Pub demolition tipped for approval
A second bid to knock down a pub to make way for houses on an estate in Sheringham has been recommended for approval by planning officers.The owners of the Sherry 'n' Ham pub, on Beech Avenue, say the business is no longer viable and is currently being subsidised to the tune of £3,000 a month.
A second bid to knock down a pub to make way for houses on an estate in Sheringham has been recommended for approval by planning officers.
The owners of the Sherry 'n' Ham pub, on Beech Avenue, say the business is no longer viable and is currently being subsidised to the tune of £3,000 a month.
Earlier this year they applied to North Norfolk District Council for permission to knock it down and build four three storey homes on the site.
The application was rejected by the council's planning committee amidst concerns that it was not in keeping with the local area.
You may also want to watch:
A second application, for three two storey homes on the same site, will now go before NNDC's Development Control Committee at its meeting on Thursday.
So far the new application has received five letters of objection with concerns ranging from loss of privacy and being overlooked to loss of the public house and over-development of the site.
- 1 'Dystopian castle' in seaside village may escape demolition
- 2 County council election 2021: Who is standing in north Norfolk?
- 3 Teenagers brighten bus shelter with village mural
- 4 Village pub wins status as asset of community value
- 5 'Fishermen should grow up' - Report sparks clash over crab fishery
- 6 Three farms hit by thefts of valuable tractor GPS systems
- 7 Group overwhelmed by support as they aim to 'reclaim the lane'
- 8 Fishermen accuse wind farm giant of bullying in compensation row
- 9 Historian's shock over footprints on Edith Cavell tombstone
- 10 Three adorable abandoned day-old kittens adopted by stray
But a report to councillors recommends the plan be approved. It says that the council does not have a policy of seeking the retention of pubs in towns and the proposed development “would not significantly conflict” with planning policy.