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 8 MB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 19 October 2015.


Subject to the addition of Gary Hancox in attendance, the Minutes of the meeting held on 19 October 2015 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.



Apologies & Substitutes (Agenda Item 2)

To receive apologies for absence.


Apologies were received from Councillors Bowes and Smith.

Councillors Darby and W Richmond were present as Substitutes.



Declaration of Interest and of Representations Received (Agenda Item 3)

Members are reminded that under the Code of Conduct they are not to participate in 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 that they have, in relation to an agenda item that supports the Nolan principles detailed within the Code of Conduct.


Agenda Item 9, Schedule Item 1 (Rocklands) – all Members had received direct representation.



Chairman's Announcements (Agenda Item 4)


The Chairman announced that there would be a one minute’s silence at 11am which was being observed by many Countries across Europe to commemorate those killed in the terrorist attacks in Paris on Friday evening.


He then informed Members that it was Heather Burlingham’s last Committee meeting.  Heather had worked for the Council and then Capita for many years and had served as Usher at the Committee for a very long time, she would be sadly missed.  Heather was presented with a bouquet of flowers a box of chocolates and a card signed by the Committee Members.



Requests to Defer Applications included in this Agenda (Agenda Item 5) pdf icon PDF 43 KB

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.


Agenda Item 9, Schedule Items 6 and 7 (both at Snetterton) had been deferred from the Agenda to allow for further supporting information to be submitted.


It was also noted that the recommendation on page 117 for Schedule Item 9 (Dereham) had been changed to Approval.



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.





Local Plan Update (Agenda Item 7) pdf icon PDF 43 KB

To receive an update. 

Additional documents:


The Planning Policy Team Leader introduced Neil Campbell the new Planning Policy Manager.  He then gave a brief update.


The Draft Preferred Directions document had been finalised and was now in the committee cycle.  The Yaxham Neighbourhood Plan area had been designated and further interest in a Neighbourhood Plan had been shown by North Lopham, Saham Toney and Rocklands.  Attleborough was developing policies which were expected to be submitted to the Council for a scoping opinion.


A letter had been sent to all Councils from Brandon Lewis MP, advising that development should not be held up where developers wished to renegotiate the S106 details.  The letter would be sent out to the Committee members.  (Copy attached for information.)


Councillor Claussen asked about the Dereham Transport Study and whether it would include Yaxham and Mattishall.  He was pleased that the cumulative effects would be considered and thanked the team for their efforts in accommodating this request and for keeping him informed.  He had attended a Yaxham Open Day on their Neighbourhood Plan and they had praised the help they had received from the Planning Policy Team Leader.


The Planning Policy Team Leader said that the Study had been commissioned and some junction surveys had already been undertaken.  The scope of the Study would be agreed by Council.


Councillor Joel referred to the Directions papers and asked that Members be sent a hard copy when they were published for consultation.  He also thought that all Parish Councils should receive a hard copy.


The Planning Policy Team Leader said that the documents would be sizeable and he could not guarantee that hard copies would be made available but he would pass on that request to the Council.



Deferred Applications (Agenda Item 8) pdf icon PDF 43 KB

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

Additional documents:


North Pickenham: The Airfield, Hilborough Road: Proposed Anaerobic Digestion Plant: Applicant: Bernard Matthews Limited: Reference: 3PL/2015/0378/F


This application had been considered at the previous meeting and deferred due to concerns about the effects of traffic on the surrounding road network.  Further discussions had taken place and additional information had been provided including an amendment to the access route from the southern part of the Estate Land.  The amended access would avoid the village of North Pickenham.  Some improvements would be made to the route to provide passing bays to make it suitable for HGV use.  A number of residential properties on the route were set well back from the road and would not be significantly affected.

The access route from the north of the Estate Land would also be improved and widened in places.


The anticipated traffic movements were explained.  Maize generated the most movements and those would take place over a four week period.  Beet would be used at different periods so the two would not be combined.  It was reiterated that the crops were already grown on the estate. 


NCC Highways no longer objected to the proposal subject to a legal agreement covering the highway improvements and other suitable conditions.


Mr Youngs (Applicant) was happy to accept the changes.  He thanked Councillor Sharpe for his suggestion of an alternative route from the south.  The legal agreement was already well on its way to completion.


Councillor Sharpe spoke on behalf of the Parish Council and said he was pleased that the consultations with interested parties had overcome their concerns.  He particularly thanked John Shaw (Highways) for his efforts.


Councillor Darby asked if there would be a directed route from the site to avoid HGV turning left and travelling through Swaffham.


My Youngs confirmed that the intention was that all traffic would turn right from the site.


RESOLVED that the application be deferred and the officers authorised to grant approval, subject to conditions, on completion of the section 106 agreement.


Councillor Claussen abstained from voting as he had not been present at the previous meeting.  The vote was otherwise unanimous.



Schedule of Planning Applications (Agenda Item 9) pdf icon PDF 159 KB

To consider the Schedule of Planning Applications:


Item No



Page No


Mr A Annison


37 – 45


Flagship Housing Group


46 – 53


Burmeister & Wainscandinavian


54 – 64


Persimmon Homes East Midlands


65 – 77


Persimmon Homes East Midlands


78 – 96


Nature’s Menu


97 – 106


Twells Partnership


107 – 112


Mr James Howard


113 – 116


D & A (2127) Limited


117 - 121


Additional documents:


RESOLVED that the applications be determined as follows:


a)    Item 1: ROCKLANDS: Land to the rear of the White Hart Public House, 43 The Street: Four new bungalows with parking: Applicant: Mr A Annison: Reference: 3PL/2015/0518/F


All Members had received direct representation on this item.


This application had received a lot of local interest with about 170 representations received, of which about 70 were for the amended plans.


The details of the amended scheme were explained to Members including the demolition and replacement of part of the existing pub wall and the removal of some hedging to increase the width of the access.  In view of strong concerns from residents Members might want full drainage scheme details if they were minded to approve the application.


It was noted that the White Hart Public House (PH) was a ‘community asset’.  The applicant had indicated that the scheme would fund further improvements to the PH.


On balance, and in view of the Council’s lack of a 5 year housing land supply, the application was recommended for approval but was considered to be finely balanced.


Mr Howie (Parish Council Chairman) represented the Parish Councillors and the majority of parishioners who were unanimously opposed to the proposal.  Four houses would not meet the Council’s housing land requirement but would have a significant impact on the village.  Flooding issues were well documented and there were also grave safety concerns.


Ms McArthur and Mr Neale (Objectors) raised concerns about inappropriate back-land development; the lack of protection to the community asset; the public bridleway being compromised and road safety.


Mr Annison (son of Applicant) had grown up in the village and understood the strength of feeling as it was a special place to live.  The small development of sustainable family homes was a natural way for the village to grow and would provide funds to enhance the PH.


Councillor Cowen (Ward Representative) had been asked by the applicant to promote his case.  He could not have supported the original proposal for seven, but he felt that four houses would have minimal impact on the setting of the PH.  The big issue was flooding and it was key that the drainage system was designed properly.  In summary there was a housing land shortage and the cash injection for the PH would help to keep it alive and thriving.


Councillor Smith (Ward Representative) said Rocklands was an active community that had acquired the village shop and tried to purchase the PH.  The village was in a hollow and flooding would be extremely likely without substantial improvements.  He had received a telephone call from the Norfolk County Councillor Cliff Jordan who had visited the site with a Highways Maintenance Engineer.  The Highways Engineer had said that he would not agree to more than one property on the site.  If approved the loss of parking space on site would lead to more on-road parking and compromise safety.


The Operations & Contract Manager pointed out that it was not a Highway Maintenance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 134.


Applications determined by the Executive Director of Place (Agenda Item 10) pdf icon PDF 101 KB

Report of the Executive Director of Place.


Members are requested to raise any questions at least two working days before the meeting to allow information to be provided to the Committee.





Applications determined by Norfolk County Council (Agenda Item 11) pdf icon PDF 26 KB





Appeal Decisions (Agenda Item 12) pdf icon PDF 47 KB





Exclusion of Press and Public (Agenda Item 13)

To consider passing the following resolution:


“That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to the Act”.





RESOLVED that under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act.



Enforcement Update (Agenda Item 14)

Verbal Update by Enforcement Manager.


The Enforcement Manager advised Members that a full time Enforcement Officer had been appointed.  The new S106 Officer was improving the monitoring system and the Team was working well.

To date there had been 297 cases compared to 375 in the previous year.  The reduction was due to a robust attitude requiring complaints to be made in writing in most cases.  The team had maintained a similar percentage of closed cases to the previous year.   They were also doing well on the number of cases resolved without formal action.


Over 98% of cases were investigated within 10 days and nearly 95% of cases were closed within 12 months.  100% of cases were being acknowledged within five days.  That was down to the new electronic system which automatically acknowledged complaints which were submitted on-line.


Overall the Enforcement Manager was very pleased with the Team’s performance, particularly as he himself had been on sick leave for some of the period since his last update.


Councillor Duigan asked if the Appeals process had improved at all as it had been very slow in the past.  He was advised that the target was to determine an Appeal within six months but that was only a guideline and the progress of Appeals was out of the Council’s control.


Councillor Martin was pleased that people found to have carried out illegal works were required to pay planning fees to regularise work undertaken without permission.

Councillor Darby asked if it was the Enforcement Officer’s responsibility to pick up on illegal activity and the Enforcement Manager explained that the Team relied upon the public to notify them of such activity.  He encouraged Members to advise their constituents to notify the Team if they had concerns.


The Chairman thanked the Enforcement Manager for his update.