Row over plans to transform old United Reform Church in Norwich
The dispute over the plans has led to one set of solicitors accusing another of trying to "bully" the council.
Sitting empty since closing as a place of worship in 2020, a developer has put forward plans which would see the building used as a venue to host cultural events, classical music concerts and conferences.Its plans would also see the site used for art exhibitions and fitness classes, with features – including the church's historic organ – being preserved.A report for the council's planning committee said an online petition backed the idea, along with 41 people writing letters of support.One person writing in favour said "spaces for positive and creative activities are essential" whilst another said it "would be an unbelievable asset".But there is strong opposition from others, with many concerned the building would be open until the early hours.A legal letter sent on behalf of one local landlord claimed the plan was to use the building as a nightclub, which would have a "serious, irreparable and unacceptable impact" on residents.In response, the developer's solicitors said the claim was "grossly unfair and based on a false premise" and the letter had sought "to bully the local planning authority into refusing the application".
The report for councillors said that, with proposed closing times of no later than 11pm, the hours for the building "differ significantly from those typical of a nightclub".It recommends they give planning permission, subject to conditions including restricted opening hours and measures to insulate sound.The planning committee will vote on the plan on Thursday, where they will also decide on proposals for a piano bar at another nearby former church, which have also been recommended for approval.
Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The need for constant vigilance
Twenty years ago today, Londoners awoke to a bright summer's day with a spring in their step. The capital had just been named the venue for the 2012 Olympic Games, confirming its global status. Better still, it had beaten Paris to the prize. On the radio that morning, Sir Ian Blair, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, discussed the security needs for such a big event and described his force's anti-terrorist preparations as ''the envy of the policing world''. Yet even as he spoke, four men were making their way on to the London transport system to turn his words to dust. The quartet of suicide bombers would commit the worst atrocity on British soil, killing 52 people. A few days passed before it was clear who was responsible and the discovery was a shock. These were not terrorists who had arrived from overseas to attack the UK. They were homegrown fundamentalists, led by a Yorkshire-born teaching assistant of Pakistani descent, trained in bomb-making at an al-Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan. The revelation led to a great deal of soul-searching about the apparent failure to assimilate into British culture people who were actually raised in the country. A video left by Mohammad Sidique Khan made clear that he considered loyalty to Islam to be greater than that to his country. The destruction of al-Qaeda training camps after 9/11 reduced the bomb-making expertise available to fanatics who now more often use stolen lorries or knives to cause carnage. But the possibility of mass casualty attacks remains and the security agencies need to maintain the highest vigilance. They have to be able to gather intelligence from within Muslim communities, especially now so many young people are being radicalised over the internet. Can we be sure that enough is being done to make this happen?
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump promises fresh tariff announcement within hours
Donald Trump said countries across the globe would find out within hours what tariff rates they face under his latest trade onslaught. The US president said letters 'and/or deals with various countries from around the world' would be delivered at 5pm UK time today. He said an extra 10pc levy would be added to any country 'aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of Brics', an 11-member alliance including Brazil, Russia, India and China. The FTSE 100 was lower and Asian stock markets mostly fell as most US trading partners prepared to face higher rates. Despite promises to work on 90 deals in 90 days, President Trump and his team have been able to complete only a limited trade deal with Britain and an agreement with Vietnam. A long-promised deal with India has remained elusive, while a trade truce with China has appeared on shaky ground.
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
My open letter to Rachel Reeves to avoid the disasters killing racing
Dear Rachel, We need to talk about growth, through the prism of the horse racing industry. We need to talk about mistakes that you have inherited that are not being addressed and we need to talk about the consequences of the tax raid that the Treasury is currently 'consulting' about. The horse racing industry provides more than £4 billion to the economy every year. It employs more than 80,000 people, supports 6,000 small businesses and is the lifeblood of more than 40 Labour constituencies. It also supports a 'soft' trade network, which is the envy of many of our competing nations, with many foreign investors attracted to the UK because of racing. That network could be relocated very easily if the standard and regard in which our racing is held should diminish. But so dire are the consequences of the situation, the prediction is that foal production will fall by 40 per cent in this country under this government. Subsequently, there will be a similar contraction of the second-biggest sport in this country, and all the employment and tax receipts that go with it. If it is ideology rather than growth that is your master, these may be losses that do not concern you. But I will spell out the three main causes anyway. Firstly, let's consider your consultation on harmonisation of online gambling taxes. Sounds innocuous enough to the uninformed, but the reality is such a harmonisation fails to take into account the social impact of different types of gambling. Online casino and slots games provide little employment in this country, are designed to be addictive and cause a huge amount of social harm. So, I would suggest you double the tax on them to 42 per cent. Betting tax on racing, which is no more addictive than buying a Lottery ticket, is 15 per cent. The smart thing to do would be to reduce this using the gains from casino games to offset the shortfall, if you really want to create growth. Increasing the tax on racing, on the other hand, would be an act of moral and fiscal vandalism that would reduce your tax take before the end of this parliament. The bookmakers realise that their best defence of casino-games taxation is to tie it as closely as possible to racing. Do not fall for that argument. They can, and should, be treated differently. Secondly, there is the matter of the Levy review which has been swept under the carpet and ignored since the election. Bookmakers pay a levy back to UK racing on bets struck on races run on home soil. But they do not pay that levy on betting on foreign racing. In Donald Trump's world, that is akin to having a tariff on a home-grown product but making the same imported product tariff free. How can that be growth friendly? When the Levy was originally constructed, bets taken on foreign racing would have been negligible. But in part due to support they have had from successive governments, the strength of breeding and racing horses in Ireland has superseded the UK. When Gordon Brown was Prime Minister, he asked me how this could be corrected. Apparently, even he knew the results at the Cheltenham Festival. But such is the strength of the bookmakers' lobbying, nothing was done to correct this Levy anomaly, which now costs the industry in the UK circa £25 million per annum. The third disaster killing racing is the ill-conceived affordability checks that have been nurtured by a Gambling Commission that is driving punters into the welcoming arms of the illegal bookmakers. The Gambling Commission is meant to be protecting punters from losses they cannot afford and bookmakers who do not follow guidelines of acceptable practice. But the reality is, if the regulated market becomes too onerous, punters will desert it for the black market, costing the Treasury hundreds of millions of pounds. The fact that the black market has grown exponentially in the past few years is indicative that the Gambling Commission is a misguided, failing quango. If you want to save money, I suggest you get rid of it. I suspect there may be some mitigating circumstances as to why you are possibly unaware of these issues and their consequences. Racing should have built closer relationships with the Cabinet Office and been more proactive highlighting the threat of the betting black market. It suited the Gambling Commission's agenda to downplay this leakage and racing should have been less nervous about confronting them and bringing it to your attention. I hope this gives you food for thought. Yours, Charlie Brooks
