Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Hanton and A Grey.

Councillor Annison declared a personal interest in item 5 in that he was known to the applicant.

Councillor Flaxman-Taylor declared a personal interest in item 4 and 5 in her capacity as Ward Councillor for Gorleston.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 4 April 2018 were confirmed.

The Committee received and considered the Planning Officer's report which presented an application for the construction of 70 beach huts with amenity block and associated services.

The Planning Manager reported that the application site was part of the lower esplanade, approximately 120 metres to the south of JayJay's Beach cafe. He reported that the beach huts would be arranged in three groups leaving spaces at the entrances to the slopes that run between the upper and lower esplanades. The huts would be sited 0.5m from the base of the cliff and will cover an area 3.5 metres wide by 275 metres long.

The Planning Manager reported that 7 letters / comments had been received, concerns had been raised in relation to the number of huts, toilet facilities, the reduction in width of the promenade, materials, security, hours of use, maintenance and increased parking on Marine Parade and nearby roads. Members were advised that no objection had been received from the Conservation Officer, providing the management agreement ensures the huts are well maintained. There had also been no objection from Highways.

The Planning Manager reported that the Event Director of Gorleston Park Run had raised some concern in relation to people running down the slopes at speed needing to have sight of people on the esplanade and had suggested that there should be a 12 metre gap between the bottom of the slope and the huts in the direction of travel for someone coming down the slope. He reported that this gap length seemed excessive although noted that there should be a distance of a least 3 metres to allow runners coming down the slope to see people on the esplanade.

The Planning Manager advised that a further letter of objection had been received and the contents of the objection were summarised to Members. He advised that the letter requested that a condition be placed onto the application in that the waste and water supply be set up first prior to the establishment of the Beach Huts.

The Planning Manager reported that the proposal complied with the aims of Policy CS8 of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan : Core Strategy and saved policies TR24 and REC11 of the Great Yarmouth Borough-Wide Local Plan. He therefore advised that the application had been recommended for approval, subject to conditions that the amenity block is provided before any of the huts are occupied and no overnight occupation is allowed.

A Member asked whether CCTV had been looked at for this proposal, and it was advised that it was thought this would form an integral part of the application.

A question was raised in relation to the standard no of public convenience and it was advised that there were no statutory guidelines on this matter. A further question was raised as to whether the toilets would be unisex and this was confirmed.

Some concern was raised in relation to disabled vehicular access and the amount of car park spaces would be used and therefore have a knock on effect to the tourist car parking facilities. The applicant reported that at present no vehicular access had been planned into the proposal, but could be considered if Members were minded to allow for this provision.

A Member raised concern in relation to the total number of Beach Huts proposed, although they emphasised the positives of the schemes.

A Member questioned whether it would be possible to have further temporary toilets on site to be used during the peak summer season, the Surveyor advised that this matter would need to be looked in to.

Mr J Formosa, objector and owner of JayJay's BEach Cafe, summarised his main concerns to the Committee and asked the Committee to consider the concerns in relation to the safety aspects of the beach hut proposals.

A Member asked whether consideration could be given to fewer beach huts being constructed, and it was advised that the business case had proposed 70 and that this was based on a viability study.

A Member commented that the proposals would be an income generator for the Borough Council and that in his opinion would have a positive impact on the Gorleston area.

Members discussed the issues relating to extra public convenience facilities and the Planning Manager suggested that this issue be looked into by the Property Services department (as applicant).

RESOLVED :

That approval be given to application 06/18/0110/SU, subject to conditions that the amenity block is provided before any of the huts are occupied and no overnight occupation is allowed.

The Committee considered the Planning Officer's report which presented a second floor extension to the front of the Cliff Hotel comprising of 12 new rooms.

The Senior Planning Officer reported that the proposal had been considered at the meeting held on the 7 March when Members resolved to defer the application to allow the applicant to investigate the possibility of providing additional parking for the hotel. The applicant had subsequently made some suggestions for parking at the front of a bungalow on Cliff Hill, removing part of the slope to create a parking area off Beach Road. The Highways Officer found the Cliff Hill proposal unacceptable and had considerable reservations about parking off Beach Road, so the applicant requested that the application be determined as submitted.

The Senior Planning Officer reported that ten letters of objections had been received with the main reasons for objections being, lack of parking, additional traffic, noise and adverse effect on light and outlook.

The Senior Planning Officer reported that the design of the extension had been amended in line with suggestions by the Conservation Officer and is considered to be acceptable in its revised form. She advised that no objections had been received from the Highway Authority to the sufficiency of parking within the site and therefore Members were advised that the application was recommended for approval, subject to a condition that the existing car park is marked out in accordance with the submitted drawing prior to the additional rooms being brought into use.

A Member asked whether consideration had been given to the potential of landslides in light of the extra weight of the building, and this was confirmed.

RESOLVED :

That approval be given to application 06/17/0722/F, subject to a condition that the existing car park is marked out in accordance with the submitted drawing prior to the additional rooms being brought into use.

The Committee considered the Planning Officer's report which presented a construction of two dwellings and refurbishment of existing semi-detached dwelling for affordable rent and new vehicular access.

The Senior Planning Officer reported that the application had originally been submitted for the erection of four dwellings which consisted of a pair of semi-detached houses facing Ormesby Lane and another pair of semis facing Green Lane. Objections to this proposal were received from the Highways Authority, the Parish Council and local residents. Following these objections the applicant amended the layout to a pair of semi-detached houses facing Ormesby Lane with a revised vehicular access leading to a parking area at the rear of the site with space for seven vehicles. 

The Senior Planning Officer reported that 9 letters of objections had been received in relation to the revised proposal. The main reasons for objection were over-development, there is no footpath from the site to Main Road, increased traffic, the sewerage system will not be able to cope with additional dwellings, wrong location for low income families, the parking area will become a dumping ground, external materials are different to the existing dwellings and the front doors are in the wrong place.

The Senior Planning Officer reported that the design of the dwellings was not identical to the existing houses at 1 to 12 Ormesby Lane but is similar in scale and proportion. The site is not within a Conservation Area and some of the existing houses have been altered and extended.

The Senior Planning Officer reported that the application was recommended for approval. She advised that the proposal complied with Policies CS2 and CS4 of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan : Core Strategy.

Mr Lawson, an objector summarised the main objections from neighbouring properties. He stated that in his opinion the proposal was inappropriate for the area and was not a suitable location for low income families, he referenced the distance to local amenities and how he felt the proposal was an example of over development.

Councillor Thirtle, Ward Councillor, summarised his main concerns in relation to the proposal.He commented that although he appreciated the proposal had been scaled down he stated that in his opinion the proposal was in the wrong place, due to very few footpaths and the development being too far away from the main village.

Following summaries from both objector and Ward Councillor the Committee entered into a debate.

A Member raised some concern in relation to the issues relating to over development and the car parking proposed. Another Member pointed out that there was a considerable need for affordable housing of this kind in this part of the Borough for residents to be able to rent.

RESOLVED :

That application 06/18/0069/F be approved as the proposal complies with Policies CS2 and CS4 of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan : Core Strategy.

The Committee received and considered the Planning Officer's report which presented a change of use to the stationing of 25 static holiday caravans with associated works and planting.

The Planning Officer reported that the application site was to the west of Sundowner Holiday Park on Newport Road measuring 1.2 Hectares. The application was to change the use of part of the land to site 25 additional caravans in a circular pattern. The proposal would involve associated works such as the installation of the access roads and the formation of areas of landscaping. The site accesses off an existing access and joins an extension to the caravan park which was approved by Committee in 2015 for 16 caravans and play space.

The Planning Officer reported that no objections had been received in respect of the application.

The Planning Officer reported that the application was recommended for approval, subject to all conditions ensuring: a suitable development including restriction of the caravan height to single storey, details of landscaping, a SuDs scheme, the requirements of natural England in the form of contributions to the monitoring and mitigation of potential impacts on the Natura 2000 sites and visitor information and a condition for the restriction of the operating dates.

A Member sought clarification in relation to the Natura 2000 payments. The Planning Manager stated that this S106 payment was necessary to make the development acceptable.

The Solicitor, Nplaw sought clarification as to the restriction of dates for non use, and she was advised that this would be in line with the current opening schedules.

RESOLVED :

That application 06/17/0726/F be approved, subject to all conditions ensuring: a suitable development including restriction of the caravan height to single storey, details of landscaping, a SuDS scheme, the requirements of Natural England in the form of contributions to the monitoring and mitigation of potential impacts on the Natura 2000 sites and visitor information and the restriction of the operating dates.

The Committee received and considered the Planning Officer's report which presented an application for a clear weather hoardings exterior of restaurant. All hoarding within stainless steel frames and logos to face.

The Planning Officer reported that the application site was positioned on Marine Parade which formed the main tourism location within the town of Great Yarmouth. The character of the area is defined by tourism/commercial uses. The site is also within an area designated a conservation area. The unit is currently in use as a restaurant under use class A3 and is positioned within a row of other restaurant uses. 

The Planning Officer reported that the application was for a new all weather hoarding formed of steel frames with clear acrylic panels, and that the proposed barrier would be erected outside the restaurant.

The Planning Officer reported that the Highways Authority had no objection to the application, but had requested condition that the appropriate street licence is obtained, that the table, chairs and barriers are removed after trading ceases in the evenings, and that the tables are retained within a clearly marked area.

A Member sought clarification as to whether the hoardings were to be removed on a daily basis, and it was confirmed that the hoarding would be on a cantilever system.

Mr Duffin, the applicant's representative provided Members with a brief overview as to the proposals.

RESOLVED :

That application 06/18/0064/F be approved, subject to all conditions ensuring a suitable development including those recommended by the Highway Authority.

The Committee received, considered and noted the Planning Decisions made by Officers and Committee between the 28 March and 30 April 2018.

The Chairman reported that there was no other business as being of sufficient urgency to warrant consideration at the meeting.