Agenda and minutes

Venue: Anglia Room, The Conference Suite, Elizabeth House, Dereham

Contact: Committee Services  01362 656870

No. Item


Minutes (Agenda Item 1) pdf icon PDF 143 KB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on


The minutes of the meeting held on 3 November 2008 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.



Apologies (Agenda Item 2)

To receive apologies for absence.


Apologies for absence were received from Mr W Borrett, Mr A Byrne, Mrs S Howard-Alpe, Mr R Kemp, Mr F Sharpe and Mr M Spencer.



Declaration of Interest (Agenda Item 3)

Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests they may have in any of the following items on the agenda.  The Members’ Code of Conduct requires that declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is personal or prejudicial.


Members and officers were asked to declare any interest at the time the applications were made.


Mr P Francis declared a personal interest in Schedule Item 1 (Attleborough) by virtue of working closely with the applicant.


Mr P Duigan and Mr M Fanthorpe declared a personal interest in Schedule Item 4 (Dereham) by virtue of having known the applicant for a long time.  Mr J Labouchere declared a personal interest in this item by virtue of having business associations with the applicant.


Mrs D Irving declared a personal interest in Schedule Item 8 (Hockering) by virtue of being the Executive Support Member to the applicant.  Mr B Rose declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item.



Chairman's Announcements (Agenda Item 4)


The Chairman asked the Solicitor to clarify voting procedures for the benefit of Members of the Public.


The Solicitor explained that if the vote on a proposal was lost it did not mean that the opposite was agreed (eg if the Committee voted against a recommendation of approval, it did not automatically mean the application was refused); a new proposal and reasons for that proposal had to be put forward and would then be voted on.



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.


There were none.



Urgent Business (Agenda Item 6)

To note whether the Chairman proposes to accept any item as urgent business, pursuant to Section 100(B)(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.


There was none.



Local Development Framework (Agenda Item 7)

To receive an update. 


The Principal Planning Policy Officer reminded Members that at full Council it had been agreed to publish and submit the Core Strategy document.  This would go out to consultation on 5 January 2009 for six weeks and would then return to full Council at the end of February or beginning of March.


At that time consultation would begin on the extra sites submitted under the Site Specifics stage of the LDF and on the draft of the Thetford Area Action Plan.



Deferred Applications (Agenda Item 8) pdf icon PDF 42 KB

To consider applications deferred at previous meetings including some, but not all, of those shown on the attached Schedule of Deferred Applications.


There were none.



Dereham: CMC Warehouse, Norwich Road: Conversion of former retail warehouse to 14 flats for Mr S Parish: Reference: 3PL/2008/1141/F (Agenda Item 9) pdf icon PDF 79 KB

Report of the Development Services Manager.


This proposal to convert a previous carpet warehouse to flats would ensure the retention of an important and prominent building which reflected the industrial past, and contributed to the character and quality, of the area.


An existing dilapidated structure and small wing to the rear would be demolished to provide a parking area.  The courtyard to the front would be landscaped and enclosed by railings, providing an amenity area for residents.


The fenestration would reflect the pattern of the original openings and this gave rise to concerns as the building was in very close proximity to existing dwellings.  Amendments had been made to provide obscure glazing to sections of the windows to prevent overlooking and some windows would need to be fixed shut.  There would clearly be some effect on amenity.  Bringing the building back into use would improve the appearance of the area.


Mr Chambers, objector, had lived in his house (immediately adjacent the site) for 20 years and used the area to the rear of the building for parking.  He was concerned about future parking provision and overlooking.  He asked for clarification of obscure glazing.


Mrs Lyons, objector, lived immediately adjacent the building on the opposite side to Mr Chambers.  Her house was the closest to the building and she was concerned that windows would overlook every part of her house and garden.


The Officer clarified the proposed glazing and showed a diagram to demonstrate that the obscure parts of the windows would prevent people in the building looking down into gardens and rooms.  Floor plans were shown so that Members could see which rooms would overlook the adjacent properties.  


A Member agreed that the glazing could be conditioned but was concerned about the access road, its upkeep and possible on-road parking.


Another Member noted a crane gantry and proposed that it should be retained by condition.  This was agreed as it was considered an important feature.


RESOLVED to defer the application, contrary to recommendation, to allow the applicant to make proposals to overcome overlooking concerns and to provide new drawings showing the gantry to be retained.


A Member requested that when the application was reported back to Committee the applicant should be encouraged to attend.



3PL/2008/1211/F: Bylaugh: Land off B1147, Bylaugh Park: Proposed camping/caravanning park for Mr A Medler (Agenda Item 10) pdf icon PDF 69 KB

To consider this application in the light of the site visit held on 21 November 2008.  A copy of the report as submitted to the meeting held on 3 November 2008 is attached.


This item was considered in light of the site visit held on 21 November 2008.


This application to create a campsite of 50 pitches in part of a large agricultural field, proposed a new access through the existing boundary wall.  Concerns had been raised about highway safety at the access point and the site visit had been arranged for Members to see the proposed access point. 


The Officer clarified for those Members that had not attended the visit, that though there were a number of undulations in the road, at the point of the access it was quite flat, allowing the full visibility splays required by Highways.  A representative from Highways was in attendance to answer any questions.


A previously refused application on a site opposite was also clarified.  This had been refused on policy (new dwelling outside Settlement Boundary) and highway grounds.  In that case, the highway objection concerned the positioning of a proposed new access at the junction with Slad Lane, and the lack of the necessary visibility splays.  Because of the policy objection, no attempt was made to negotiate the access arrangements.


The main issues of policy, sustainability, environmental impact and highway safety (explained fully at the previous meeting) were reprised.


Mr Mallen, Bylaugh Parish Chairman, said the road was heavily used by HGVs and was busier than had been stated.  In places it was too narrow for two lorries to pass each other and he considered the addition of up to 30 cars and caravans would increase danger.  The verges had been trimmed two days before the site visit and he felt this had given a false impression.


Mr Warlow, Agent, said that the verges would be maintained if permission was granted and the access would seem like an entrance to the Estate.  The site would be seasonal from April to the end of the summer with a few other occasional weekends and was therefore unlikely to conflict with shooting. 


Mr Bambridge, Ward Representative, raised concerns about sewage, because of the sensitivity of the area and existing problems; site management and whether there would be an on-site warden; possible future use of the permanent buildings on site as dwellings and he also felt that the proposed new screening was too close to the pitches.


Members asked about hard-surfacing, foul drainage, site security, the positioning of the proposed screening and the use of the on-site buildings.


The agent confirmed his client would be happy to move the screening back.  He also felt that there would probably need to be a gate at the entrance to prevent unauthorised access.  A warden would be available most of the time to maintain security, working on a shift system, not sleeping on site.


Officers confirmed that proposed conditions addressed many of the other concerns.


RESOLVED to approve the application as recommended.



Schedule of Planning Applications (Agenda Item 11) pdf icon PDF 94 KB

To consider the Schedule of Planning Applications:


Item No



Page No


Connaught Veterinary Surgery




Mr Steven Parish




Dam Estates Ltd




Mr R Everett




Mr & Mrs Nixon




Mr Michael Gregson

New Buckenham



Mr & Mrs A Medley

Old Buckenham



Mr & Mrs P Claussen





RESOLVED that the applications be determined as follows:


(a)       Item 1: 3PL/2008/1081/O: Attleborough: Land adjoining The Manse, Station Road: Residential development of 4 detached bungalows with garages, demolish existing annex and form new site access for Connaught Veterinary Surgery


Mr Francis declared a personal interest in this item.


This outline application with all matters reserved was in an area characterised by large dwellings in large plots.  The plot sizes for the proposed four bungalows, shown on an indicative plan, were relatively small and would increase density from 8 dwellings/ha to 23/ha.  It was felt that the setting of the listed building would be affected and the proposal would impact on the amenity of the occupants of Old Manse.


Mr Stasiak, Ward Representative, supported the application.  There was a lack of consistency concerning ‘backland’ development.  He drew Members’ attention to various other ‘backland’ developments in the area built in recent years and said that the proposal would not impact on the listed building.


A Member felt that this ‘grander’ area of Attleborough should be preserved, whilst another pointed out that the development was a long way back and would not be visible from Station Road.


Refused, as recommended.


(b)               Item 2: 3PL/2008/1141/F: Dereham: Former CMC Warehouse, Norwich Road: Proposed conversion of former maltings to 14 apartments for Mr Stephen Parish


Deferred, see Minute No 206/08.


(c)               Item 3: 3PL/2008/1279/F: Swaffham: 75 Market Place: Change of use of ground floor from Class A1 to either Class A2 or A3 and conversion of upper floors to 3 No flats for Dam Estates Ltd


This application proposed the raising of the ridge height of two sections of a three element building to enable development of flats at first floor level.  This would entail the addition of dormer windows.  Other changes were to the shop front and fenestration, a replacement window and Juliet balcony were also proposed.


The change to A2 or A3 use would enable financial and professional services or café/restaurant use of the ground floor.  Although the loss of A1 (retail) use was regretted a marketing scheme had proved that there was no A1 need in this area.


An amended plan introduced a side door entrance to the proposed flats towards the rear of the property and provision for internal refuse storage.


Mr Butters, for the Town Council, regretted that they had not seen the amended plans.  He was concerned that the Juliet balcony would obstruct the large wagon used by the adjacent butcher’s shop; and that rubbish and parking would cause problems.


Mr Potter, objector, owned the adjacent butcher’s shop which had been trading for 80 years.  He was concerned that the rear door to the property would open onto staff cars parked on his land and that there would be problems with his wheelie bins.  There was also concern about illegal parking in the churchyard overnight.


Mr Shoot, Director of Dam Estates, said the property had been vacant for 18 months.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 208.


Applications determined by the Development Services Manager (Agenda Item 12) pdf icon PDF 152 KB

Report of the Development Services Manager.


This item was noted.



Enforcement Items (Agenda Item 13) pdf icon PDF 58 KB

Report of the Development Services Manager.


This item was noted.



Applications determined by Norfolk County Council (Agenda Item 14)

Reference: 3CM/2008/0017/F: Dereham: Neatherd High School, Norwich Road: Extension of existing car park area to the south of the tennis court, to include the erection of a bicycle shed and enclosure for Children’s Services.

Decision: Approval.


This item was noted.



Appeal Decisions (Agenda Item 15)

APP/F2605/A/08/2079419: Watton: 50 Norwich Road: Appeal against refusal to grant planning permission, for the erection of a bungalow and attached garage, by Mrs V Carter.  Application Reference: 3PL/2008/0465/F

Decision:  Appeal Dismissed.


APP/F2605/A/08/2079683: North Elmham: Site adjacent 6 Orchard Close: Appeal against refusal to grant planning permission, for single storey dwelling, by Mr T Hansell.  Application Reference: 3PL/2008/0289/F.

Decision:  Appeal Dismissed.


This item was noted.