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.

All Members had received e-mail representation from the Applicant.

The Chairman noted that an article in the Thetford and Brandon Times had inferred that people turning up at the meeting would be able to ask questions.  He asked anyone not registered to speak that had a question to contact the Usher and an effort would be made to give them the opportunity to speak.

Report of the Director of Commissioning.

The Regional Planning and Building Control Manager (Capita for Breckland Council) presented the report.  The application had originally been submitted in 2011 and it had taken a long time and a lot of work to reach the current position.

He gave a brief and concise outline of the planning process and the issues to be taken account of.  The detail was in the report.

The outline planning application was for up to 5000 new dwellings, 19.5ha of employment land, local commercial centres, community and healthcare uses, up to three primary schools, associated green infrastructure, playing fields, allotments, drainage systems and highway improvements including new road junctions, alterations to existing junctions, public transport, cycle and pedestrian routes together with other physical infrastructure and enabling works.

Members were shown the extent of the site on a plan.  It included some junctions on the A11 and various sites within the Town Centre where work would also take place.  Two acres of land within the Hilborough Estate was also included as it would act as mitigation for protected species.  Members had carried out a Site Visit on 14 March 2014.

The Regional Planning and Building Control Manager explained the background to the application.  Thetford had been identified as the main area for strategic growth in the Core Strategy (CS) of the Council’s Development Plan which had been adopted in 2009.  Policy CP1 of the CS allocated 7,877 dwellings for Thetford over the plan period.  It also stated that the allocation would be met by way of a new greenfield allocation in Thetford which would consist of a strategic urban extension (SUE) to the north-east of the town within the boundary of the A11.

Policy CP3 required Thetford to provide at least 5,000 new jobs by 2021.

The Thetford Area Action Plan (TAAP) had been adopted in July 2012.  It had been subject to a challenge in the High Court which had been dismissed in January 2013.  Within the TAAP there was a commitment to provide at least 5,000 new dwellings, the majority of which would be on land to the north and north-east of the town.  There was specific provision for the SUE, including a Masterplan and a series of policies designed to ensure the delivery of the SUE.  The site was also clearly defined in the Proposals Map.

The scheme clearly had a basis in the Development Plan which had been subject to a lot of consultation and Examination in Public.  The adopted policies gave substantial weight to the determination of the application.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) had been issued in March 2012.  The TAAP had been adopted after that.  Policy TH1 of the TAAP indicated conformity with the NPPF and clearly set out a positive approach to development reflected in the presumption in favour of sustainable development.  As a core principle of planning in England it added significant weight to the determination of any planning application.

However, that had to be set against the requirement for an appropriate assessment under  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.