Venue: Anglia Room, Conference Suite, Elizabeth House, Walpole Loke, Dereham
Contact: Committee Services Tel 01362 656870
To confirm the Minutes of the meeting held on 30 August 2007.
The minutes of the meeting held on 30 August 2007 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
To receive apologies for absence.
Apologies for absence were received from Mr R. Childerhouse, Mrs P. Quadling and Mrs P. Spencer.
Declaration of Interest
Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that 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 a personal or prejudicial interest.
The following declarations were made in regard to agenda item 7:
Mr. Borrett – Prejudicial
interest, as has business connections with a company which owns
land in North Elmham and has made
representations on the Local Development Framework
Mr Joel – Personal interest, as a member of Old Buckenham
Councillor Bowes – Personal interest, as has interests in
land in one of villages concerned in the report
§ Mr Rogers – Personal and prejudicial interest, as ward member for Carbrooke and has interest in land within the parish which has been submitted for inclusion
Non-Members Wishing to Address the Meeting
To note the names of any non-members wishing to address the meeting.
The following members were in attendance:
Report of the Operations Manager (Commercial Services).
The Economic Projects Officer presented the report, which informed members of the background and progress to date of the Snetterton Utilities Project.
The Council had led this project since October 2006. Snetterton was recognised as a key employment site for the District and the region. Development of the site was constrained at present by an inadequate utility (gas and electricity) supply which fell far short of that required to realise the full potential of the area. To release the employment site and achieve optimum commercial development, ensuring quality job opportunities in Breckland, a best value energy solution was needed.
The investigations under Phase 1 of the project identified the risks posed to the economic development of the area if the power constraints were not overcome and looked at the full range of energy supply solutions.
The results concluded that there were two viable energy technology options; an EDF Energy solution or a combined heat and power (CHP) solution.
Early indications were that a combined heat and power solution was an appropriate and flexible solution to overcoming the power shortage at Snetterton, offering a sustainable, low carbon footprint and was a potentially significantly lower cost option than those recommended by EDF Energy. The pursuit of solution was subject to match funding from both Norfolk County Council and the Snetterton landowners and this match funding had now been secured.
Phase 2 of the project had commenced and consultants had been engaged to produce a feasibility study and recommendations on the options involving CHP and EDF Energy solutions.
In response to questions, the following points were noted:
The Chairman thanked the Economic Projects Officer for presentation and the report was noted.
Report of the Operations Manager (Environment).
Mr S. Faulkner from the Department of Planning and Transportation and Mr S. Edwards from the Children’s Services (Education) of Norfolk County Council were in attendance for this item by invitation to provide information and advice in relation to County Council planning and schools matters concerning the candidate villages.
The Principal Planning Policy Officer introduced the report, which provided an analysis of those larger villages in Breckland which had the potential to accommodate sustainable growth as part of the Core Strategy for the Breckland Local Development Framework (LDF). Revisions to national planning policy and the emerging Regional Spatial Strategy (Regional Plan) recognised that larger villages could have a role in providing employment, services and housing to meet local needs. Work to date on the Core Strategy had consistently proposed that there were a number of Local Service Centre villages in Breckland, which had drawn significant comment at the various stages of consultation. As work on preparing the final draft Core Strategy for the LDF, it was important this locally determined element of the LDF was considered and a view given on what formed the basis of forthcoming LDF consultation.
Members’ views were accordingly sought on the number and strategy for proposed local service centre villages based on the evidence in the report as a basis for further work in finalising the Breckland Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Document for consultation later this year.
The report set out the background and the context for local service centres, the regional criteria for assessment and policy responses, an analysis of each of the candidate villages and the process to date.
In considering the candidate villages for possible selection as local service centres, there were four options available:
Delete a village from the list
Identify a village as a local service centre for service provision
(i.e. provide protection and promotion of service provision in the
community without further large growth or development)
Identify a village as a local service centre for
(4) Introduce additional villages as candidate local service centres
In regard to option (4), five villages in addition to the existing list of twelve villages had been promoted for local service centre status as part of the consultations on Development Choices in Spring 2007.
The regional assessment criteria defined key service centre villages as essentially large villages with a good level of services, which might include the following:
Additional factors which were to be taken into account were:
The Environmental Planning Manager explained that a lot of consultation had already taken place in reaching this stage and that ... view the full minutes text for item 61.
Work Programme (Agenda Item 8)
Members are invited to consider any additional items or topics for inclusion on the future work programme.
Items currently listed in the Panel’s programme are:
18 September 2007
23 October 2007
The future timetable was agreed as follows:
8 November 2007 (new meeting date)
The following item was proposed and agreed for future consideration:
Remaining items for future reports were:
Next Meeting (Agenda Item 9)
To note the arrangements for the next meeting to be held on 23 October 2007 at 10.00am at the Town Hall, Queen’s Square, Attleborough.
To consider dates for future meetings.
Arrangements for the next meeting on 23 October 2007 were noted.
The suggested additional meeting on 8 November 2007 was also agreed (venue to be confirmed).