Agenda item

Conditional approval

The Head of Planning presented the report and referred to the slides that had previously been circulated to the Committee.  He recommended approval of this application subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The Head of Planning reported the comments of Councillor E Seward, local Member, who supported this application as it would enable the whole site to have a dual use.

Public Speaker

John Morris (supporting)

Councillor P Heinrich, local Member, stated that removing the condition would bring the remaining part of the park under the same conditions as the rest of it.  He was not aware of any local objections.  He proposed the approval of this application as recommended.

Councillor N Lloyd seconded the proposal. 

Councillor G Mancini-Boyle asked if there were written guarantees from the new owners that there would be no recurrence of the alleged mis-selling that had happened under the previous ownership.

The Head of Planning explained that planning conditions could not be used to control the sale of the units and other legislation would cover any mis-selling.  The Principal Lawyer confirmed that civil or land ownership issues were private matters and the planning process was only concerned with land use.

Councillor A Brown supported the application.  He was mindful that the residents had been on tenterhooks whilst the planning process and legal action was ongoing.  However, he was concerned that the owners of similar sites could see this application as a way of flouting Local Plan Policies SS1 and SS2, and he asked the Head of Planning to explain why he considered that approval of this application would set a rare precedent.

The Head of Planning stated that applications had to be considered on their own merits.  He explained that there were rare circumstances in this case, in that it was a holiday site close to the largest centre of population in the District, there were a number of services associated with this site and it was sustainable in terms of its access to other community services and facilities, without reliance on the private car.  There were few other sites located in such a position and it was unusual to find a site with such extensive facilities.  He therefore considered that it was a rare precedent which would not be readily repeated by other sites in less sustainable locations in the District.

Councillor N Pearce referred to the request by North Walsham Town Council to impose a condition to require a maximum 50/50 split between permanent residential and holiday accommodation.  He considered that holiday use was important to the local economy.

The Head of Planning stated that the Council Tax records indicated that very few of the units were in permanent residential use and he considered that it would be inappropriate to impose such a condition.  Many people used the site for staycations and some owners let out their units, which brought people into North Walsham and supported the local economy.  He stated that the use of the site was appropriate as it was sustainable and residential or holiday use were similar in their benefits to the economy.

RESOLVED unanimously

That this application be approved in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Planning.