Venue: Anglia Room, The Conference Suite, Elizabeth House, Dereham
Contact: Committee Services 01362 656870
To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 17 February 2014.
The Solicitor advised that Councillor Childerhouse had requested an amendment to the Minutes with regard to the comments he had made as Ward Representative on Schedule Item 3 (Croxton). He had said that the Leisure Centre site was still available. Members agreed that the matter should be looked into and the point would be clarified when the matter was next discussed by the Committee.
Councillor North clarified that her declaration regarding Schedule Item 2 (Attleborough) had been that she had received a letter requesting support for the proposal which she had passed on to other local Ward Members.
Subject to that amendment, the Minutes of the meeting held on 17 February 2014 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
Apologies & Substitutes (Agenda Item 2)
To receive apologies for absence.
Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors Lamb and Sharpe.
Councillor Joel was present as Substitute for Councillor Sharpe.
Declaration of Interest and of Representations Received (Agenda Item 3)
Members are reminded that under the Code of Conduct they are not to participate and must leave the room, for the whole of an agenda item to which they have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest.
In the interests of transparency, Members may also wish to declare any other interests they have in relation to an agenda item, that support the Nolan principles detailed within the Code of Conduct.
Schedule Item 4 (Thetford) – Councillor Robinson declared that he had had dealings with the applicant and his business.
Schedule Item 5 (Great Ellingham) – Councillor North declared that she was acquainted with Mrs Banks (Objector).
Chairman's Announcements (Agenda Item 4)
The Chairman reminded Members that a previous meeting had been interrupted by the mobile phone of the press representative. It had been agreed that her line manager would attend to sing for the Committee in lieu of the usual £10 fine.
Chris Hill, Community Editor for the Eastern Daily Press and Editor of the Dereham Times then accompanied himself on guitar and sang ‘This Old House’ complete with an additional verse referring to applying for Planning Permission to replace the old house.
After warm applause from all present Mr Hill said that despite having paid the debt by performing he was pleased to also pay the £10 to the Chairman of the Council’s charity – Caister Lifeboat.
The Chairman of the Planning Committee thanked Mr Hill and advised everyone present that the performance had been a ‘one-off’ and that in future the penalty for a mobile phone interrupting the meeting would be the £10 fine.
Requests to Defer Applications included in this Agenda (Agenda Item 5)
To consider any requests from Ward Members, officers or applicants to defer an application included in this agenda, so as to save any unnecessary waiting by members of the public attending for such applications.
Schedule Item 2 (Necton) had been deferred from the agenda for further procedural matters.
Members had previously been advised that Agenda Item 8a (Croxton) had also been deferred from the agenda.
Local Plan Update (Agenda Item 7)
To receive an update.
The Local Plan Issues and Options consultation was currently being developed. Public consultation was likely to occur in the Autumn, which would allow a number of key pieces of evidence base to be delivered to inform the first round of consultation. Updates to the evidence base would include: an Open Space Assessment, Retail and Town Centre Study and further Housing Studies.
Further amendments to the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) regulations had come into force at the end of February. The regulations were being reviewed by Team. The Draft Charging Schedule would be considered by Cabinet in May, with a timetable for adoption by March 2015, when the restrictions on s106 agreements would occur. That would allow the Council to start charging CIL shortly afterwards.
The end of the monitoring year was approaching. Site visits were being undertaken to review the level of housing completions within the District. The site visits would inform the Five Year Housing Land Supply statement which would be reported to the Planning Committee later in the year and would inform future planning decisions.
Croxton Parish Council had submitted a request for the designation of a Neighbourhood Area for the whole of the parish. The consultation period had closed however, talks were currently occurring with Kilverstone & Brettenham Parish Council for a joint Neighbourhood Plan with Croxton which would effectively cover all three parishes and incorporate all of the Thetford Sustainable Urban Extension area.
To consider applications deferred at previous meetings including some, but not all, of those shown on the attached Schedule of Deferred Applications.
The above application was deferred from the Planning Committee meeting held on 17 February 2014 to enable a site visit to take place on 14 March 2014.
This application had been deferred from the agenda at the request of the applicant.
To consider the Schedule of Planning Applications:
RESOLVED that the applications be determined as follows:
(a) Item 1: DEREHAM: 54 & 56 Yaxham Road: Proposed development of land for three new dwellings and detached single garage for each plot: Applicant: Mr Peter Anthony: Reference: 3PL/2013/0545/F
This application proposed three new dwellings on land to the rear of 54 and 56 Yaxham Road, accessed from the existing driveway to No 54. An existing doorway onto the drive would be blocked up and additional soundproofing would be provided to reduce noise from vehicles using the driveway.
Similar development had taken place to the north and it was considered that the separation distances were sufficient to protect amenity. A S106 agreement had been completed.
Mr Anthony (Applicant) noted that the nearest properties on the Industrial Estate over the railway line were for warehouse not manufacturing use. He also advised that the proposed density was lower than on a nearby site.
Councillors Spencer, North and Richmond raised queries about the access drive and whether it would be wide enough. It was confirmed that it had a type three turning head and complied with highway requirements.
Councillor Armes asked whether the driveway would be a permeable material and was advised that the tar sprayed shingle being used to reduce noise was not permeable but there was a surface water management scheme.
Approved, as recommended.
(b) Item 2: NECTON: The Necton Diner, Norwich Road: Residential development: Applicant: Mr T Gray: Reference: 3PL/2013/0983/O
This application had been deferred for procedural matters.
(c) Item 3: BEESTON: Valley Farm, Watery Lane: Proposed permanent agricultural dwelling: Applicant: Mr J Ogilvy: Reference: 3PL/2013/1104/O
This was an Outline application with all matters reserved and just the principle of a permanent agricultural dwelling to be considered.
Plans had been amended to move the proposed dwelling closer to existing buildings to minimise its impact on the landscape. Temporary permission for a mobile home had previously been granted, on appeal. Since then the enterprise had expanded beyond expected levels and the numbers of livestock had increased to a level requiring 24/7 care and supervision.
The Parish Council had requested more landscaping, and that permitted development rights should be removed. If Members were minded to approve the application those additional conditions would be included.
Councillor Bowes thought it was important to ensure that the house was of an attractive design rather than limiting it to a single storey.
Councillor North felt that as the dwelling was outside the Settlement Boundary on an exposed site it should be limited to a single storey. She also requested a condition requiring the removal of the existing mobile home.
Councillor Carter agreed that it should be a single storey dwelling as it would be visible from a long way away.
Approved, as recommended, subject to additional conditions including a condition for single storey.
(d) Item 4: THETFORD: Land behind No 10 Bridge Street: Proposed two storey dwelling house: Applicant: Mr N Pettit: Reference: 3PL/2013/1159/F
Councillor Robinson declared that he had had dealings with ... view the full minutes text for item 30.
Report of the Assistant Director of Commissioning.
The Planning Policy Officer advised Members that the report had been previously presented to the Local Plan Working Group and they had asked for it to be referred to the Planning Committee.
The study covered all of the Brecks national character area and built on the existing Breckland Landscape Assessment. It presented a holistic view of the Brecks landscape which had previously been considered at the individual Local Authority’s level through their own Landscape Character Assessments.
The dual aim of the study was to provide a narrative of how the Brecks had developed for the public and also to provide a technical assessment. The study had been done at a scale of 1:10000 which provided much greater detail than had previously been available. It identified eight character landscape types across the Brecks.
Within the Core Strategy, Policy CP11 identified the most important landscape types for the highest protection. The study gave advice on what to look at in landscape terms when considering planning applications.
Councillor North asked what the £1.5million grant for the Brecks would be spent on and the Deputy Planning Manager advised that it was too early to say. The current study had been paid for with money from other funding streams. It would provide useful guidance as part of the Local Plan process.
Councillor Claussen thought it was a shame that the Study had been done just as the Brecks Partnership had been wound up.
The Deputy Planning Manager did not disagree. It was a legacy item from the Brecks Partnership and a new delivery vehicle would need to be found moving forward.
The report was noted.
Report of the Director of Commissioning
Members are requested to raise any questions at least two working days before the meeting to allow information to be provided to the Committee.
Appeal Decisions (Agenda Item 12)
APP/F2605/A/13/2209599: BESTHORPE: Park Farm Bungalow, Morley Road: Appeal against refusal to grant planning permission for one replacement dwelling and one new dwelling by Mr. Neil Clancy: Reference: 3PL/2013/0843/F
Decision: Appeal allowed subject to conditions in respect of details of materials, provision of parking/turning, parallel visibility splay to be provided.
Summary: The Inspector noted that planning permission had been granted for a replacement dwelling on the site. The issue relates to the additional dwelling proposed.
The Inspector considered that the proposal would have a very limited effect on the shortfall in housing land supply
The Inspector acknowledged that future occupiers would be reliant on the use of motor vehicles however did not feel the proposal would generate significant movements. The close proximity of services and the location within a group of dwellings would constitute sustainable development. The proposal would result in only limited harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside.
APP/F2605/A/13/2207472: GREAT ELLINGHAM: 26 Rectory Lane: Appeal against refusal to grant planning permission for a new dwelling by Mr. & Mrs. Fleming. Reference: 3PL/2013/0262/F
Decision: Appeal dismissed
Summary: The Inspector acknowledged that the proposal would make a modest contribution to new housing within the village.
The Inspector considered that the proposal would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the area.
In relation to contributions to recreational facilities, the Inspector could not be satisfied that any undertaking met the Requirements in Regulation 122(2) of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010. The absence of such an undertaking does not count against the proposal.
The Chairman noted that it was the Solicitor’s final Planning Committee in Dereham (although he would be attending the Special Planning Committee on 4 April 2014 in Thetford). He wanted to personally thank Mr Chinnery for his legal advice which had been very useful.
Councillor Armes had known Mr Chinnery for a long time and said that he was always quiet, courteous and efficient. She respected him immensely and thanked him for all he had done and wished him all the best for the future.
Councillor Claussen also thanked Mr Chinnery who he said had understood Members and whose legacy would be how little the Council had had to pay in compensation, which was largely thanks to his advice.
Councillors North and Carter were both relatively new Councillors. They had found Mr Chinnery’s advice very helpful. When they had needed guidance it had been delivered in a quiet and understandable way.
Councillor Spencer also thanked Mr Chinnery for the Standards training he had given which had been a great help.
Mr Chinnery responded with thanks for the kind comments. When he had originally left Breckland he had done work on Planning Committees at a lot of other Authorities and he believed that the Breckland Planning Committee were the most sensible he had come across. This time he would be retiring properly to spend time in his garden and with his grandchildren. He thanked the Members for their good wishes.