Agenda and minutes

Venue: Anglia Room, The Conference Suite, Dereham

Contact: Julie Britton 

No. Item


Minutes (Agenda item 1) pdf icon PDF 77 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 February 2015.


The Senior Democratic Services Officer pointed out that Phil Mileham, the Deputy Planning Manager had not been in attendance at the 6 February meeting and therefore the comments at paragraph 3 under Minute No. 7/15 should be changed to read: “The Planning Policy Team Leader had been advised by the Deputy Planning Manager that he was reviewing the draft timetable with the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group and would feed back the comments to the Group in due course”.


Subject to the above amendment, the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 February 2015 were agreed as a correct record.


Apologies (item 2)

To receive any apologies for absence.


An apology for absence was received from Mark Kiddle-Morris.


Declarations of Interest (item 3)

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.





Urgent Business (item 4)

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.





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

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


Councillors E Gould, E Jolly, S Matthews, J North, G Bambridge, T Carter, P Duigan, A Joel and K Martin.


Chairman's Announcements (if any) (item 6)




Neighbourhood Plans (Standing Item) (item 7)


The Planning Policy Team Leader advised that the Neighbourhood Plan Area for Mattishall had been submitted and was being presented to the Cabinet meeting on 24 March 2015; the recommendation was to accept the Plan Area.  He had recently attended a Mattishall Steering Group meeting and would be working with them throughout the whole process.


He had also attended a meeting the Annual General meeting at Old Buckenham to discuss the potential creation of a Neighbourhood Plan for the village.  The event included an in depth presentation by the proposed Neighbourhood Planning Group and a question and answer session by the Planning Team Leader.  The steer had been to wait until after the Elections in May 2015.


Interest continued to be received from other parishes and towns.  The Planning Policy Team had had discussions with Swaffham and Dereham Town Council and it was understood that discussions were on-going with Attleborough Neighbourhood Planning Group and the Deputy Planning Manager.


A new initiative from the Department of Communities for Local Government (DCLG) providing grant aid for communities to pursue Neighbourhood Planning had been announced.  The Council had announced that funding had been made available for extra resources to support the development of Neighbourhood Plans to meet with the anticipated demand through the establishment of a new position and through establishment of a fund to match any DCLG grant of up to 50%.


Referring to the additional resources, the Chairman stated that an additional post was to be created to act as a single point of contact to provide assistance for parishes and towns wishing to develop a Neighbourhood Plan and point them in the right direction for the DCLG funding and advice.  He explained that Neighbourhood Planning was not the way forward for everyone and highlighted what Shipdham were doing; the costs of which were much less in comparison to the cost of a Neighbourhood Plan.  He also mentioned the National Association of Local Councils (NALC) event that was taking place at Elizabeth House on 27 March 2015.  There had been a huge response to this event, so much so, there was now a waiting list.


Councillor Joel thanked the Planning Policy Team Leader for attending the meeting at Old Buckenham and providing the meeting with all the technical answers.  The parishioners had voted in favourof a Neighbourhood Plan and that the Parish Council would make the decision whether to support a Neighbourhood Plan following the Elections in May.  He was also delighted with the decision to employ a dedicated person to assist parishes and towns with their Neighbourhood Plans and the grant support from Breckland Council was also great news.  He mentioned Broadland District Council’s website page that had been created in relation to Neighbourhood Plans that he felt was very commendable.  The Chairman pointed out that this funding would be dependent on whether the parishes had applied to the DCLG first.  Councillor Gould, as the Executive Member for Planning advised that the new employee would be there to aid  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16/15


Duty to Cooperate (Standing item) (item 8)


A report on the structure for future cooperation was being presented to the Cabinet meeting on 24 March 2015.  The report sets out a number of options on the future of the Norfolk Duty to Cooperate (DtC) member Forum on how best to address the Government’s requirements for Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to cooperate on cross-boundary issues through their Local Plans.  It presents 5 potential options and recommends that option 3, formal cooperation through a shared non-statutory strategic framework, should be progressed. 


The Chairman had attended a Leader meeting and all had been keen to work together and put some funding into an agreement so it was meaningful for all.



Local Plan Issues and Options Consultation Responses and Progress Report (Agenda item 9) pdf icon PDF 317 KB

Report of the Planning Policy Team Leader.


Appendix A to follow.

Additional documents:


The Chairman explained that this report featured three elements and the intention was to discuss each item at each stage and to be interactive to ensure that the Local Plan reflected the Working Group’s opinions.


The Planning Policy Team Leader explained that the aim of the Local Plan Working Group report was to present to the Working Group a summary of the responses from the Issues and Options Consultation and to have a discussion around three areas that were fundamental to the production of a timely Local Plan; namely - the time period, the emerging work in order to define a spatial strategy and the setting of a housing target. The purpose of this meeting was for Members to provide a steer in order to guide work over the next few months so that progress could be made in a timely and efficient manner with regard to the timetable set by the Council.


The report had been split into three elements covering the plan time period, the work done so far in order to identify the Objectively Assessed Needs and the approaches to setting a spatial strategy i.e. defining the hierarchy of centres and deciding how much growth goes where in the district. This had been followed by a more general summary of the responses by section for Members information.


Although there were overlapping areas the aim was to focus debate on the individual sections in order to have a structured debate. Officers were in attendance to provide a short introduction to the topic area and a spreadsheet had been produced to provide Members with some visual indication of numbers around the potential scenarios and their implications to aid discussion.


Prior to the aforementioned discussions, the Planning Policy Team Leader had been asked to provide some additional contextual information.


  • The Local Plan must be prepared with the objective of contributing to achieving Sustainable Development, the objectives should be realistic, planning positively through the setting of strategic polices for the delivery of the homes needed in the district and to identify sufficient sites to provide for five years worth of housing plus the additional 5% buffer.
  • The existing Core Strategy had an existing housing target of 780 dwelling per year. This had been set through the now revoked Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) and the Council had the primary responsibility for setting its own housing requirement and providing the right number of new homes was one of the most important challenges it faced. The setting of this target must be in the context of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and be based on current and future demographic trends and market trends.
  • The approach taken was one of building on the strategic commitments of the Core Strategy - that of the 4,000 homes at Attleborough and the 5,000 homes in Thetford. Members needed to bear in mind that these commitments continued to influence the Local Plan spatial strategy.
  • The NPPF requires the Council to prepare a Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18/15