. No              :   2004/2355/CU
         Parish                :   LODDON

         Applicants Name       :   The Loddon Dental Practice
         Site Address          :   The Loddon Dental Practice, Bridge Farm, Bridge Street
         Proposal              :   Proposed conversion of existing first floor ancillary area to create
                                   2no new surgeries with waiting rooms, staff room & toilets

         Recommendation        :   Approve

                               1 Full Permission Time Limit
                               2 Limited hours of use

   1     Planning Policies

   1.1   IMP 8 - Safe and free flow of traffic

   1.2   IMP 9 - Residential amenity

   1.3   IMP 13 - Alterations of listed buildings

   1.4   SHO 7 - Conversion of floor space on upper floors
East Area Planning Committee                                                  6 January 2005



   2     Consultations

   2.1   Parish Council                      : Approve

   2.2 District Member                       : Delegate

   2.3 NCC : Highways                        : No Objections

   2.4 Environmental Services                : No objections subject to a condition limiting the
       (Pollution)                             hours of use

   2.5 Local Residents                       : One letter of objection expressing following concern:
                                               • Parking will result in Garden Court.

   3     Assessment

   3.1   The site falls within the defined Central Business Area of Loddon near the junction of
         Bridge Street and George Lane. The building itself is a two storey Grade II listed building
         and is attached to the larger 13 Bridge Street. The site is also within the Loddon
         Conservation Area.

   3.2   The proposal is to convert an ancillary area on the first floor of the building into additional
         surgeries for the existing Dental Practice on the ground floor. This would make more
         effective use of the space, thus complying with policy SHO7 which supports commercial
         uses of upper floors.

   3.3   The objection relates to the parking provision for the dental practice. It is acknowledged
         that parking is limited, with most of the spaces to the rear used for the adjacent building
         currently being converted to flats. However, the site is within the town centre, which is a
         sustainable location for such a facility as the site is accessible by modes of transport
         other than the private car and trips to the practice can be combined with trips to shops
         and other businesses within the town centre. Furthermore, the site is within easy walking
         distance of free town centre car parking, which are more accessible than Garden Court.
         Double yellow lines prevent parking on Bridge Street itself.

   4.    Reasons for Approval

   4.1   The proposal will result in better use of currently under-utilised first floor space within
         Loddon’s Central Business Area, therefore complying with policy SHO7 of the South
         Norfolk Local Plan relating to the Conversion of Floor Space on Upper Floors. Given the
         central location of the proposed use and availability of public car parking, on site parking
         provision is not required in this instance.

                                    ________________________
East Area Planning Committee                                               6 January 2005



   3     Appl. No              :   2004/2367/F
         Parish                :   SEETHING

         Applicants Name       :   Mr R W Key
         Site Address          :   Barn at Church Farm, Brooke Road, Seething
         Proposal              :   Proposed conversion of existing barn to single dwelling

         Recommendation        :   Approve

                               1 Barn Conversion - time limit
                               2 In accordance with submitted amendments
                               3 External materials to be agreed
                               4 Specific details t.b.a.
                               5 Boundary treatment to be agreed
                               6 Contaminated land - scheme to be submitted
                               7 Foul drainage to sealed system or private treatment plant only
                               8 No satellite dishes, tanks etc
                               9 No PD for fences, walls etc
                               10 No PD for Classes ABCD&E
                               11 Driveway Surfaces

                               Subject to satisfactory amended plans

   1     Planning Policies

   1.1   HOU 10 - Adaption and re-use of existing buildings for residential purposes

   1.2   IMP 1      - Design

   1.3   ENV 1      - Protection of landscape

   1.4   IMP 8      - Safe and free flow of traffic

   2     Planning History

   2.1   07/85/2380/F - Conversion of redundant cart shed and          - Refused 02/10/85
                        store to a single dwelling for private use
                                                                       - Appeal dismissed 22/04/86

   3     Consultations

   3.1   Parish Council                      : Refuse
                                               • Although conversion of the barn to residential
                                                   use was supported, Councillors felt that the road
                                                   access, as currently outlined is an unacceptable
                                                   risk on the blind bend and consideration should
                                                   be given to re-siting it.

   3.2   District Member                     : No comments received to date
East Area Planning Committee                                                6 January 2005




   3.3   NCC: Highways                      : No objection in principle to the barn conversion,
                                              however:
                                              • Means of access by which it is proposed to serve
                                                  the barn is currently a field gate with no formal
                                                  verge closing.
                                              • The entrance is poorly located on the inside of
                                                  the bend.
                                              • Request amended access.

   3.4   Environmental Services             : Conditional support
         (Pollution)

   3.5   Local Residents                    : No comments received to date

   4     Assessment

   4.1   The application site lies to the northwest of the village of Seething, outside the
         development boundary but within the conservation area.

   4.2   The brick and tile cart shed/barn is sited close to the highway with the main farmhouse
         located to the west. The application site is open in nature with low hedge to northern and
         eastern boundaries.

   4.3   There is no objection to the principle of the barn being converted to residential use as it
         has been demonstrated that the barn is both permanent and substantial for conversion
         purposes. A number of concerns have been raised regarding the design and details of the
         proposal, however, these issues have been resolved and amended plans have been
         requested.

   4.4   Both the highway officer and the Parish Council raised concerns regarding the proposed
         access point which is currently a field site with no formal verge crossing on the inside of a
         bend. A revised siting has been negotiated and subject to satisfactory amended plans
         should overcome the concerns raised.

   4.5   The proposed curtilage to the barn is relatively open and rural in nature, it is therefore
         suggested that permitted development rights for ancillary buildings, fencing and hard
         standings are removed to retain and protect the existing character.

   4.6   Subject to the receipt of acceptable amended plans it is considered that the proposal is
         acceptable in both design and policy terms.

   5     Reason for Approval

   5.1   The proposal accords with policies HOU 10, IMP 1 and IMP 8 of the South Norfolk Local
         Plan as the barn is both permanent and substantial; the design is acceptable and in
         keeping with the surrounding rural setting; will not harm the character of the landscape
         and will not be detrimental to highway safety.

                                   ________________________
East Area Planning Committee                                              6 January 2005



   4     Appl. No              :   2004/2457/F
         Parish                :   HOLVERSTON

         Applicants Name       :   C P Cole Esq

         Site Address          :   Orchard Farm, Norwich Road, Holverston
         Proposal              :   Proposed erection of new farm shop

         Recommendation        :   Refuse

                               1   Contrary to policies EMP8, SHO8, IMP7, TRA13, IMP8
                               2   Detrimental to highway safety
                               3   Inadequate access/visibility
                               4   Design – out of scale and character
                               5   Insufficient information submitted – need assessment and type of
                                    goods

   1     Planning Policies

   1.1   ENV 8   - Development in the open countryside

   1.2   EMP 8 - Farm diversification schemes

   1.3   SHO 8 - Local and rural shops and services

   1.4   IMP 1   - Design

   1.5   TRA 13 - Corridors of movement

   1.6   IMP 8   - Safe and free flow of traffic

   1.7   IMP 15 - Setting of listed buildings

   2     Consultations

   2.1   Parish Council                     : To be reported

   2.2   District Member                    : To be reported

   2.3   NCC: Highways                      : Refuse
                                              • The site is located on and served by the A146, a
                                                  principle route, in the Norfolk Hierarchy Plan.
                                              • As such route is protected as corridor of
                                                  movement in both Norfolk Structure Plan and
                                                  South Norfolk Local Plan.
                                              • The proposed farm shop at this location will
                                                  have a significant and undesirable increase in
                                                  slowing, stopping and vehicular movements on
                                                  and off the A146, contrary to policy TRA 13.
                                              • In addition means of access has restricted
                                                  visibility (100 Metres) and a minimum of 215
                                                  metres would be required.
East Area Planning Committee                                               6 January 2005




   2.4   Norfolk Landscape                 : No objections
         Archaeology

   2.5   Local Residents                   : No objections

   3     Assessment

   3.1   This application relates to the erection of a farm shop towards the front of the site,
         adjacent to the A146. The farmhouse on the site is a grade II Listed Building. The shop
         measures 17.5m long, by 8.1m wide, and would be 9m high to ridge (5m to eaves). It is
         proposed to clad the building with weatherboard and to have a profiled sheet roof.

   3.2   A site appraisal and design statement has been submitted with the application and the
         applicant is seeking to diversity his enterprise and sell his meat direct through a farm
         shop. He has stated that to give the shop a satisfactory range it is anticipated it would
         also sell vegetables and other complimentary products, although these have not been
         defined.

   3.3   In policy terms the proposal needs to be considered in accordance with policy EMP 8
         relating to farm diversification and in principle such a use could be looked at favourably.
         However, insufficient information has been submitted with the application to fully evaluate
         the proposal with respect to this policy i.e. part (i) of EMP 8 requires evidence to be
         submitted to show the proposal would facilitate the continued agricultural use, part (ii)
         requires proposal should contribute to the rural economy and not affect local centres –
         additional information and assessment relating to the need and type of goods sold would
         need to be explored. It is viewed for such a scheme to be supported the main type of
         goods sold should relate to produce from the farm.

   3.4   Notwithstanding the need for additional information and clarification mentioned above, it
         is considered the scale of the building located on this prominent road frontage would be
         excessive and out of character in this rural locality. Furthermore, Norfolk County
         Highways have raised an objection and would not support a farm shop in this location. Of
         particular concern is the increase use of the access, which would be detrimental to
         highway safety and poor visibility to and from the site.


                                   ________________________
East Area Planning Committee                                               6 January 2005



   5     Appl. No            :   2004/2464/H
         Parish              :   KIRBY CANE

         Applicants Name :       Mr A J Titlow
         Site Address :          The Drift. 40 Yarmouth Road
         Proposal        :       Proposed 2no storey extension to side of dwelling

         Recommendation:         Approve

                                 1. Full Permission Time Limit

   1.    Planning Policies

   1.1   IMP 1 - Desgin

   1.2   IMP 9 – Residential Amenity

   1.3   HOU 19 – Extensions to Existing Dwellings

   2.    Consultations

   2.1   Parish Council                        :   To be reported

   2.2   Mrs A Smith                           :   To be reported

   2.3   Local Residents                       :   One letter of objection:
                                                   • Front extension may create loss
                                                     of light

   3.    Assessment

   3.1   The property is semi detached and situated within the development boundary for the
         parish of Kirby Cane. The proposal is for a two storey extension to the side and a single
         storey extension to the front of the dwelling.

   3.2   The side extension is subordinate to the existing dwelling and has not raised any issues.
         The front extension projects forward 1.48, it is 2.5m to the eaves and has a lean-to roof
         which is hipped on either end. Comments have been received from the adjoining
         neighbour who has concerns that the front extension may affect the light to the front
         window of their property.

   3.3   There is a hedge of the front boundary between the two properties which appears to
         already minimise the light to the neighbours window. While it is acknowledged there may
         be a marginal amount of light lost in the early morning it is considered the proposal, by
         virtue of the width and height, together with a hipped roof, should not affect on the
         amenities of the adjacent occupiers to an unacceptable degree.

   4     Reason for Approval

   4.1 It is considered the proposal accords with IMP1, IMP 9 and HOU 19 of the South Norfolk
       Local Plan as it is of a high standard of design and the character and appearance of the
       dwelling and the amenities of the adjoining occupiers is not adversely affected to a
       material degree.
East Area Planning Committee                                               6 January 2005



   6     Appl. No              :   2004/2465/H
         Parish                :   THURLTON

         Applicants Name       :   Mr & Mrs D Smalls
         Site Address          :   Viewfield, Low Road, Thurlton
         Proposal              :   Proposed pitched roof to both side extensions with single storey
                                   garden room extension to rear and extension to existing detached
                                   double garage

         Recommendation        :   Approve

                               1 Full Time Permission
                               2 Amended plans

                               Subject to satisfactory amended plans

   1     Planning Policy

   1.1   HOU 19 - Extensions to existing dwelling

   1.2   IMP 9      - Residential amenity

   2     Consultations

   2.1   Parish Council                      : To be reported

   2.2   District Member                     : To be reported

   2.3   Lower Yare Third IDB                : To be reported

   2.4   Local Residents                     : One objection received
                                               • Plans showing Viewfield and Farthings are
                                                  inaccurate
                                               • Strongly object to the increase height of the
                                                  parapet wall
                                               • Parapet wall has no functional or structural
                                                  purpose other than to hide pitched roof.
                                               • The wall will have a negative impact on their
                                                  outlook

   3     Assessment

   3.1   The property is a large detached house in an area of linear residential development

   3.2   The proposal seeks to change the existing flat roofed single storey extensions to pitch
         roofs and to raise the parapet walls to the front and rear, erect a single storey garden
         room extension to the rear and an extension to the rear of the garage.
East Area Planning Committee                                                  6 January 2005



   3.3   The objector lives to the west of the site and has no concerns regarding the roof alteration
         to the east of the property or the extensions to the rear of the property and the garage.
         However, they have raised concerns regarding the increased height of the parapet wall
         on the southeast elevation. The parapet wall is located 5metres to the south of the
         objectors property and it is proposed to raise this by 1 metre. The objector feels this will
         have an adverse impact on the outlook from his property. The objector has brought to our
         attention that the plans showing the distance between Viewfield and Farthings are
         inaccurate. Amended plans have been requested to show the accurate relationship
         between the two properties.

   3.4   Although the proposed parapet will be visible from the objector’s property and will reduce
         their view slightly, it will not reduce their view significantly nor will it be over dominant or
         cause unreasonable over shading.

   4     Reason for Approval

   4.1   Although the proposal will have some impact on the neighbouring property it has been
         designed to be in keeping with the existing property and is considered not to impact on
         the residential amenity of the neighbour to a material degree. The proposal is therefore in
         accordance with policies HOU 19 ‘Extensions to existing dwellings’ and IMP 9
         ‘Residential amenity’.
                                   ________________________


   7     Appl. No              :   2004/2550/F
         Parish                :   TASBURGH

         Applicants Name       :   Redwings Horse Sanctuary
         Site Address          :   Land at Piggots Farm, Figgets Lane, Tasburgh
         Proposal              :   Proposed erection of barn

         Recommendation        :   Approve

                               1 Full Permission Time Limit
                               2 Not to be hired out for livery
                               3 External materials to be agreed

   1     Planning Policies

   1.1   ENV1 - Protection of Landscape

   1.2   IMP1 -     Design

   2     Planning History

   2.1   2001/0091 - Change of use to ‘the keeping of horses’                   -      approved
         18/04/2001

   2.2   2001/0152 - Erection of nine field shelters and paddock fencing -             approved
                                                                                       18/04/2001
East Area Planning Committee                                                6 January 2005



   2.3   2003/0828 - Proposed erection of two stables
                     (not in curtilage of dwelling) and mess room             approved 2/7/2003


   3     Consultations

   3.1   Parish Council                      : No comments

   3.2   District Member                     : To be reported

   3.3   County Highways Authority           : No objection subject to there being no commercial
                                               livery stabling of horses

   3.4   Local Residents                     : One letter of objection expressing following
                                               concerns:
                                                  • large amounts of additional traffic
                                                  • visual impact of the barn being not in
                                                      keeping with the existing structures and
                                                      spoiling the landscape


   4     Assessment

   4.1   The application site is accessed from the A140 between Tasburgh and Newton Flotman
         by a long driveway. The site of the proposed barn is adjacent to recently built stables
         (application number 2003/0828), which are situated at the bottom of a shallow valley.

   4.2   It is the Council’s view that the barn is needed for the existing use and is not for an
         expansion in the number of horses being kept on the site. This would mean that there is
         no intensification of the sanctuary as approved, with no additional requirements being
         placed on the access. In order to ensure that at no stage the barn is used for commercial
         livery, it is proposed that a condition of any approval restricts use to that of the horse
         sanctuary and shall not be hired out for public or livery use. Given this, and that the
         County Highways Authority have not asked for any alterations to the access, it is
         considered the application could not be refused on the quality of the access.

   4.3   The other issues raised in the letter of objection related to the visual impact of the barn,
         with particular concern relating to the view from Piggotts Farm. However, as mentioned
         above, the barn is at the bottom of a shallow valley, whilst Piggotts farm is on higher
         ground, and is adjacent to existing stable blocks. Whilst it is slightly higher than the
         stables, it is still not considered that given the distance involved and the change in levels
         the impact on the landscape would not be significant enough to justify refusal. It is
         suggested a condition is attached to any permission requiring the applicant to submit
         details of external materials so that the materials can be kept in keeping with the
         surrounding buildings.

   5     Reason for Approval

   5.1   The barn is required for the operation of the existing stables and would not result in large
         amounts of additional traffic or be significantly detrimental to the landscape and is
         therefore in accordance with policies ENV1 and IMP1 of the South Norfolk Local Plan.
                                    ________________________
East Area Planning Committee                                               6 January 2005



   8     Appl. No              :   2004/2610/H
         Parish                :   BROOKE

         Applicants Name       :   Mr M Parsons
         Site Address          :   2 The Street, Brooke
         Proposal              :   Proposed 2no storey extension to rear of dwelling with erection of
                                   single storey conservatory to side

         Recommendation        :   Approve

                               1   Full Permission Time Limit
                               2   In accordance with submitted amendments
                               3   External materials to be agreed
                               4   Window details to be agreed

   1.    Planning Policies

   1.1   IMP 1      - Design

   1.2   IMP 17     - Alterations and extensions in conservation areas

   1.3   HOU 19 - Extensions to existing dwellings

   2.    Consultations

   2.1   Parish Council                      :   Refuse
                                                  • The design of the windows and roof of the rear
                                                    elevation do not appear appropriate for the
                                                    architecture of the dwelling.

   2.2   District Member                     :   Delegate

   2.3   Local Residents                     :   To be reported

   3     Assessment

   3.1   The property is within the Conservation Area of Brooke and is one of a pair of distinctive
         properties situated either side of the entrance of the drive to Brooke House.

   3.2   The proposal is to erect a two storey extension to the rear of the property with a
         conservatory on the north side, facing The Street. In 2003 the property on the opposite
         side of the drive, which is identical in design, gained planning consent (Application
         Number 02/2341/H) for a rear and side extension and the applicant and his agent have
         taken great care to ensure the proposed extension imitates that of the extension to the
         property opposite in order to retain the balance.
East Area Planning Committee                                                  6 January 2005


   3.3   Objections have been received from the Parish Council regarding the design of the
         windows and roof of the rear elevation. The details of the windows and materials for the
         proposed extension have, however, been conditioned to ensure they match the design
         and character of the existing property. It is, therefore considered the design of the
         scheme not only compliments the existing property but matches the design of the
         extension to the property on the opposite side of the drive.

   4     Reason for Approval

   4.1   The proposal accords with IMP 1, IMP 17 and HOU 19 of the South Norfolk Local Plan as
         it is considered the design is sympathetic to the character and appearance of the area
         and will not have a detrimental impact on the existing property, the street scene or the
         Conservation Area.

                                    ________________________


   9     Appl. No              :   2004/2629/F
         Parish                :   LODDON

         Applicants Name       :   Mr A Schooling
         Site Address          :   Tots Nursery (Dutch Barn), Ingloss Lane, Loddon
         Proposal              :   Proposed erection of polytunnel for bedding plants and other
                                   plants

         Recommendation        :   Approve

                               1 Full Permission Time Limit
                               2 Landscaping

   1     Planning Policies

   1.1   ENV 8 - Development in the open countryside

   1.2   EMP 5 - Agricultural Development

   2     Consultations

   2.1   Parish Council                      : Approve

   2.2   District Member                     : No comments received to date

   2.3   Local Residents                     :   •   I letter of support received

         Consultation period expires 24 December 2004.

   3     Planning History

   3.1   2003/0220/O - Erection of agricultural restricted dwelling                 - Refused 03/02/03

   3.2   2002/2072/F - Erection of shade house and gate house                       - Approved 23/12/02

   3.3   1999/1777/F - Erection of polytunnel and standing of residential           - Approved 09/02/00
                       caravan for use by horticultural worker
East Area Planning Committee                                                  6 January 2005


   4     Assessment

   4.1   The nursery is in an isolated rural location. The adjacent property is a grade II listed
         building and is situated directly south of the site. There is also a residential property to the
         north. The application site has a number of buildings on it including a barn, shade house,
         glasshouse and a polytunnel. The applicant has recently purchased an additional piece of
         land to the west of the existing site to which this application relates. A change of use
         application is not required in this instance as the use of the land is agricultural and
         horticulture falls under the same use.

   4.2   The proposal seeks to place an additional polytunnel to the west of the existing site on
         the newly acquired piece of land. The polytunnel is 3metres in height and measures 8.5
         by 17.5 metres.

   4.3   There is a small level difference on the site, the ground steps up approximately 0.7
         metres between the existing structures and proposed polytunnel. The site is open
         haracter and therefore when approaching the site from the north the proposed polytunnel
         will be visible. A landscaping condition requesting planting along the northern boundary
         should be attached to any permission. The polytunnel has been sited close to the existing
         buildings and structures to minimise the impact on the wider landscape.

   5     Reason for Approval

   5.1   The proposal is 3 metres in height and has been located close to the existing buildings
         and structures on the site to ensure it will not have an adverse impact on the rural
         surroundings or represent an intrusion into the open countryside. The polytunnel is
         required for a horticultural wholesale business. It is therefore considered that this
         proposal accounts with policies ENV 8 and EMP 5 of the South Norfolk Local Plan.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:1
posted:8/22/2014
language:Unknown
pages:16
About