Agenda item

Schedule of Planning Applications

To consider the Schedule of Planning Applications :

 

Item No

Applicant

Parish

Page No

1

Crown Chicken Ltd

Kenninghall

14 - 19

2

CCL Holdings Ltd

Kenninghall

20 -25

3

Abel Homes Limited

Swaffham

26 -31

4

Croxton Park Ltd

Croxton

32 -35

5

Mr & Mrs A J Townshend

Hardingham

WITHDRAWN

6

Breckland District Council

Mileham

36 - 40

7

Dudgeon Offshore Wind Ltd

Necton

41 - 47

8

Friends of All Saints Church

Swanton Morley

48 - 52

9

Breckland District Council

Thetford

53 - 62

10

Breckland District Council

Thetford

63 - 66

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the applications be determined as follows :

 

(a)       Kenninghall : Extension to hatchery : Applicant : Crown Chicken Ltd : Reference : 3PL/2011/1100/F

 

The item had been withdrawn prior to the meeting pending a Screening Direction to be requested from the Secretary of State.

 

(b)       Kenninghall : Construct 4 x 48T bulk bins with automatic door : Applicant : C C L Holdings Ltd : Reference : 3PL/2012/0156/F

 

The item had been withdrawn prior to the meeting pending a Screening Direction to be requested from the Secretary of State.

 

(c)        Swaffham : Erection of 250 dwellings at the Swans Nest site access from Brandon Road : Applicant : Abel Homes Ltd : Reference : 3PL/2012/0576/O

 

Cllr C Bowes declared that the applicant was a friend.

 

Outline planning permission was sought which included access for 250 dwellings.  The proposal had been amended to incorporate the requests of NCC Highways and had resulted in the footpath/cycleway to the west of the site being located directly adjacent to Brandon Road rather than to the east of the hedgerow.

 

Since the report was published objections and a petition which contained 60 signatures had been received which related to increased traffic, character of the area, local facilities and local employment.

 

Mrs Miles, Objector, believed the medical cover in Swaffham and Norfolk was not sufficient to accommodate extra people.  It could take up to 15-25 minutes to get out of Cygnet Walk and lots of traffic travelled along Brandon Road.  The Swaffham Flyer did not go round all areas of the town and it would be necessary to walk over a mile to get to the town if transport was not provided.

 

Mr Hanlon, Agent, explained the application was in outline and the 250 dwellings were a mix of affordable and market led.  Important hedges on the edge of the site would be retained.  There was safe access along Brandon Road.  The proposal would deliver very valuable residential contributions subject to the legal agreement.

 

A sustainable urban drainage scheme was proposed and a Member requested details be provided if a detailed application came forward and, for the safety of cyclists and pedestrians, the reason why Highways would want a path near the road and not behind the hedgerow.  Travel Plan Bonds were explained to the Committee.

 

RESOLVED, that the application be deferred and the Officers be authorised to approve it as recommended, on completion of the legal agreement.

 

(d)       Croxton : New purpose built refrigerated onion store : Applicant : Croxton Park Ltd : Reference : 3PL/2012/0595/F

 

Cllr C Bowes declared that the applicant was a friend.

 

Permission was sought to erect a general purpose vegetable storage building designed for the long term storage of onions and potatoes.  The building would be 42 metres by 25.7 metres with a 10m x 8m plant room.  It would be a steel frame building clad with plastisol coated steel sheeting in olive green to match the adjacent existing buildings.

 

            Approved, as recommended.

 

(e)       Mileham : Construction of 11 new dwellings : Applicant : Breckland District Council : Reference : 3PL/2012/0660/O

 

Planning permission with all matters reserved was sought to establish the principle of the construction of 11 dwellings, four of which would be affordable, on land at Burghwood Drive in the village of Mileham.  Access was proposed from Burghwood Drive.  Materials are to be agreed at the reserved matters stage.

 

Approved, as recommended.

 

(f)         Necton & Fransham : Construct new substation & section of onshore electrical cable route (Fransham Wood to Necton Substation) : Applicant : Dudgeon Offshore Wind Ltd : Reference : 3PL/2012/0703/F

 

Michael Horn, Solicitor to the Council was present for this Agenda item.

 

The application presented by the Principal Planning Officer (Major Projects) sought full planning permission for the erection of a new substation and an associated section of on-shore cable route.  Since the report publication, a petition of objection had been received which contained approximately 170 signatures and principally covered the impact on the landscape, traffic and local amenities.

 

Mr Watling, Parish Council, stated that whilst they were not averse to renewable energy installations, they did object to avoidable disturbance of rural communities.  The proposal would be ugly and alien to the natural environment of a rural landscape with panoramic views.  With more compassion and more investment a better site could be identified by the applicant.  He asked Members to reflect on why the initial application was refused.

 

Mrs Willis, Objector, Necton Action Group stated that the majority of the village were against the proposal and reasons consisted of the proximity of the site to Necton village, its visual impact in a rural community, insufficient screening, road safety, access and visibility. 

 

Mr Sheringham, Objector, emphasised the dangerous stretch of road which was an unrestricted single carriageway on a blind summit.  Areas of his land would be affected.  Pollutants could enter ponds and there were Great Crested newts in his own ponds.

 

Mr Petterson, Agent and Project Director for Dudgeon Wind Farm disagreed with comments made.  There was no brownfield alternatives to the site, it would be increasingly screened over time, biodiversity targets would be met and the main concerns from the previous application had been addressed.  No construction traffic would go through Necton village.  It was an important project not just for the area, but for the UK and would bring clean energy, investment and jobs.

 

Comments from a Member were that road signage would need to be substantial to ensure road safety and he was not happy with the decision of Highways and felt that temporary extra lanes should be considered.  He asked for assurances that adequate care would be taken to protect water voles and white-clawed crayfish if they were in the River Wissey and surrounding areas.

 

To ensure the depth of cables were not detrimental to the farming community, Mr Petterson confirmed that, they would be agreed with each individual farm owner.  Planting would be of local varieties to look like surrounding woodland.  The sub station would be unmanned.

 

RESOLVED, that the application be approved, subject to conditions or subject to a legal agreement as appropriate.

 

            Michael Horn left the meeting.

 

(g)       Swanton Morely : Building plot for single detached dwelling : Applicant : Friends of All Saints Church : Reference : 3PL/2012/0776/O

 

Members had received correspondence about the proposal which sought outline planning permission with all matters reserved to establish the principle of constructing a two storey detached dwelling on land to the north-east of a two storey detached dwelling known as Crispins in order to facilitate improvement works to All Saints Church comprising replacement of the current electrical system, the installation of a new heating and lighting system and the provision of toilets and kitchen facilities.

 

The Principal Planning Officer advised that the Historic Buildings Consultant had stated that All Saints Church was not at risk.  Four letters of objection had been received.  Swanton Morley Parish Council had not commented on the application.

 

Mr Willis, Objector, stated that the site lay outside the Settlement Boundary, was not an exemption site, the fabric of the church was not at risk, it was opposite the listed building of Kesmark House, the setting of a heritage building should be respected and not just its fabric, and the application sought to put a sizeable modern house 20m from a listed building.  Approval would set a precedent.  The local community had made it clear they did not want the land developed.

 

Mr Took, Agent, explained that the application was to provide funds for essential works to the parish church which whilst structurally sound would be at risk if heating and electricity could not be provided.  Basic facilities of a kitchen and toilet were required and without adequate funding simple functions could not be provided.  The church had become a main church for the army and the Camp Padre was supportive of the application.

 

Mr Richmond, Ward Representative stated that the proposal was important as it affected the whole community.  It was a constant battle to raise money although regular events were organised. The situation was embarrassing as Military personnel and families had to rely on the generosity of the Bowls Club for use of their toilet facilities.  The street scene would not be affected by the proposal which the Highways Officer was supportive of.  Swanton Morely was a growth village and the proposal would benefit the whole community.

 

As the church was regularly used by military personnel and families a Member was supportive as it was a focal point of the community and would be of everlasting public benefit for residents.

 

Members questioned the Agent on what external funding had been applied for, to which he advised support had been received from English Heritage to retile the chancel roof but there would be minimal chances of more support.  Members were disappointed that alternative sources and further funding options had not been investigated for the interior works.

 

Refused, as recommended.

 

(h)        Thetford : Demo. & redevelopment for mixed use of hotel, cinema & retail (A1), hot food (A5), restaurant (A3) & drinking (A4) : Applicant : Breckland District Council : Reference : 3PL/2012/0790/F

 

            The item was discussed at the same time as Scheduled Item 10 below.

 

Cllr Bambridge declared that he used to have a connection with the Anchor Hotel.

 

Cllr M Chapman-Allen declared that she was predetermined as she had spoken on a related matter at a Norfolk County Council Planning meeting and also mentioned the regeneration of the Anchor site.  Therefore she would reserve her right to speak but would not vote.

 

Mr Wilson, Objector, represented the Thetford Society who believed the design was a cheap and desperate 4 storey ugly block which would do nothing to enhance the riverside area but would be a blot on the landscape in a conservation area.

 

Mr Cooper, Agent, advised that the scheme had eroded through an enormous amount of consultation.  The site was purchased for regeneration and would be a catalyst for further regeneration in the town.  It would create jobs during construction and thereafter.  Social environmental elements would be provided and would result in a sustainable form of development.  It included an enhanced riverside area for the whole of the town.  It was rare to see a scheme with so many positives. 

 

Members’ comments were that whilst they agreed the need for redevelopment, it was the proposed monstrosity that they were against, one of the sides looked like a box, the overall design needed to be much more incorporated, the building was not contemporary but was an extension of a 1960s style building in the area, along with a reduction in car parking spaces.

 

A Member stated the people in Thetford would like the developers to incorporate the original façade of St Christophers which would not be beyond the ingenuity of the architects and developers.

 

Concern was raised that should the proposal be approved the area be landscaped in a sympathetic way so residents would not be subjected to a dreadful piece of land in the middle of the town in between the time the site was cleared and before the re-build took place.

 

It was felt by a Member that if the proposal went ahead it would promote footfall for the nightlife in the town and bring people in from outside so she was not worried about 21 car parking spaces being lost, as there were other car and lorry parks in the area.

 

The Planning Manager was also concerned about what would replace the Anchor Hotel and what would happen to the site in the interim, and he suggested that conditions be amended to stipulate that following demolition, the site should not be left derelict but in the interim, should be landscaped.

 

            Whilst Members accepted the need for redevelopment they were not supportive of the proposed design, therefore the recommendation for approval was not supported.

 

            A new recommendation was made to defer the application which was seconded.

 

            RESOLVED, that contrary to the recommendation of Officers, the application be deferred to allow time for the applicant/agent to submit a better design.

 

Cllr Bambridge abstained from voting.

 

(i)         Thetford : Demolition of existing buildings on site : Applicant : Breckland District Council : Reference : 3PL/2012/0791/CA

 

            The item was discussed at the same time as Scheduled Item 9 above.

 

Cllr Bambridge declared that he used to have a connection with the Anchor Hotel.

 

Cllr M Chapman-Allen declared that she had spoke on a related matter at a Norfolk County Council Planning meeting and also mentioned the regeneration of the Anchor site.  Therefore she would reserve her right to speak but would not vote.

 

            Approved, as recommended but with an amending condition which stipulated that, following demolition of The Anchor, the site should be developed in accordance with an approved scheme of redevelopment or, in the alternative or interim, landscaped in accordance with details which should first be agreed by the Council as LPA.

 

Cllr Bambridge abstained from voting.

 

Notes To Schedule

 

Item No.

Speaker

1

 

2

 

3

Mrs Miles, Objector

Mr Abel, Applicant

Mr Hanlon, Agent

4

 

5

 

6

 

7

Mr Watling, Parish Council

Mrs Willis, Objector

Mr J Sheringham, Objector

Mr Petterson, Agent

8

Mr Richmond, Ward Representative

Mr Willis, Objector

Mr Took, Agent

Mr Stone, Friends of Church Society

9

Mr Wilson, Objector Thetford Society

Mr Cooper, Agent

10

Mr Wilson, Objector Thetford Society

Mr Cooper, Agent

 

            Written Representations Taken Into Account

           

Reference No.

No. of Representations

3PL/2011/1100/F

8

3PL/2012/0156/F

10

3PL/2012/0503/O

15

3PL/2012/0547/F

1

3PL/2012/0576/O

10

3PL/2012/0660/O

3

3PL/2012/0703/F

21

3PL/2012/0776/O

9

3PL/2012/0790/F

6

 

 

Supporting documents: