Agenda and minutes

Venue: Norfolk Room, The Conference Suite, Dereham

Contact: Julie Britton 

Items
No. Item

16.

Minutes (Agenda item 1) pdf icon PDF 74 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2013.

Minutes:

a)           Setting Localised Housing Target Methodology (Minute No. 11/13)

 

It was agreed that the second sentence of the seventh paragraph should read: “She hoped that appropriate agencies including the Older People’s Forum would be consulted”.

 

         Minutes

 

b)           Subject to the above amendment, the Minutes of the meeting held on 26 March 2013 were agreed as a correct record.

 

17.

Non Members wishing to address the meeting (Agenda item 5)

To note the names of any non-members who wish to address the meeting.

Minutes:

Mesdames S Armes, M Chapman-Allen, J North and Messrs G Bambridge, R Childerhouse, P Cowen, A Joel, R Kybird and K Martin.

 

18.

Further Assessment of the relationship between buildings and Stone Curlew distribution - 2013 (Agenda item 7) pdf icon PDF 80 KB

Report by the Planning Policy Team Leader and the Joint Deputy Planning Manager.

 

The Members of the Local Plan Working Group are asked to bring along the Footprint Ecology document that they received at the Portfolio Holder Briefing on 8 July 2013.

 

Paper copies will be available on the day for all other Members in attendance.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillor Mark Kiddle-Morris presented the report which was a continuation of Footprint Ecology’s report that had been commissioned to support the development of the Council’s LDF Core Strategy in 2008 and who had been further commissioned to undertake additional research as per the Cabinet resolution in 2010.

 

Appendix A updated previous work on the effect of buildings and roads on stone curlews.  In terms of research it had been found that agricultural buildings had less of an impact on stone curlews as opposed to residential development; however, it had been suggested that applications for any non-residential development close to the SPA should be carefully considered on an individual basis.

 

The Planning Policy Team Leader highlighted the fact that no other authority that included Breckland SPA suitable for Stone Curlews had contributed to this research. He stated that this work carried out by Footprint Ecology had taken the research as far as it could go with the least financial risk to the Council – section 2 of the appendix explained the findings and results.

 

Dr Durwyn Liley BSc, PhD, IEEM, a Director of Footprint Ecology, had completed this research with Professor Ralph Clarke, a nationally renowned statistician.  Members were informed that the 2008 research had been submitted to a well renowned ecological journal and had since been accepted and published.

 

A very detailed presentation was provided by Dr Liley which included a great deal of technical data.  The presentation contained various overviews of nest data, habitats, field sizes and building sizes, nest densities in distance bands around settlements, an overview of data within a 500m grid line and further modelling of building areas within specific distance bands, the influence of building types and spatial autocorrelation.  The latest research reaffirmed 1500m as the distance up to which avoidance of housing and roads was most significantly correlated and that this stone curlew constraint zone remained a valid policy response.

 

Councillor Kybird asked why nesting attempts were being measured rather than unsuccessful breeding.  Members were informed that the distribution of stone curlews was a fundamental baseline; the nesting success was secondary to the actual distribution which was critical.  The Member also asked about the phrase “Likely, Significant Effect” that seemed to be mentioned quite frequently throughout the report.  Dr Liley said that this phrase was the trigger that required a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) where proposals cold affect a European site.

 

Councillor Cowen thought that the presentation had been very comprehensive but he wanted to know whether any further development alongside trunk roads would have any additional affects on the birds.  He was surprised that there had been no mention of any predatory affects in the research and he asked what the definition was of an ‘enormous’ agricultural building.  He further mentioned about the ‘unassigned’ buildings that could leave the Council open to challenge.  Members were informed that it had been recognised that roads and housing together would have a greater affect on the birds.  In response to the remaining questions, it was noted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

19.

Strategic Housing Market Assessment (Agenda item 8) pdf icon PDF 105 KB

Report by the Housing Enabling Officer and the Joint Deputy Planning Manager.

 

The Members of the Local Plan Working Group are asked to bring along the Strategic Housing Market Assessment document that they received at the Portfolio Holder Briefing on 8 July 2013.

 

Paper copies of the said document will be available at the meeting for all other Members in attendance.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) had previously been discussed at the Cabinet meeting held prior to the Local Plan Working Group where it had been agreed to recommend the SHMA to Council for adoption.

 

The SHMA was a statutory piece of work that had to be completed through the Local Plan.

 

Another matter discussed was the timeline in relation to the settlement boundaries consultation and although a precise timeline could not be provided on site specifics, it was agreed that an email would be sent to Committee Services to forward onto all Members so that they could then forward the information to their parishes.

 

It was noted that the recommendation had been endorsed by Cabinet and had been recommended to Council for adoption.