This was the original ALERT!!

now nearly a year ago!

this free script provided by JavaScript Kit

 

 

 

 

PLANNING PERMISSION for buildings and garages here, can and MUST BE STOPPED before Monday 16th July 2007ACT NOW


This is Cross Street where it joins the Coast Road c.1912

Little has changed since Sam and Ann Talbot had their shop here and white ducks spread themselves on that bit of grass. The railings have gone now but otherwise the tranquility is the same.

If as many people as possible write in to the council expressing their concerns about the proposed planning application to build two semi-detached cottages on the south lawn of Eastgate Cottage, Cross Street, there is a hope that this ugly and unwanted plan will be thwarted - but the time is short

It seems that a new planning notice has been erected and people haven't realised. On Monday next it will be too late to complain.

 


If you love Salthouse

if you were born here

and love to visit as

so many do, then take a few minutes

to read this and

help by adding

your opinion and

letting the Council know.

 

see some photos taken today
(Wednesday 11th July '07)

 


Messages and letters must flood the Council offices
before Monday next:
16th July 2007

However you make the comment you must include the reference number PLA/20070961

WRITE to:

Planning Section,
North Norfolk District Council,
Council Offices,
Holt Road, CROMER NR27 9EN

or the title: "ERECTION OF TWO ONE AND A HALF STOREY DWELLINGS  - EASTGATE COTTAGE CROSS STREET SALTHOUSE"

EMAIL: planning@north-norfolk.gov.uk

   

Voice your concern or express your disagreement, and give your name, address and contact details -
Anonymous letters have no effect

Here are some of the objections which may have an effect on the outcome:

BLOCKING the VIEW of an ancient Cottage (Eastgate Cottage)

THE STYLE IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE SURROUNDINGS

FLOOD: Even if the buildings are a few inches above the average flood height, wave action could cause damage

NUISANCE TO NEIGHBOURS being over-looked

OVER-DEVELOPMENT and crowding of two cottages in a small garden

DRASTIC CHANGES in the entrance and rebuilding of ancient flint wall

ABUSE OF AN AREA OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY - The developers who own this property have been trying for over two years to develop this site, which many feel would be detrimental to the character of this area of outstanding natural beauty and the Conservation Area.

[click here to see all the information concerning the Eastgate Cottage site]

click the image to enlarge

click the image to see large
enough to read!

 

The first application in November 2005 was withdrawn as they had put in plans to build a house on the land at the entrance to Cross Street.
The second application was refused by the Planning Committee. It was taken to appeal by the applicant and was refused in Jan 2007
We are now on the third application!

Mrs. Gilly Case (01328-805001), a very concerned Salthouse lover, says:
"One thing I am horrified about, is that the Developer proposes knocking down part of the old flint wall and rebuilding it along the line of a vision splay. 
Firstly this will be out of keeping with the design of an old flint wall and I have been told that it will NEVER look the same.
"

Peter J Golder, the Inspector appointed for the first examination, said: "A particular feature of existing development along the Coast Road, is the random, open and looseknit pattern of development which in large measure derives from numerous areas of undeveloped land, both sizeable and small, and public and private. These range from large public areas such as the Green to smaller pieces of garden land such as that belonging to Eastgate Cottage. This parcel of land combines with open land on the opposite side of Cross Street and the wider areas of "verge" along the Coast Road to give a particularly open appearance which is evident for some distance in either direction
"The erection of a block of three garages here with steeply pitched gables and screen walling would be prominent and intrusive and significantly erode the open and undeveloped appearance of this piece of land. It would be particularly harmful to the very special environmental qualities of this area of Salthouse."

Val fiddian says: " The frontage along the coast road and the buildings at the bottom of Cross Street is the part of the village where the indigenous Salthouse wild fowlers and farming folk lived. So far their houses have been carefully maintained, though of course newcomers have moved in.
Ugly crowded new buildings and garages in this area would be a crying shame."

 

David Lincoln of Cross Street, Salthouse, says:

"I will be writing a letter objecting to the building in the garden of Eastgate Cottage, Salthouse; below are the personal views I will be expressing.
1) The plot is not large enough for the cottages and will look out of keeping with the immediate area.
2) There are no matching semi-detached cottages in Salthouse of the era of Eastgate Cottage.
3) The demolition of the old roadside wall is unacceptable.
4) The design is NOT 'in the style of Salthouse Cottages
5) The terraces to the rear of the new buildings will not function as a
rescue platform as they are inaccessible to a boat.
6) Materials should be strictly specified.

1) The over crowding is  particularly relevant to the obstruction of the view of the southern gable end of Eastgate Cottage.  Eastgate Cottage as many historic features including this gable end which should be seen as important as a historical feature able to be viewed by the public.
2) What we think of as the 'Salthouse cottage' are buildings which have been
built in a haphazard way over the centuries.  None of them were built as matching semi - detached.
3) The demolition of the old roadside wall is unacceptable because it is such a prominent feature of this ancient part of Cross Street.  Rebuilding would have two problems -
a) where walls have had to be rebuilt because of accident in Cross and Purdy Street they do not look 'old', they are glaringly new; 
b) realigning it to the view line of the vehicular exit would be an 'urban' feature.
4) The design is NOT in the style of Salthouse cottages as there are no mirror image semi detached cottages in this ancient area.  All nearby cottages have at least a 45 degree pitch to the roofs, this design has less than 45 degrees.  They were not built with garages, or steps to the door, or over hanging roofs over the door.
5) To the best of my understanding, the raised terraces/platforms on properties below the flood-line are to facilitate rescuer by boat in event of flood.  The over-crowding of this site would prevent even the smallest craft from reaching the terrace at the rear.
6) If this application is passed it will be a sad day for this historic part of Salthouse, and consequently this conservation area and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  But if it is passed strict detailing of materials will be essential - *  the flints should be grey/blue 'sea flints' and not field or quarried flints.
*  the mortar should be 100% lime mortar and not a cement lime mix.
*  the bricks and tiles should be recycled from North Norfolk properties of
similar age to Eastgate Cottage.  (At that time the bricks were made quite
locally using the nearest clay)"

The following is taken from the North Norfolk District Council website:  What are the additional controls within Conservation  Areas?

As every development must either preserve or enhance
the appearance  and character of a conservation area,
the Local Planning Authority will only permit new development that:-

  
   * achieves a high standard of design sympathetic with the 
character of the area,
     * is compatible with the scale, mass and form of adjacent 
buildings and their settings,
     * uses appropriate materials,
     * includes appropriate, good quality landscaping that 
compliments the area,
     * does not result in the loss of important open spaces or 
features of interest, and
     * does not impinge upon views, into, out of, and within the 
conservation area."

People who have previously written in, and need to write again for this third application, are:

MR and MRS J. FERGUSON, MR. BRYAN RINGROSE, MRS. WENDY ELSDEN, MRS. J. CINNAMON, SHIRLEY DAGGER, MR. OWEN, MRS. JAMES, MR. H. LAWLESS, MOLLY COLEMAN, MR. and MRS. THROWER, CAROLYN AND JOHN  FERGUSON, MR. D. LINCOLN, MR. BAGLEY