BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

Item Applicant Parish Reference No. No. 1 Mr & Mrs S Howell BINTREE 3PL/2005/0589/CU 2 Exors of Mr A G Kerridge NECTON 3PL/2005/0598/O 3 Mr & Mrs W C Farrow WEETING 3PL/2005/0613/F 4 Abel Developments Ltd WATTON 3PL/2005/0645/F 5 Coughtrey & Son Ltd GRISTON 3PL/2005/0670/F 6 DHL International (UK) Ltd THETFORD 3PL/2005/0684/A 7 Mr R Wilkin DEREHAM 3PL/2005/0697/O 8 Terra Firma (London) Ltd YAXHAM 3PL/2005/0701/F 9 Mrs C Tooley TITTLESHALL 3PL/2005/0732/F 10 Mr R W Rice SNETTERTON 3PL/2005/0735/O 11 Mrs J Langley WATTON 3PL/2005/0748/O 12 D J and P J Smy CARBROOKE 3PL/2005/0754/O 13 J R Tufts GREAT ELLINGHAM 3PL/2005/0777/F 14 Mr & Mrs R Crisp HOE 3PL/2005/0784/F 15 Barry Walter Lucas BRISLEY 3PL/2005/0785/F 16 B W Thomas ASHILL 3PL/2005/0796/F 17 Tadorna Holdings Ltd NARBOROUGH 3PL/2005/0803/O 18 J H Martin and Sons ATTLEBOROUGH 3PL/2005/0804/F 19 Mr M Riley SCARNING 3PL/2005/0813/F 20 Mr Michael Brackpool BEACHAMWELL 3PL/2005/0826/F 21 Simon Rowling LITTLE CRESSINGHAM 3PL/2005/0827/A 22 Mr S Woodcock COLKIRK 3PL/2005/0838/F 23 Mr P A Kiddle WHINBURGH/WESTFIELD 3PL/2005/0848/O 24 Neil Davey SAHAM TONEY 3PL/2005/0851/F 25 Mr and Mrs G Wright BEESTON 3PL/2005/0853/O 26 Mr G & Mrs V Hoare SHIPDHAM 3PL/2005/0868/F 27 Mr G Woodley DEREHAM 3PL/2005/0873/A 28 Neil Davey SAHAM TONEY 3PL/2005/0878/O 29 Mr & Mrs P Jackson ATTLEBOROUGH 3PL/2005/0879/O

53 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 1

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0589/CU

LOCATION: BINTREE APPN TYPE: Change of Use Tower Farm POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry

ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs S Howell CONS AREA: N Tower Farm Bintree TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Cruso and Wilkin Waterloo Street Kings Lynn

PROPOSAL: Change of use of redundant traditional farm building to bed and breakfast

POLICY NOTES Policies TRA.5, TRA.6 and TOR.6 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) are considered relevant to this application. TRA.5 New development generating traffic which would exceed the capacity of the highway will not normally be permitted. TRA.6 Development with direct access to a corridor of movement will not be permitted. TOR.6 Conversion of Rural Buildings to Tourist Accommodation may be permitted subject to criteria.

CLERK TO BINTREE P C No objection

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This proposal seeks to convert a traditional brick and pantile barn into a two-storey bed and breakfast establishment. An indicative plan showing the building converted to provide 5 bedrooms and associated accommodation has been provided. The development would be served by an access off Fakenham Road shared with the existing farm. * The site lies within an area where Policy TOR.6 states that the conversion of buildings to new holiday accommodation will only be permitted where a number of criteria have been met including the barn being structurally sound, and every effort having been made to secure a suitable business re-use, prior to consideration being given to its conversion to tourist accommodation. In this case, whilst no evidence of a marketing exercise has been provided, the building lies in very close proximity to the main farmhouse and other building which will remain in agricultural use. For these reasons, it is not considered that a business re-use would be suitable in this instance. Furthermore, the structural report indicates that the building is in a satisfactory condition to allow its conversion. * However, the contentious element of the proposal relates to its impact on highway safety. The Highways Engineer has raised strong objection to the scheme on the basis that the access is

54 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

unsuitable to cater for an increase in vehicular movements, given that the development would access directly onto a corridor of movement where vehicle speeds are high, and where increased vehicular movements associated with the proposal may lead to conflict with other road users. * Therefore, the proposal is considered contrary to Policies TRA.5 and TRA.6, and recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9455 Any highway reason for refusal

55 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 2

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0598/O

LOCATION: NECTON APPN TYPE: Outline Mill Street POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry

ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Exors of Mr A G Kerridge CONS AREA: N c/o Mrs T Adcock 20 Orchard Close TPO: Y

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Case & Dewing Church Street Dereham

PROPOSAL: Residential development

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.4, HOU.13, TRA.5, INF.4, INF.5, ENV.26 and REC.2 of the Breckland District Local Plan and PPG3, Circular 01/05 are considered relevant to this application. HOU.4 - Within the Settlement Boundaries of villages identified for Individual dwellings or small groups of houses, development must enhance the form, character and setting of the village. HOU.13 - Affordable Housing will be encouraged in New Developments. TRA.5 - New development generating traffic which would exceed the capacity of the highway will not normally be permitted. INF.4 - Development that is likely to increase the risk of flooding will not be permitted. INF.5 - Development in areas at risk from flooding will be discouraged. ENV.26 - High standards of design in all new buildings will be sought. REC.2 - Minimum open space standards will be required for new residential development.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO NECTON P C Objection - lacking detailed proposal of development plus there is no pathway in Mill St and there would be intolerable strain on local drainage of surface water.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The application is for the residential development of a 1.3ha site within the Settlement Boundary of Necton. * The proposal is in outline only. No details regarding density and access have been submitted. * There is currently one dwelling and mobile home on the southern part of the site adjacent Mill Street. A stream crosses the site and the northern part is currently meadow. The mature trees on the boundary are the subject of Tree Preservation Orders. * Although no details as to the number of dwellings have been provided, a site of this size could, in accordance with PPG3, accommodate in excess of 30 dwellings.

56 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

* A development of such a scale would require affordable housing, open space provision and a contribution towards fire service, library provision and environmental maintenance. * The site is within the settlement boundary, therefore, the principle of residential development is acceptable, providing the scale is of a form and character in keeping with the amenity of the area and the existing infrastructure is satisfactory in terms of drainage and road capacity. * The Parish Council have objected on the grounds of the lack of information, lack of footpath and inadequate water drainage. * 15 letters of objection have been received raising concerns regarding existing inadequate surface water system capacity to cope with additional water and the increase in traffic on narrow roads. * The County Council planning section have raised a strategic policy objection on the grounds the proposal may present a significant flood risk and no flood risk assessment has been submitted. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies INF.4 and INF.5. * The Highway Engineer has raised serious concerns regarding the severely restricted nature of the surrounding road network and lack of visibility and has recommended refusal. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy TRA.5. Given the national planning policy contained in PPG3 and the Government Density Directive (Circular 1/05) it is considered the county strategic objection is not a sustainable reason for refusal. * In terms of the scale of the development, given the serious concerns regarding the highway network and surface water system any proposal for the development of the site should be accompanied by a development brief and a flood risk assessment based on the proposed density. * The proposal as submitted is contrary to Policies INF.4 and 5 and TRA.5 and is recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9900 Non-std reason for refusal 9900 Non-std reason for refusal 9900 Non-std reason for refusal 9900 Non-std reason for refusal

57 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 3

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0613/F

LOCATION: WEETING APPN TYPE: Full Land rear of 21 Park View POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry fronting Jubilee Close ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs W C Farrow CONS AREA: N 21 Park View Weeting TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: John Atkins Architect Ltd 64 Melford Bridge Road Thetford

PROPOSAL: Erection of new dwelling

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.4, TRA.5 and ENV.28 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) are considered relevant to this application. HOU.4 Within the Settlement Boundaries of villages identified for Individual dwellings or small groups of houses, development must enhance the form, character and setting of the village. TRA.5 New development generating traffic which would exceed the capacity of the highway will not normally be permitted. ENV.28 Residential amenity will be protected wherever possible.

CLERK TO WEETING P C Please see letter dated 11th May 2005.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This application relates to the erection of a dwelling and garage within the rear garden of 21 Park View, Weeting. * The dwelling would be served by a new access off Jubilee Close. There is one dormer window to the rear and two to the front. Both flank walls are blank. * The site is within a residential estate noted for a mixture of housing types. * The site area measures approximately 215 square metres; the remainder of the land within the applicants control/ownership is estimated to be 312 square metres. * The Highway Authority has objected to the proposals, on the grounds of poor visibility. The opportunity for a relaxation of visibility requirements is not appropriate in the opinion of the highway authority. * Devaluation of property is not normally a planning consideration. * The dwelling is one and a half storey. No. 1 Jubilee Close is a semi-detached property, under an asymmetrical roof line. It is between 2.5 metres and 4 metres from the party boundary and is lower to the front. It would be intended to retain the saplings along the party boundary. There is one existing window in the side elevation; the eastern elevation to the new dwelling is blank. The

58 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

dormer window in the rear elevation of the dwelling serves the bathroom and the type of glazing is opaque and could be controlled by condition, as could the position of any additional openings at first floor level. * In the light of the above, and the comments from the Highway Authority, the application is recommended for refusal on highway grounds. "Inadequate visibility splays are provided at the junction of the access with the County highway and this would cause danger and inconvenience to users of the adjoining public highway, contrary to Breckland District Council Local Plan Policy TRA.5."

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9455 Any highway reason for refusal

59 DC131 60 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 4

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0645/F

LOCATION: WATTON APPN TYPE: Full Former Watton Masonic Lodge Site POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry and Abel Removals Ltd Shire Horse Centre Norwich Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: Abel Developments Ltd CONS AREA: N The Old School Little Cressingham TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: David Futter Associates Ltd Arkitech House 35 Whiffler Road

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing building and construction of residential development together with ancillary works

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3PL/2001/1016/O - Outline Planning Permission - 15th December 2001 - 6 No. Dwellings. 3PL/2004/1957/D - Planning Permission - 16th February 2005 - 6 No. Dwellings.

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.6 and HOU.14 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. HOU.6 - Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism. HOU.14 - Affordable Housing may be permitted adjoining the Settlement Boundary in exceptional circumstances.

WATTON TOWN CLERK No objection

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This application proposes the demolition of the existing single storey, poor quality Masonic Lodge and several agricultural buildings and the erection of 17 dwellings. * The 0.58ha site which extends to a depth of 130m with average width of 45m is partly inside and partly outside the town’s Settlement Boundary. Six of the dwellings proposed together with an area for play space are indicated to be on land outside this boundary. * In approving new residential development outside the Settlement Boundaries, the Council would normally expect that the dwellings would be fully justified in respect of their need for agriculture or similar rural enterprise or that they are to be provided as affordable units in conjunction with a registered social landlord. No such case or provision has been made in this instance.

61 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

* The Highways Authority furthermore recommends refusal to the application due to the intensification of the use of an already substandard access onto the B1108. The current access from the Masonic site onto this road is via a 100m long lay-by. * Given the policy constraint and Highway Authority comments the application is recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9042 Adopted D.W.L.P.(September 1999) HOU.6 - Outside villages 9044 Policy not met outside settlement 9046 Proposal not connected with agriculture etc. 9110 D.W.L.P. - ENV.3 - Protected for its own sake 9150 Unwarranted intrusion in rural setting 9900 Non-std reason for refusal

62 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 5

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0670/F

LOCATION: GRISTON APPN TYPE: Full Coughtrey & Son Ltd POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry Coughtrey Industrial Estate Church Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Coughtrey & Son Ltd CONS AREA: N Church Road Griston TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Plandescil Limited Connaught Road Attleborough

PROPOSAL: Erection of warehouse extension

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3PL/2003/1243/F - Full planning permission to remove condition 3 of 01/1243 restricting hours of operation and demolition of compressor house - Approved. 3PL/2003/1092/F - Demolish industrial buildings and replace with light industrial buildings and improve access - Approved. 3PL/2001/1243/F - Change of use of storage building to industrial unit and extension - Approved. 3PL/2001/0929/F - Full planning permission for extension to existing building to provide office space - Approved. 3PL/2000/0683/F - Extension to storage building - Approved.

POLICY NOTES Policies ECO.4 and ENV.28 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered to apply:- ECO.4 Small scale economic development may be permitted within settlement boundaries subject to criteria. ENV.28 Residential amenity will be protected wherever possible.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO GRISTON P C No Objection. Comments:- Provided no overnight use of forklifts, after 9.30 pm as agreed by Norfolk Labels (Paragon Labels). This restriction to apply to any other company if Norfolk Labels leave the premises.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This full application proposes the erection of an extension to an existing industrial building on this industrial site. The new extension would measure approximately 36 metres by 19.7 metres

63 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

with a height to the ridge of 8.7m, and would be used for storage purposes in connection with the existing business on the site, namely Norfolk Labels. * Policy ECO.4 of the Breckland Local Plan states that extensions to existing businesses will be permitted in such locations subject to satisfying a range of criteria including being visually acceptable in design and amenity terms, and protecting highway safety. * One letter of objection has been received from a neighbouring resident on the grounds that the extension would have a detrimental impact on the adjacent property, both in terms of its overbearing impact and overshadowing, resulting from its overall height and close proximity to the site boundary. * In this case, notwithstanding the fact that the use of the extension could be restricted in terms of its use for storage and the hours of operation controlled, it is considered that the extension would, by virtue of its overall height, scale and siting, have a significantly detrimental impact on the amenities of immediately adjacent property known as The Hollies, particularly in terms of its overbearing impact. * The application is therefore considered contrary to Policies ECO.4 and ENV.28, and recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9260 Non-std Environment reason for refusal 9900 Non-std reason for refusal 9900 Non-std reason for refusal

64 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 6

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0684/A

LOCATION: THETFORD APPN TYPE: Advertisement Jeyes Distribution Centre POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry Wyatt Way Fison Industrial Estate ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: DHL International (UK) Ltd CONS AREA: N 50 Cox Lane Chessington TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Sign One 8/9 Aylesham Industrial Estate Brighouse R PROPOSAL: Two internally illuminated flex face signs

POLICY NOTES ENV.34 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) and PPG19, paragraphs 9-16 are considered relevant to this application:- ENV.34 Advertisements and signs will only be permitted where they are not harmful to local amenity or road safety.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO THETFORD T C Strong objection

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This application for advertisement consent relates to two internally illuminated signs on a distribution centre on the Fison Industrial Estate in Thetford. * The signs measure 9.5m x 2.00 m and 3.0 x 2 ms and would be fixed to the northern flank wall of the warehouse. * The building lies on the edge of the settlement boundary, adjacent to a field which is also a site of archaeological and historic interest. The building is approximately 0.2 kms south of the Gallows Hill Interchange, the junction of the A11 and the A134 and the A1166. The road adjacent the distribution centre, the A1066, is also classed as a principal route. * The Highway Authority has no objection to the proposals, subject to a condition controlling the degree of illumination. * Thetford Town Council has a “strong objection” to the application, commenting that “Members did not want this advertising to spoil the night-time scene, deeming it a form of light pollution.” * The distribution centre is prominent from the north, west and east by virtue of its size, colour, the absence of buildings on land between it and the A11 and the height of the industrial estate relative to Thetford itself. The signs would be 7.8 metres off ground level; the building is 10.8 metres high.

65 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

* The applicants have declined to consider non-illuminated signage, and also maintain that two signs are essential. * The signage as proposed is considered inappropriate given the distinctive open character of the countryside immediately adjacent and detracts from the visual amenity of the area by virtue of the overall size, illumination, position and choice of strong primary colours. The application is considered to detract from local amenity and is contrary to ENV.34 of the Breckland District Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Consent to Display Advertisements

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9900 Non-std reason for refusal

66 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 7

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0697/O

LOCATION: DEREHAM APPN TYPE: Outline Martyndale POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry 159 Shipdham Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr R Wilkin CONS AREA: N Martyndale 159 Shipdham Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Sketcher Partnership Limited First House Quebec Street

PROPOSAL: Proposed residential development

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY Temporary planning permission for the use of the land for 6 light vehicles expired in April 2002.

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.6, ENV.3, TRA.6 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) and PPS.7 are considered relevant to this application:- HOU.6 Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism. ENV.3 The landscape outside of the Areas of Special Protection to be protected from development wherever possible. TRA.6 Development with direct access to a corridor of movement will not be permitted.

CLERK TO DEREHAM T C This development is outside the settlement boundary and should be looked at at the new development plan stage rather than now.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal is an outline application to redevelop a former HGV operating centre to residential use. * Only the means of access forms part of the application, although an illustrative layout has been provided indicating five detached dwellings. * The site is located outside the settlement boundary and is visually separated from the built up residential area of Toftwood/Dereham by the nursery. * The Town Council has commented that the site is outside the Settlement Boundary and the site should be looked at as part of the review of the Local Development Framework. * The Environment Agency has objected to the proposal on the grounds of the lack of a flood risk assessment.

67 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

* Policy HOU.6 restricts new residential development outside settlement boundaries. The proposal is not for an agricultural/forestry dwelling and therefore the proposal is contrary to this policy. * Whilst PPG.1, PPG.3 and PPG.7 emphasise the promotion of sustainable patterns of development and the re-use of previously developed land, one of the key principles of PPG.7 requires that new development, outside areas allocated for housing in development plans, should be strictly controlled to protect the countryside. * The redevelopment of brownfield land in itself is insufficient to outweigh adopted Local Plan policy. * The most appropriate course of action in this case is to pursue the allocation of this site for redevelopment through the emerging Local Development Framework process. * The Highway Engineer has raised no objection. * The indicative layout would also appear cramped and over developed. This is not appropriate for an edge of settlement development. * The application is recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9042 Adopted D.W.L.P.(September 1999) HOU.6 - Outside villages 9044 Policy not met outside settlement 9046 Proposal not connected with agriculture etc.

68 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 8

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0701/F

LOCATION: YAXHAM APPN TYPE: Full The Forge POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Stranton Avenue ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Terra Firma (London) Ltd CONS AREA: N 66 High Street Rowhedge TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Terra Firma (London) Ltd 17 White Street Martham

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing sheds with the replacement of 4 new detached private houses

CLERK TO YAXHAM P C Objection Councillors find the design distasteful and incompatible with the surroundings, in particular, the pitched roofs. They appreciate that, even though the proposed development is probably within Government guidelines, there are too many large houses being squeezed onto this site. There is a discrepancy between the site plan for this application and 3PL/2003/1846/F (The Granary adjacent) in that the boundaries, car parking and garden space have changed. This needs clarification. They are also concerned about the access to the field behind as Councillors believe that there is a 12' right of way to this field. Please clarify the name 'Stanton Grove' . The name is Stranton Avenue and the plan is marked 'Stanton Grove'. Is this an error or a recipe for confusion? You will be aware that these four proposed houses would bring the number of dwellings currently approved/being built in Station Road to 38. This will double the number of dwellings in Station Road. The drainage into the road is already inadequate and this development would increase problems.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal is to demolish existing buildings on the site and redevelop the land currently used for a steel fabrication business. * The site is located to the rear of a terrace of 3 cottages and a former granary which is currently under conversion to residential flats. * The site straddles the settlement boundary and is considered as brownfield development. * The principle of the redevelopment of this site is considered acceptable in policy terms. The main issue in this instance is the design of the proposed dwellings. * The Parish Council have raised objection to the proposal on the grounds of design and

69 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

overdevelopment. * The applicant proposes 4 detached dwellings of modern design with Monopitch green roofs and using a variety of materials such as render, timber, cladding and bricks. * It is considered that the proposed design is in keeping with the “modern” approach and materials used in the adjacent “granary” conversion. The use of a traditional pitch roof would result in an overbearing impact on the adjacent terrace cottages.

RECOMMENDATION: Planning Permission

CONDITIONS: 3006 Full Permission Time Limit 3046 In accordance with submitted plans 3104 External materials to be approved 3402 Boundary screening to be agreed 3410 Hardlandscaping - details and completion 3714 Loading and parking space clear of highway 3949 Contaminated Land - Remediation 3998 NOTE: Reasons for Approval

70 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 9

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0732/F

LOCATION: TITTLESHALL APPN TYPE: Full The Cedars POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry High Street ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mrs C Tooley CONS AREA: Y 16 The Drummonds 745-749 Dunstable TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Burns Associates Architects 32 Market Place Swaffham

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing dwelling, 4 no. proposed dwellings, access road, garages & external works

POLICY NOTES Policies ENV.10, ENV.19 and HOU.4 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. ENV.10 - Conservation Areas will be preserved and enhanced. ENV.19 - Trees under threat may be retained through the imposition of Tree Preservation Orders. HOU.4 - Within the Settlement Boundaries of villages identified for Individual dwellings or small groups of houses, development must enhance the form, character and setting of the village.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CHAIRMAN TO TITTLESHALL P.C. NO RESPONSE AS AT 15TH JUNE 2005

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This application proposes the demolition of the existing bungalows set within this 0.15ha site and the erection of 4 no. 2 storey dwellings. * The site, which benefits from a large Deodar Cedar set within the front garden, is located within the village Conservation Area, off of the southern side of the High Street. * 11 letters of objection have been received in respect of this proposal, raising concerns relating to the cramped nature of the development, the dominance of the development in the street scene and the harm resulting to the Conservation Area. Overshadowing, inadequate infrastructure and the impact on the highway are also cited by the writers. * The Council’s Tree Officer considers that the frontage cedar, which makes a valuable contribution to the street scene, would be unsuitable, so close to the proposed dwellings. * The Historic Buildings Officer considers that the scheme will be dominated by the driveway and parking areas and will appear cramped and harmful to the character and appearance of the

71 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

Conservation Area. * The proposal is recommended for refusal being contrary to Policies HOU.4, ENV.10 and ENV.19 of the Breckland District Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9900 Non-std reason for refusal

72 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 10

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0735/O

LOCATION: SNETTERTON APPN TYPE: Outline Mill Common POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Southend ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr R W Rice CONS AREA: N Town Farm Kenninghall TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Acorus Rural Property Services The Old Market Office 10 Risbygate Stree

PROPOSAL: Erection of two semi detached cottage style dwellings with associated parking areas

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.6 and ENV.1 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. HOU.6 - Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism. ENV.1 - Development will not be permitted in the Areas of Important Landscape Quality and Historic Parklands except in exceptional circumstances.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO SNETTERTON P C Objection: See letter received 7th June 2005.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal is to erect a pair of semi detached cottages within the garden of an existing dwelling. * Mill Common is a small group of dwellings outside the settlement boundary. It is considered that this group does not form a cohesive settlement where it is appropriate to define a settlement boundary. * The proposal therefore falls to be determined within the policy context of HOU.6, which only allows development in the countryside which is essential for the purposes of agriculture. * No agricultural case has been put forward. The proposal is contrary to Policy HOU.6. * Mill Common is a narrow single track drive which is considered inadequate to serve the development proposed by reason of its poor alignment, restricted width and substandard construction. * The Parish Council have objected to the proposal on the grounds of it being outside the

73 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

settlement boundary and unsatisfactory access. Letters of objection have been received raising similar concerns. * The applicant considers the development to be a sustainable infill, brownfield development, providing properties for rent for local demand. * It is considered that the proposal is not located in a sustainable location, no survey has been undertaken to support the case for local need and such sites should in any case fulfil the requirements of Policies HOU.13 and HOU.14. * Furthermore one of the key principles of PPS7 requires that new development away from established settlements in the countryside or outside areas allocated for housing in development plans should be strictly controlled to protect the countryside. * There is a strong policy objection. The application is recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9042 Adopted D.W.L.P.(September 1999) HOU.6 - Outside villages 9044 Policy not met outside settlement 9046 Proposal not connected with agriculture etc. 9048 No evidence that cannot be met in settlement 9140 Further consolidation of sporadic development 9430 Inadequate access road

74 DC131 75 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 11

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0748/O

LOCATION: WATTON APPN TYPE: Outline 71 Dereham Road POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry

ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mrs J Langley CONS AREA: N 71 Dereham Road Watton TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Adrian Morley Kingsfold Watton Road

PROPOSAL: Erection of bungalow

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3PL/2004/1657/O - application to erect bungalow - refused.

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.2 and ENV.13 of the Breckland District Local Plan is considered to apply:- HOU.2 Housing development within the Settlement Boundaries for the towns will be permitted subject to criteria. ENV.13 Statutory Listed Buildings will be protected.

WATTON TOWN CLERK Objection Overdevelopment and not in keeping with the area.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This is a re-submission of an identical scheme to that previously refused for erection of a detached bungalow within the front garden of an existing bungalow. This would, in effect, create a tandem development. * The existing property forms part of a group of dwellings set back from the highway within attractive landscaped front gardens. * A grade 2 listed building is set immediately to the north of the application site, but sited closer to the highway. * As such the listed building appears prominent in the street scene and is an attractive feature. It is considered that the siting of the bungalow would detract from the listed building and would adversely affect the amenity of the building due to loss of light. * The tandem development, as proposed, is not in keeping with the form and character of other development in this locality which is mainly linear in form. * The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies HOU.2 and ENV.13 and is recommended for

76 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9210 D.W.L.P. - Policy ENV.13 9210 D.W.L.P. - Policy ENV.13 9710 Non-std Policy ENV.13 reason for refusal 9900 Non-std reason for refusal 9900 Non-std reason for refusal

77 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 12

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0754/O

LOCATION: CARBROOKE APPN TYPE: Outline 6 Cochrane Close POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Beech Tree Park Estate ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: D J and P J Smy CONS AREA: N 6 Cochrane Close Beech Tree Park Estat TPO: Y

LB GRADE: N AGENT: D J and P J Smy 6 Cochrane Close Beech Tree Park Estat

PROPOSAL: Erection of 3 bed detached dwelling

POLICY NOTES Policy HOU.6 of the Breckland District Local Plan is considered relevant to this application. HOU.6 - Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO CARBROOKE P C Objection:- Outside defined development area. Squeezing in another property between no.6 and 7 (which itself was built on the then garden of no.6) would be detrimental to both existing properties. Site is too small Access is via very narrow estate road where parking already poses problems. Application for development at other end of Cochrane Close where site was more spacious and there were no access problems recently refused by Breckland Council. Objections by neighbours.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This is an outline application for the erection of a three bed detached dwelling, within a narrow infill plot. Although the site forms part of a large group of residential dwellings, it is located outside a recognised settlement boundary. * The site forms the side garden serving a semi-detached property. Although of an acceptable length the proposed plot is narrow, measuring approximately eight metres in width. Cochrane Close is a relatively narrow road. * Six letters of objection have been received raising objection on grounds of loss of character, loss of garden space, loss of parking space, narrow access road, outside settlement boundary, loss of amenity, potential loss of preserved trees and poor sewerage system.

78 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

* The Tree and Countryside Officer raises concern at potential tree loss. * The Environmental Health Officer raises no objection to the proposal. * Although technically outside the settlement boundary this site forms part of a sizeable residential development. An infill plot in this locality may be a possibility therefore. However the proposed plot, in this case, is considered too narrow to satisfactorily accommodate a dwelling, whilst maintaining adequate amenity and parking space for the existing dwelling. * Parking for the existing dwelling would be restricted to either frontage or on street parking which is undesirable on what is a relatively narrow road. * A mature, protected Scots Pine is sited on the neighbouring property but immediately next to the boundary of the application site. The tree would be at serious risk should development of the land occur. * In conclusion the site is not considered capable of accommodating a dwelling without harming the existing character and amenity of the locality.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9042 Adopted D.W.L.P.(September 1999) HOU.6 - Outside villages 9044 Policy not met outside settlement 9046 Proposal not connected with agriculture etc. 9170 Overdevelopment of site

79 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 13

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0777/F

LOCATION: GREAT ELLINGHAM APPN TYPE: Full Pond Farm POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Watton Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: J R Tufts CONS AREA: N Pond Farm Watton Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: J R Tufts Pond Farm Watton Road

PROPOSAL: Standing of static caravan

POLICY NOTES Policy HOU.6 of the Breckland District Local Plan and PPS7 Annex A is considered relevant to this application. HOU.6 - Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism.

CLERK TO GREAT ELLINGHAM P C Comments: What use is envisaged and how long will it be sited here?

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal is to site a caravan on an established pig farm * The caravan is to be occupied by a son who would undertake the heavy work on the site whilst his parents remain in the farm house. * The main issue in this instance is whether it is essential for the proper functioning of the agricultural unit that the additional accommodation is required on the holding. * Policy HOU.6 and the advice contained within PPS7 are of relevance in this instance. * PPS7 makes it clear that the needs of the enterprise should be taken into consideration and not the personal circumstances of the individuals. * No functional or financial justification has been put forward to demonstrate that further accommodation is essential for the proper functioning of the holding. * The proposal is considered contrary to HOU.6 and PPS7 and is recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9062 Adopted D.W.L.P. (Sept 1999) Policy HOU.6 - Outside villages

80 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

9063 Policy not met outside settlement 9068 Agricultural enterprise already served 9066 No evidence that cannot be met in settlement 9310 Despite personal circumstances

81 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 14

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0784/F

LOCATION: HOE APPN TYPE: Full Swanton Morley Road POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Worthing ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs R Crisp CONS AREA: N Home Farm Swanton Morley Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: R & J Parker Bldg Design Consultants Ltd Home Farm C PROPOSAL: Proposed erection of two cottage style dwellings

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3PL/1980/0874 – Refusal 10th June 1980 – Erection of house. 3PL/1990/0899 – Refusal 31st July 1990 – Erection of 3 dwellings. 3PL/1999/0189 – Refusal 13th April 1999 – Erection of 2 cottage style dwellings.

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.6 and ENV.3 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. HOU.6 – Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism. ENV.3 - The landscape outside of the Areas of Special Protection to be protected from development wherever possible.

CLERK TO HOE P C No objection:- The building of these cottages will provide a valuable link between the two halves of the village. There is already a line of mature trees along the western boundary of the proposed site.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This application proposes the erection of 2 cottage style dwellings on 0.19ha of open farmland off Swanton Morley Road, Worthing. * The site, which is approximately 60m in length and 36m in depth, lies outside any defined settlement boundary. * Members will note that a number of proposals for the residential development of this land have previously been refused. There have been no significant material changes in circumstances since those earlier decisions. * No justification has been provided that the dwellings are required for the purposes of agriculture

82 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

or a similar rural enterprise. Furthermore it is considered that the proposal would result in the consolidation of the existing sporadic form of development along Swanton Morley Road, harmful to the character of the area. * The application is recommended for refusal being contrary to Policies HOU.6 and ENV.3 of the Breckland District Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9042 Adopted D.W.L.P.(September 1999) HOU.6 - Outside villages 9044 Policy not met outside settlement 9046 Proposal not connected with agriculture etc. 9115 Non-std - ENV.3 reason for refusal 9140 Further consolidation of sporadic development 9445 Non-std traffic reason for refusal

83 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 15

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0785/F

LOCATION: BRISLEY APPN TYPE: Full No.1 Pond Farm POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Fakenham Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Barry Walter Lucas CONS AREA: N No.1 Pond Farm Fakenham Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Kenrick Associates 61 Blenheim Crescent London

PROPOSAL: Stationing of mobile home, utility room and touring caravan for residential use

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3PL/1991/0633 (Refused 9th July 1991) - Temporary standing of residential caravan for 12 months. 3PL/1992/0456 (Refused 16th June 1992) - 7 Stables. 3PL/2001/0872 (Refused 28th September 2001) - Standing of residential mobile home. 3PL/2002/1536 (Refused 18th February 2002) - Standing of residential mobile home.

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.6 and ENV.3 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. HOU.6 - Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism. ENV.3 - The landscape outside of the Areas of Special Protection to be protected from development wherever possible.

CLERK TO BRISLEY P C Objection. Comments: Similar applications on site already refused - 3PL/1991/0633, 1992/0456, 2001/0872, 2002/1536. Also 3PL/2005/0561 if adjacent refused 23/05/2005. Dangerous access to highway. Outside village guidelines. Set a precedent. Contravening policy HOU.6 of Breckland Local Plan. No evidence cannot be met in settlement. Unwarranted intrusion into landscape. Plot too small for viable agricultural concern (and no evidence of such on site). This used to be a beautiful area with trees and ponds, and is now a mess. Request alongside refusal of application, enforcement action for removal of mobile home etc.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * Members may recall refusing planning permission for the standing of a mobile home on the

84 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

adjoining parcel of land, at their meeting held 23rd May 2005. * This similar application is for the mobile home currently sited on 0.01ha immediately to the north. Both sites share an access off Fakenham Road. * The proposal is for the retention of a mobile home located adjacent to the northern site boundary. The applicants also require consideration for the retention of a utility van and touring caravan. A number of other sundry buildings and structures are also evident within the site. * No agricultural justification has been given in support of the mobile home; however the applicant advises that he and his family require low cost housing. His son attends Litcham Primary School. * The application is recommended for refusal being contrary to the provision of Policy HOU.6 of the Breckland District Local Plan whilst proving harmful to the countryside therefore contrary to Policy ENV.3. * Enforcement action is sought for the removal of the mobile home and buildings.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9900 Non-std reason for refusal 9042 Adopted D.W.L.P.(September 1999) HOU.6 - Outside villages 9044 Policy not met outside settlement 9046 Proposal not connected with agriculture etc. 9048 No evidence that cannot be met in settlement 9110 D.W.L.P. - ENV.3 - Protected for its own sake 9130 Unwarranted intrusion into landscape

85 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 16

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0796/F

LOCATION: ASHILL APPN TYPE: Full The Firs POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry Watton Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: B W Thomas CONS AREA: N C/o Agent TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Ian J M Cable Architectural Design Highlands

PROPOSAL: Erection of 4 houses and garages (revised design)

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3/91/1233 - Application for erection of bungalow - refused. 3PL/2004/2040/F - Application for erection of four houses and garages - withdrawn.

POLICY NOTES Policy HOU.4 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) is considered relevant to this application: HOU.4 Within the Settlement Boundaries of villages identified for Individual dwellings or small groups of houses, development must enhance the form, character and setting of the village.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO ASHILL P C The Parish Council objections to original application still apply. Although the design of dwellings has been changed slightly it does not alter the fact that there are still four large houses on the site overshadowing Fir Park. The problems with access have not been addressed. Great concerns has been expressed that this is only the first stage of development of The Firs as it appears from the plan that it allows for further access to rear of The Firs. If this application is granted, assurance is required that NO further development will be granted to The Firs.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This is a full application for residential development on garden land currently serving ‘The Firs’, a large residential property located on the edge of the village. The site is within the settlement boundary. * The application consists of four detached, two storey, four bed dwellings. Two separate garage blocks are also provided. * The site is oblong in shape measuring some 0.18 hectares in area. Fir Park, a relatively recent

86 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

residential development consisting of a mix of single storey and two storey dwellings, is located immediately to the north and east of the site. The remaining garden serving ‘The Firs’ occupies the land to the south of the site. * The site is served by a single access drive from Watton Road. An existing garage block attached to ‘The Firs’ and a large detached storage building in the north-east corner of the site will be demolished as part of the scheme. * 22 letters of objection have been received raising concern with regard to loss of character, privacy, outlook, lack of affordable housing, increased traffic danger, precedent, concern over future loft conversions and lack of local infrastructure. * The Highway Authority raises no objection to the scheme but requires conditions to be attached to any approval. * The application is a revised scheme to one previously withdrawn by the applicant. The previous layout proposed three new vehicular accesses onto Watton Road and the dwelling heights were set at two and a half storeys. * The current scheme is considered much improved incorporating just one single access and the dwellings reduced to two storeys in height. * Impact on neighbouring property is considered limited. Plots 3 and 4 back onto existing two storey dwellings on Fir Park. However they are separated by a distance of some 20 metres which is considered an acceptable level of spacing. * The design of the dwellings reflects a traditional cottage style and does not harm the appearance of the street scene in this location. Adequate amenity space and off street parking is provided for each dwelling. * In conclusion this is a brownfield site within the settlement boundary where the proposal will not harm the appearance of the locality. The application is considered to comply with planning policy and is recommended for approval. Relevant conditions should include removal of permitted development rights for potential loft conversions.

RECOMMENDATION: Planning Permission

CONDITIONS: 3006 Full Permission Time Limit 3046 In accordance with submitted plans 3106 External materials and samples to be approved 3212 No additional windows at first floor 3405 Fencing/walls - details and implementation 3408 Landscaping - details and implementation 3412 Trees/hedges to be retained 3414 Fencing protection for existing trees 3750 Non-standard highways condition 3750 Non-standard highways condition 3920 Non-standard condition 3998 NOTE: Reasons for Approval

87 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 17

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0803/O

LOCATION: NARBOROUGH APPN TYPE: Outline Land off Meadow Road POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry

ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: Tadorna Holdings Ltd CONS AREA: N Church Farm Narborough TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Helen Breach Norfolk House Newton Road

PROPOSAL: Erection of 3 eco-friendly holiday chalets

POLICY NOTES Policies ENV.3 and TOR.8 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. ENV.3 - The landscape outside of the Areas of Special Protection to be protected from development wherever possible. TOR.8 - Outside an Area of Important Landscape Quality new Tourist Accommodation in permanent buildings may be permitted subject to criteria.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO NARBOROUGH P C Comments: The development lies outside the development envelope and does not fall within the guidelines for an extension.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This is an outline application for the erection of three ‘eco-friendly’ holiday chalets on an area of agricultural land. No design details have been submitted with the application. * The site forms part of an open field located outside the settlement boundary for Narborough. A number of mature trees and shrubs border the field. * The Ramblers Association raise no objection to the proposal. * The Environment Agency raise no objection. * Letters of objection have been received raising concerns about the effect on nearby residents of such a development. * The Highways Authority have recommended refusal on the grounds that the access road is of restricted width and lacks passing places and that inadequate visibility splays are provided at the junction of the access with the County highway. * Members will be aware that although new permanent holiday accommodation can be

88 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

permissible outside settlement boundaries, such proposals should not conflict with policies for the protection of landscape and the countryside. * In this case the site is almost entirely open in nature, forming the setting for the western edge of Narborough. The locality is characterised by open farmland with small tree groups and is considered attractive. * The proposed buildings would be intrusive in nature, having little or no relationship with any other existing buildings. The development would not blend with the existing landscape. * In conclusion the proposal is considered contrary to planning policy in that the development would have a significant adverse impact on the existing landscape.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9110 D.W.L.P. - ENV.3 - Protected for its own sake 9130 Unwarranted intrusion into landscape 9430 Inadequate access road 9455 Any highway reason for refusal

89 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 18

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0804/F

LOCATION: ATTLEBOROUGH APPN TYPE: Full 5 Atling Way POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry

ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: J H Martin and Sons CONS AREA: N The Old Manse Station Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Simon Westaway Associates 46 Connaught Road Attleborough

PROPOSAL: Erection of bungalow and garage

POLICY NOTES Policy HOU.2 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) is considered relevant to this application:- HOU.2 Housing development within the Settlement Boundaries for the towns will be permitted subject to criteria.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO ATTLEBOROUGH TC No objection

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal is a full application to erect a bungalow and garage within the rear garden of an existing bungalow. The site is a corner site between Atling Way and Knevett Close * The proposed garage would serve the existing property and the rear bungalow would utilise the existing garage. * A letter of objection has been received raising concerns about the size of the plot, access and materials. * The relevant planning policy in this case is HOU.2 – residential development in towns. * The policy requires that new dwellings should respect the existing character and amenity of the area and ensure that the proposal is of a scale, density and layout appropriate to the locality. * The site, by comparison with immediately adjoining dwellings, is small, providing little in the way of private amenity land. It is considered the site in this particular location is considered too small to satisfactorily accommodate a new dwelling, without harming existing character and amenity. * The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy HOU.2.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

90 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9900 Non-std reason for refusal 9170 Overdevelopment of site

91 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 19

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0813/F

LOCATION: SCARNING APPN TYPE: Full Garden Cottage POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Dereham Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr M Riley CONS AREA: N Garden Cottage Dereham Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: Adjacent Grade 2 AGENT: Mr R Atkins Blackwater Cottage Southburgh Road

PROPOSAL: Conversion and extension of garage to form detached annexe for elderly parent

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.18, ENV.3, ENV.28 and TRA.5 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. HOU.18 - Residential Annexes may be permitted subject to criteria. ENV.3 - The landscape outside of the Areas of Special Protection to be protected from development wherever possible. ENV.28 - Residential amenity will be protected wherever possible. TRA.5 - New development generating traffic which would exceed the capacity of the highway will not normally be permitted.

CLERK TO SCARNING P C Comments: The Council is supportive of this proposal.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This application is for the conversion and extension of an existing outbuilding in the curtilage of the applicant’s property to form a detached two-storey annexe providing self-contained living accommodation for the applicant’s elderly mother and a carer. The property lies outside the Settlement Boundary for Scarning. * Policy HOU.18 states that residential annexes will only be permitted where a proven need for the care and supervision of occupants exists. In this case, sufficient justification has been put forward in regards to this matter. * However, Policy HOU.18 also requires that to be deemed acceptable, annexes should contain the minimum amount of ancillary accommodation required to provide care and supervision of the occupant, be well related to the main dwelling, and be capable of conversion without the need for substantial rebuilding and extension works. In this case, it is considered the annexe, by virtue of its size, its detached siting and the level of accommodation being provided (for both the occupant and carer) is excessive to meet a short term need. Furthermore, given the two-storey nature of

92 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

the annexe, it is considered that substantial building/extension works would be required to facilitate its conversion, and as such the proposal would constitute a ‘rebuild’ as opposed to a ‘conversion’, resulting in a development which would resemble a new dwelling in the countryside. * Therefore, the application is considered contrary to the requirements of Policy HOU.18, and is recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9390 Adopted D.W.L.P.(Sept 1999) - Policy HOU.18 9395 Non-std annex reason for refusal

93 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 20

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0826/F

LOCATION: BEACHAMWELL APPN TYPE: Full 5 Drymere POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry

ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr Michael Brackpool CONS AREA: N 5 Drymere Beachamwell Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Mr Michael Brackpool 5 Drymere Beachamwell Road

PROPOSAL: Erection of a 2 storey log cabin for use as holiday let

POLICY NOTES Policies TRA.5 and TOR.7 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. TRA.5 - New development generating traffic which would exceed the capacity of the highway will not normally be permitted. TOR.7 - New Tourist Accommodation in permanent buildings will not normally be permitted in Areas of Landscape Protection.

CLERK TO BEACHAMWELL P C Objection:- The Parish Council does not want to see this type of development at Drymere. We are horrified that if this proposal slips through it would open the floodgates to the erection of 'temporary' dwellings. The proposed dwelling is out of keeping with the style of the other dwellings in Drymere and represents a departure from the domestic and smallholding character of the immediate area. The owners of adjoining properties have expressed their objection on the grounds of inappropriate appearance of the proposed development and the potential for further obtrusive 'holiday let' accommodation. The Parish Council have always sought and received the District Councils support in trying to maintain the rural character of Drymere by opposing what is seen as inappropriate development of this visually sensitive area. We therefore ask that this application is refused.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This application relates to the erection of a two storey log cabin within the garden of No.5 Drymere. The site is within open countryside; the area around Drymere has been designated as an Area of Important Landscape Quality. There are a number of former forestry cottages either side of the road. * The Highway Authority has objected to the proposals on the grounds of poor visibility.

94 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

* Policy TOR.7 from the Breckland District Local Plan relates to the provision of tourist accommodation in areas of important landscape quality and states that “planning permission for tourist accommodation in new permanent buildings will not be granted”. * Given the comments of the Highway Authority and the policy constraints for new tourist accommodation within a high quality landscape the application is recommended for refusal, as being contrary to Policies TRA.5 and TOR.7 of the Breckland District Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9900 Non-std reason for refusal 9140 Further consolidation of sporadic development 9150 Unwarranted intrusion in rural setting 9300 Setting a precedent

95 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 21

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0827/A

LOCATION: LITTLE CRESSINGHAM APPN TYPE: Advertisement North side of Brandon Road POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry (Opposite Heatex) ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Simon Rowling CONS AREA: N Broom Hall Country Hotel Richmond Roa TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Simon Rowling Broom Hall Country Hotel Richmond Roa

PROPOSAL: Non illuminated pole sign

POLICY NOTES Policy ENV.34 of the Breckland District Local Plan is considered relevant to this application. ENV.34 - Advertisements and signs will only be permitted where they are not harmful to local amenity or road safety.

LITTLE CRESSINGHAM PC Objection:- On the basis we don't agree with advertising signs in the countryside, we are concerned that if approved this might become the thin end of the wedge setting a precedent for others. The application does not relate to anything in our Parish, though the sign if allowed would be within our Parish. The sign proposed would be too close to Mrs Rees house, one of our Parishioners and too large in size. We therefore object to the application.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This application relates to the siting of an advertising directional sign consisting of a painted board 1 metre high and 1.5 metres wide, on posts, to a total height of 2.8 m. * The sign would be sited on agricultural land at the approach to Watton on the Brandon Road, set against a backdrop of existing hedging and trees. * There are existing traffic and town signs in the verge at this point on the approach to Watton and at the time of the site visit a number of temporary signs, advertising local events were also evident. * The proposed sign relates to Broom Hall Country Hotel, on Richmond Road, Saham Toney, remote from the site of the sign. * Whilst the Highway Authority do not consider the sign to be an unacceptable distraction to highway safety, concerns have been raised that should this be approved it would set a precedent for similar proposals which would result in a proliferation of signs along the side of the B1108, likely to result in a hazard to road safety. * Policy ENV.34 of the Breckland District Local Plan seeks to ensure that advertisements do not

96 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

detract from local amenity or road safety. The siting of the sign, on land unrelated to the use to which it refers, would detract from the visual amenities of the area and may set a precedent for similar proposals and is recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Consent to Display Advertisements

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9400 D.W.L.P. - Policy ENV.34 9420 Unacceptable advertisement board 9425 Non-std advertisement reason for refusal

97 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 22

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0838/F

LOCATION: COLKIRK APPN TYPE: Full Orchard Cottage POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Main Dereham Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: Mr S Woodcock CONS AREA: N 24 Kingsley Court Welwyn Garden City TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: David A Cutting Building Surveyors Limited 70 Market S PROPOSAL: Erection of outbuilding for use as domestic workshop and storage of horsedrawn vehicles etc

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3PL/2004/0351/F - Full planning permission for an outbuilding - Refused - 24th May 2004.

POLICY NOTES Policy ENV.3 of the Breckland District Local Plan is considered relevant to this application. ENV.3 - The landscape outside of the Areas of Special Protection to be protected from development wherever possible.

CLERK TO COLKIRK P C No objection

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal seeks to erect a large domestic outbuilding to be used to store the applicant’s collection of horse drawn vehicles and garden equipment located outside the curtilage of the property. Members may recall a similar application was refused at the Development Control Committee of 17th May 2004. * The proposed building would measure approximately 18 metres by 10.8 metres with a height to the ridge of 5.6 metres, and would be constructed in brown sheeting/red brickwork. * Although the scale of the building has been reduced from the previous scheme (i.e. from 6.6m to 5.6m in height and 22.5m to 18m in length), this reduction is minimal. It is therefore still considered that due to its scale, the building would appear unduly large for its use as an ancillary domestic outbuilding, with its appearance resembling an industrial/agricultural building as opposed to a domestic structure. * Therefore, it is considered that the proposal remains contrary to Policy ENV.3 of the Local Plan, which seeks to protect the landscape for its own sake, and should be refused.

98 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9900 Non-std reason for refusal

99 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 23

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0848/O

LOCATION: WHINBURGH/WESTFIELD APPN TYPE: Outline Rose Cottage POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry Dereham Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr P A Kiddle CONS AREA: N Rose Cottage Dereham Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Mike Morley 1 Corner Cottage Shop Street

PROPOSAL: Erection of detached dwelling and garage

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.4, ENV.28 and TRA.5 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered relevant to this application. HOU.4 - Within the Settlement Boundaries of villages identified for Individual dwellings or small groups of houses, development must enhance the form, character and setting of the village. ENV.28 - Residential amenity will be protected wherever possible. TRA.5 - New development generating traffic which would exceed the capacity of the highway will not normally be permitted.

CLERK TO WHINBURGH & WESTFIELD Objection. Whinburgh Councillors have grave reservations as this would be over development because of the narrowness of the plot. Dereham Road (B1135) is a very busy road, and this access is close to a blind bend. This would double the usage of the access. The Councillors query the loss of the trees. A new dwelling would mask the view of the cottages behind and it would not fit in with the street scene. It would introduce a new principle of two dwellings on a linear plot. Under these circumstances, Councillors decline to support outline planning permission.

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal is an outline application to erect a dwelling in the front garden of a semi detached cottage located within the settlement boundary. * The means of access and siting form part of the application. * The relevant policies in this instance are HOU.4, ENV.28 and TRA.5. * The existing cottage is sited over 53m back from the highway. * The Parish Council have raised objection to the proposal due to the narrowness of the plot, the principle of this form of tandem development and highway issues relating to the proximity of the bend. * The views of the Highway Engineer are awaited and will be reported verbally at the meeting.

100 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

* The proposed dwelling indicates a similar foot print to the adjoining property to the north and is sited in line with the existing frontage development in the area. The distance between the rear wall of the new dwelling and front wall of the property to the rear is over 35m; this distance is considered acceptable in terms of relationship and would not result in loss of privacy or amenity to either property. * The proposal has overcome the issues normally associated with this form of development and the proposal is considered with the advice contained within PPG3 regarding the efficient use of land.

RECOMMENDATION: Outline Planning Permission

CONDITIONS: 3004 Outline Time Limit 3058 Standard Outline Condition 3060 Standard outline landscaping condition 3046 In accordance with submitted plans 3116 Roof of clay pantiles 3402 Boundary screening to be agreed 3816 Foul drainage to Sealed system or Small STW only 3998 NOTE: Reasons for Approval

101 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 24

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0851/F

LOCATION: SAHAM TONEY APPN TYPE: Full Land off Pages Lane POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry

ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: Neil Davey CONS AREA: N 52 Falcon Road West Sprowston TPO: N

LB GRADE: Adjacent Grade 2 AGENT: Martindales 1 Avro Court Ermine Business Park

PROPOSAL: Reconstruction of clay lump barns as three residential units

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.6 and HOU.11 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) are relevant to this application. HOU.6 Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism. HOU.11 The conversion of rural buildings may be permitted subject to criteria.

CLERK TO SAHAM TONEY P C NO RESPONSE AS AT 15TH JUNE 2005

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal is to rebuild 3 barns for residential use on land off Pages Lane. * A separate application on adjoining land has been submitted for the erection of 8 social housing units. (3PL/2005/0878/O) * The site lies outside the settlement boundary and therefore Policy HOU.11 is relevant. * The proposal is based on new build rather than conversion; Policy HOU.11 requires the buildings to be structurally sound and capable of conversion without substantial repair or rebuild. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy HOU.11. * Furthermore, the site is an area where the erection of new dwellings in the countryside should only be supported if they are essential for the purposes of agriculture. No such case has been provided; the proposal is therefore contrary to Policy HOU.6. * The views of the Parish Council and Highway Engineer will be reported verbally at the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9088 Adopted D.W.L.P.Sept 1999 Policy HOU.11 - Barn Conversions

102 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

9089 Non-std D.W.L.P. policy reason for refusal

103 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 25

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0853/O

LOCATION: BEESTON APPN TYPE: Outline Moat House POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Chapel Lane ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs G Wright CONS AREA: N Moat House Chapel Lane TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: Mr and Mrs G Wright Moat House Chapel Lane

PROPOSAL: Erection of 2 detached 4 bedroom properties with garages

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3PL/1980/3439 - Refusal on 9th December 1980 - Residential development 3 dwellings.

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.6 and ENV.3 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) are considered relevant to this application. HOU.6 - Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism. ENV.3 The landscape outside of the Areas of Special Protection to be protected from development wherever possible.

Letter(s) of OBJECTION

CLERK TO BEESTON P C NO RESPONSE AS AT 15TH JUNE 2005

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This outline application proposes the erection of 2 no. 4 bedroom dwellings within part of the rear garden area of an existing cottage located off Chapel Lane, Beeston. * The 0.12ha, relatively well screened site, lies outside the village settlement boundary. * Access is proposed to be off Back Lane, to the north, necessitating the removal of hedging along this boundary. * The opinion of the Highways Authority will be reported verbally. * A letter of objection has been received raising concerns about development in this rural setting. Comments have been received from a neighbour regarding the retention of a hedge to the south west boundary. * The proposal is not justified in terms of its need for the purposes of agriculture or similar rural

104 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

enterprise. It is therefore recommended for refusal being contrary to policies ENV.3 and HOU.6 of the Breckland District Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9042 Adopted D.W.L.P.(September 1999) HOU.6 - Outside villages 9044 Policy not met outside settlement 9046 Proposal not connected with agriculture etc. 9110 D.W.L.P. - ENV.3 - Protected for its own sake 9120 Unwarranted intrusion/ribbon development

105 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 26

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0868/F

LOCATION: SHIPDHAM APPN TYPE: Full Park View POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Watton Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr G & Mrs V Hoare CONS AREA: N The Red Lion P H 87 Market Place TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: System 21 4 Coronation Grove Swaffham

PROPOSAL: To replace existing derelict house and garages and to erect two stable blocks

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3PL/1996/1059 Refusal Demolition of dwelling and construction of 5 houses and garages. 3PL/1999/1359 Refusal-(Appeal Dismissed) Demolish house and rebuild new house with road to 9 dwellings. 3PL/2004/0925 Withdrawn Residential development of 6 dwellings (one to replace existing derelict house). 3PL/2004/2028 Refusal - Demolition of dwelling, new dwelling, garage, stable block/tack room.

POLICY NOTES Policy HOU.15 of the Breckland District Local Plan is considered relevant to this application. HOU.15 - The design and layout of new residential development will be to a high standard.

CLERK TO SHIPDHAM P C NO RESPONSE AS AT 15TH JUNE 2005

ASSESSMENT NOTES * Members may recall refusing a similar proposal for the redevelopment of this site at the meeting held 25th April 2005. The design, scale and mass of the dwelling then proposed were considered to be inappropriate for the site and its edge of village location. * In this proposal it is considered that the applicant has sufficiently revised the dwelling design to overcome Members' concerns. The gable width of the principal building has been reduced to 6.1 metres, with eaves height dropped to 4.3 metres. A chimney has furthermore been added to the southern end of the ridge with fenestration arrangement further simplified. * Subject to the building being constructed in high quality materials it is considered that the cottage proposed will be in keeping with local character and enhance the form and character of the area. * No significant impact will result in respect of neighbouring amenity.

106 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

* The stables proposed will be required to be used solely for domestic purposes by condition. * The application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION: Planning Permission

CONDITIONS: 3006 Full Permission Time Limit 3046 In accordance with submitted plans 3106 External materials and samples to be approved 3116 Roof of clay pantiles 3212 No additional windows at first floor 3402 Boundary screening to be agreed 3750 Non-standard highways condition 3750 Non-standard highways condition 3750 Non-standard highways condition 3572 Siting of muck heap to be agreed 3920 Non-standard condition 3920 Non-standard condition 3998 NOTE: Reasons for Approval

107 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 27

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0873/A

LOCATION: DEREHAM APPN TYPE: Advertisement RMC Concrete Products Cemex POLICY: In Settlemnt Bndry 10 Yaxham Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: Mr G Woodley CONS AREA: N Breckland Garden Centre Dereham Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: D J Spencer Magnum House Deopham Green

PROPOSAL: Non illuminated banner sign

POLICY NOTES Policy ENV.34 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) is considered relevant to this application. ENV.34 Advertisements and signs will only be permitted where they are not harmful to local amenity or road safety.

CLERK TO DEREHAM T C NO RESPONSE AS AT 15TH JUNE 2005

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This retrospective application seeks the retention of an advanced warning directional banner sign positioned adjacent to the Yaxham Road exit off the Tesco roundabout in Dereham. The sign measures approximately 5 metres by 1 metre. * The non-illuminated sign advertising Breckland Garden Centre is located in a detached location, some one mile from the premises to which it relates. Due to the prominence of the sign in this unrelated location, it is considered that it would represent an unnecessary feature which would detract from the visual amenities of the area, and may set a precedent which would make similar proposals difficult to resist. * Comments from the Highway Authority in respect of the acceptability of the scheme from a highway safety perspective are currently awaited. Members will be updated at the meeting on the receipt of these comments. * The application is therefore recommended for refusal on the grounds of Policy ENV.34. Furthermore, as this application is retrospective, authority to take enforcement action to secure the removal of the sign is also sought.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Consent to Display Advertisements

108 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9400 D.W.L.P. - Policy ENV.34 9420 Unacceptable advertisement board 9300 Setting a precedent 9800 NOTE - Enforcement Notice Authorisation requested

109 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 28

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0878/O

LOCATION: SAHAM TONEY APPN TYPE: Outline Land off Pages Lane POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry

ALLOCATION: No Allocation APPLICANT: Neil Davey CONS AREA: N 52 Falcon Road West Sprowston TPO: N

LB GRADE: Adjacent Grade 2 AGENT: Martindales 1 Auro Court Ermine Business Park

PROPOSAL: Eight residential social housing units, parking and amenity areas

POLICY NOTES Policy HOU.14 of the Breckland District Local Plan (Adopted September 1999) is relevant to this application. HOU.14 Affordable Housing may be permitted adjoining the Settlement Boundary in exceptional circumstances.

CLERK TO SAHAM TONEY P C NO RESPONSE AS AT 15TH JUNE 2005

ASSESSMENT NOTES * The proposal is to erect 8 social houses on land off Pages Lane. * A separate application on adjoining land has been submitted for the rebuild of the existing barns for residential use. (3PL/2005/0851/F) * The site lies outside the Settlement Boundary and therefore the proposed development is contrary to policy unless an exception under Policy HOU.14 is applied. * A housing needs survey was undertaken in 2004 and established a need for 7 units of affordable housing in the village. The Parish Council and a housing association are currently looking at potential sites around the village to deliver the identified need. * Whilst the principle of affordable housing in the village is acceptable, it is considered that this site is not appropriate. * The proposal does not presently have the support of a Housing Association or the Parish Council. It has not been demonstrated that there is no other suitable land within the Settlement Boundary or better related to the existing Settlement Boundary. * The views of the Highway Engineer and the Parish Council are awaited. * It is considered the proposal is contrary to Policy HOU.14.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

110 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9900 Non-std reason for refusal

111 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

ITEM 29

REF NO: 3PL/2005/0879/O

LOCATION: ATTLEBOROUGH APPN TYPE: Outline Homestead POLICY: Out Settlemnt Bndry Ellingham Road ALLOCATION: No Allocation

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs P Jackson CONS AREA: N Homestead Ellingham Road TPO: N

LB GRADE: N AGENT: D W A Planning 6 Middlemarch Road Toftwood

PROPOSAL: One dwelling

POLICY NOTES Policies HOU.6, ENV.3 and TRA.5 of the Breckland District Local Plan are considered to apply:- HOU.6 Development will not be permitted outside of Settlement Boundaries unless it is justified for agriculture, forestry, recreation or tourism. ENV.3 The landscape outside of the Areas of Special Protection to be protected from development wherever possible. TRA.5 New development generating traffic which would exceed the capacity of the highway will not normally be permitted.

CLERK TO ATTLEBOROUGH TC NO RESPONSE AS AT 15TH JUNE 2005

ASSESSMENT NOTES * This outline application proposes a new dwelling on garden land to the side of the applicants' property. The site is located outside the designated Settlement Boundary for Attleborough. * Policy HOU.6 of the Breckland District Local Plan states that new residential development outside such boundaries will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that it is essential for the purposes of agriculture or forestry. In this case, no supporting agricultural justification has been provided. * Furthermore, the site would be served by a new access off Ellingham Road (a classified road). Comments from the Highway Engineer in respect of the acceptability of a new access to serve the dwelling are currently awaited. * On the basis of no highway objection being raised to the scheme, the application is recommended for refusal on the grounds of Policy HOU.6.

Refusal of Outline Planning Permission

112 DC131 BRECKLAND COUNCIL - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 04-07-2005

RECOMMENDATION:

REASON(S) FOR REFUSAL: 9042 Adopted D.W.L.P.(September 1999) HOU.6 - Outside villages 9044 Policy not met outside settlement 9046 Proposal not connected with agriculture etc. 9048 No evidence that cannot be met in settlement

113 DC131