Agenda and minutes

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

Contact: Committee Services  01362 656870

No. Item


Minutes pdf icon PDF 86 KB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 21 June 2010.


The Minutes of the meeting held on 21 June 2010 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.



Apologies & Substitutes

To receive apologies for absence.


Apologies were received from Mr T Lamb and Mr S Rogers. Mr Duigan was present at the meeting as a substitute for Mr Rogers.



Declaration of Interest and of Representations Received

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 were asked to declare an interest at the time the applications were introduced.


Mr P Duigan declared a personal interest in Item No. 7 as a Member of Norfolk County Council.




Chairman's Announcements





Requests to Defer Applications included in this Agenda

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.


Application Reference No. 3PL/2010/0458/F at Wretham by A F Machinery Ltd for a Potato Store Extension was deferred for consideration at a future meeting pending the receipt of additional information from consultants and advice from Natural England with regard to the Special Protection Area.



Urgent Business

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.





Local Development Framework (Standing Item)

To receive an update. 


The Principal Plannning Policy Officer informed Members that the public consultation process for the LDF was underway and that 224 comments had been received so far. Most of the comments made were on specific sites and not on settlement boundaries.


The Government Order to revoke the Regional Spatial Strategy was proceeding. The Communities and Local Government Department website had a useful Question and Answer section which stressed the importance of planning at local level and that the Local Development Framework would continue as a planning tool. There would be financial incentives for local communities for local housing.



Deferred Applications pdf icon PDF 31 KB

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





Shipdham: 36 Letton Rd: Proposed Residential Development: Marlborough Properties: 3PL/2010/0293/O pdf icon PDF 64 KB

Report of the Chief Executive.


The Principal Planning Officer (Major Projects) presented the report on the outline proposal for 12 new dwellings on part of a horticultural nursery site. The proposal met planning policy requirements in terms of development within the settlement boundary, character, density and layout of housing, parking, retention of trees and landscaping. A S106 agreement would ensure the requirement for provision of affordable housing and a suitable contribution towards improving local amenity.


The Highway Authority had objected to the application on the grounds that there is no footpath on Letton Road linking the site with the A1075 and requested that the applicant provided a footway of 270 metres. Such a requirement would involve the purchase of third party land and the cost involved would undermine the viability of the proposal. Officers considered that this request was unreasonable and recommended that the proposal was approved as it stood.


Mr Took, agent for the applicant, told the Committee that the owner needed to consider closing the nursery and had complied with planning requirements including the reduction in the number of dwellings on the site which had affected the viability of the development. The additional cost of constructing the footpath requested by the Highway Authority was estimated at £25,000 plus the cost of purchasing third party land to build it on. This would make the proposal not financially viable. A footpath would be provided on the site frontage but a further requirement was not considered reasonable. The proposal was a small scale development to be constructed by local builders and would meet the requirement for affordable housing.


In response to a Members query, it was clarified that a S106 agreement was still to be drafted but needed more time. The Solicitor verified that the S106 agreement could be agreed in principle and that the detailed mechanics would be worked out subsequently. Mr Took confirmed that the applicant was agreeable to all Breckland District Council conditions.


RESOLVED, that the application be deferred and the officers be authorised to grant approval as recommended, subject to conditions, on completion of a S.106 agreement to affordable housing and open space contributions.


It was noted by the Committee that this would take the process over the 13 week decision target period.



Attleborough: The Old Farmhouse, Station Rd: Proposed Residential Development by Mild Professional Homes Ltd: Reference: 3TL/2010/0018/TL pdf icon PDF 81 KB

Report of the Chief Executive



The Principal Planning Officer (Major Projects) presented the report of the application to extend the time limit for the previously approved application for 24 flats in a 5 storey building. Members were advised of the need to consider the application in view of current planning policies, some of which had changed significantly since permission was granted in 2005 such as contributions towards local recreation and affordable housing.


However, the applicant was not agreeable to the planning requirements particularly to provide 40% affordable housing. A financial viability report had been recently received form the agent but there had not been enough time for this to be considered by the District Valuer. The report had concluded that the viability of the development was questionable with or without the affordable housing element due to the nature of the scheme and the high building costs involved.


Other issues were that the modern design of the proposal was not in keeping with the locality and that there was limited parking provision for the residents/visitors. Officers had not had a chance to discuss with the applicants other ways of developing the site. The proposal was contrary to planning policy and refusal was recommended.


Members raised concern about the parking provision particularly as the Parking Task and Finish Group had commissioned a survey which had shown that there was a critical parking problem in Attleborough. In addition it was felt that neither the design nor the high rise nature of the building was compatible with the local area.


Members expressed disquiet that the changes to planning policy in 5 years had such a significant effect on such applications and considered that the current economic climate made it more difficult for developers to comply with such policies and queried whether the 40% affordable housing requirement could be reduced. The Development Service Manager responded that developers would be aware of policy changes and would take these into account. Any change to planning policy would have to be justified by evidence and approved by the District Valuer.


RESOLVED that planning permission be refused as recommended, due to failure to provide affordable housing, recreation and local library contributions and concerns about the inadequacy of the parking provision.



Schedule of Planning Applications pdf icon PDF 89 KB

To consider the Schedule of Planning Applications:


Item No



Page No


Marlborough Properties




Mr P Foster

South Lopham

17 – 21


Mrs N Kemp


22 – 26


Tilia Properties


27 – 29


Gressingham Foods

Great Ellingham

30 – 32


A F Machinery Ltd


33 – 35


Norfolk County Council


38 – 38


Mr M Blyth





RESOLVED that the applications be determined as follows;


(a)   Item 1: Shipdham: 36 Letton Road: Proposed residential development  for Marlborough Properties: Reference: 3PL/2010/0293/O


Approved, see Minute 118/10


(b)   Item 2: South Lopham: Four Acres, Redgrave Road: Construction of first floor balcony within existing roof, new and enlarged dormers to rear for Mr P Foster: Reference: 3PL:2010:0345/F


The Principal Planning Officer (Major Projects) gave a report of the proposal for alterations to the rear roof of the property. Obscure glass screening at either end of the balcony had been added to help protect the privacy of neighbouring properties.


Mr Webb, adjacent neighbour to the south of the site, objected to the proposal on the grounds that it would be intrusive and overlook his property causing loss of privacy. He circulated a photograph to Members of the roof view with the projected balcony and enlarged windows superimposed. He estimated the distance from the balcony to his boundary was 4 metres.


Mr Brand, agent for the applicant, said that the proposed alterations to the windows would provide more light to the bedrooms and that efforts had been made to avoid possible overlooking of the neighbouring properties helped by the provision of screening. He suggested that the balcony would only be used a few times a year.


Mr Nunn, Ward Representative, said that the main concern was the effect on the privacy of the neighbouring properties. The balcony was likely to be used in good weather at the same time as neighbours could be in their gardens and could be viewed from the balcony. There was the potential to remove the screening in the future and he considered development at the height and position was not appropriate.


Members received clarification that there was already access from the rear windows to the roof area; that the change in size of the windows was not excessive; and the screening would be 1.8 metres in height. It was suggested by one Member that the screening could be a solid barrier rather than obscure glass.


The Development Service Manager clarified that the officer recommendation included a condition relating to the level of obscurity of the glass, and that changes to the screen or any other part of the development should not be made without approval.


Approved, as recommended, subject to conditions.


(c)   Item 3: Attleborough: Windmill Way, Foundry Corner: provide new driveway access from Buckenham Rd (B1077) together with new drive & turning space for Mrs N Kemp: Reference: 3PL/2010/0396/F


The Principal Planning Officer (Major Projects) presented the report on the proposal to provide new vehicle access at the front of the property on Buckenham Road. The current vehicle access at the rear was from Borough Lane which was of restricted width.


Concerns had been raised regarding highway safety and the possible danger of a new access on to the B1077 which was considered a busy road. The Highways Authority had not objected as long as normal requirements for parking/turning space were met and that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 120.


Applications determined by the Chief Executive (For Information) pdf icon PDF 58 KB

Report of the Chief Executive.





Enforcement Items (For Information) pdf icon PDF 61 KB





Applications determined by Norfolk County Council (For Information) pdf icon PDF 34 KB





Appeal Decisions (For Information)

APP/F2605/C/09/2111115: Attleborough: Land at Leys Lane: Appeal against an enforcement notice regarding the change of use of the land from woodland to use for the parking stationing storage or accumulation of vehicles, mobile homes, caravans, scrap vehicles, scrap metal and other articles and materials by Mr Adam Jones: Reference: ENF/2008/0190/CAS

Decision: Appeal dismissed


APP/F2605/C/10/2122498 & 2122499: Colkirk: Dereham Rd: Appeal against an enforcement notice regarding change of use of the land from agriculture to residential purposes by the stationing of a mobile home by Mr R E Reeve and Mrs J A Reeve: Reference: ENF/2009/0042/CAS

Decision: Appeal Dismissed