Five commercial units at Home Farm Enterprise Zone, Hall Road, Cromer

What was proposed

The application proposed five commercial units for business, indoor sport, recreation, fitness, storage or distribution uses.

“CROMER – PF/24/2341 - Erection of 5 commercial units for uses within Use Classes E(c)(i) - financial services, E(g)(i) - offices, E(d) - indoor sport, recreation or fitness, B8 - storage or distribution at Home Farm Enterprise Zone, Hall Road, Cromer, Norfolk…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site was in the countryside and undeveloped coast, near important trees and the Grade II listed South Lodge.

“Insufficient information has been provided in relation to the proposal’s arboricultural implications, with the site surrounded by a number of important trees, conflicting with the requirements of Policies EN 2 and EN 4 in this respect.”

“The development has been found to result in ‘less than substantial’ harm to the significance of the Grade II listed South Lodge as a result of the position and sheer scale of the proposed commercial units and the intervisibility between the two. The development would intrude into the important rural setting of the Lodge, disrupting the landscape in which it was originally intended to be appreciated from.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the proposal conflicted with strategic policies and its harms were not outweighed by economic benefits.

“Undoubtedly, the development would result in economic benefits; this includes the job creation opportunities which would come from the delivery of 5 commercial units, as well as general economic growth benefits resulting from the increase, provision and diversity of commercial floorspace in the Cromer area. The full extent of these benefits is however, not fully known at this stage given the limited information submitted in support of the application.”

“In undertaking an overall balance of the competing aspects of the proposal, it is considered that the identified harms resulting from the proposal would not be outweighed by the economic benefits in favour of the development. The proposals would not be in accordance with the requirements of the Development Plan, and it has been concluded that there are no material considerations which would outweigh departure from the Development Plan.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Conservation, landscape and highways consultees objected, while Historic Buildings and Places requested further information.

“None of the reports required have been received. There remains a lack of information provided. Impacts on trees, species, habitats all remain unknown.”

“Historic Buildings and Places: Further information required…”

Officer report

Business support and information

Three local businesses indicated demand for additional or new floorspace, but officers found no tangible evidence, business case or required town-centre assessments.

“In addition to the covering letter from Pike Partnership – which itself does not provide the required information as highlighted within the 6 th February report; three emails from local businesses have been submitted. These emails indicate that there are local businesses which may require additional or new floorspace, with a desire to remain in the Cromer area. These emails provide limited details of each business’s aspirations.”

“No information has been provided to satisfy the required sequential and viability/vitality tests as a result of the Main Town Centre/retail uses proposed.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Cllr Boyle and Cllr Adams spoke in support, citing local business needs, diversification, economic benefits and highway safety considerations.

The committee vote

The committee rejected the officer recommendation for refusal by one vote in favour and nine against.

“The Chairman proposed and seconded the recommendation for refusal…”

“It WAS RESOLVED by 1 vote in favour and 9 votes against to reject the recommendation for refusal.”

Minutes

The final decision

The committee unanimously approved the application, subject to conditions and any new objections during the ongoing consultation.

“Cllr Paterson proposed that the application be approved, with the range of conditions outlined by the ADP and specifically such conditions as to reasonably address the Highways concerns whilst limiting vegetation loss.”

“It WAS RESOLVED Unanimously to approve the application subject to the conditions referenced by the ADP and subject to any new objections raised during the ongoing consultation.”

Minutes