Developers have won an appeal after Broadland District Council blocked permission for homes and business units in Blofield. Credit: Aspect Landscape Planning
Inspector overturns council decision and gives go-ahead for 175 homes in Norfolk village
Dan Grimmer
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
11:16 AM
Developers have been told they can build 175 homes in a Norfolk village, after a planning inspector quashed a council’s decision to block the plans.
In April last year Broadland District Council’s planning committee turned down a proposal for the homes, plus business units, on land at Blofield.
The application for the scheme, known as Manor Park, had been lodged by AGH Smith, JE Smith, RG Smith and SLA Property Company Ltd.
But the developers behind the scheme enlisted the aid of Beacon Planning, appealed against that decision and yesterday a planning inspector announced he agreed that the council was wrong to turn down the plans.
Inspector Richard Clegg disagreed with Broadland District Council’s reasons for refusal.
He said: “The addition of up to 175 additional dwellings would represent a significant increase in the size of Blofield”, but added it was not inappropriate.
And he agreed with Beacon Planning that there was a shortfall of housing land over the next five years in the Broadland area.
Despite the Joint Core Strategy – a blueprint for where houses should be built – referring to about 50 homes for Blofield, the inspector said the document also said key settlements within the area may be considered for extra housing.
He said the district council’s policies could not be considered up-to-date, so the presumption in favour of sustainable development – a key cornerstone of the National Planning Policy Framework – took precedent.
Lee Melin, a director of Beacon Planning, said; “We feel that this appeal win has tested the veracity of the framework and the government’s desire not to duck the difficult decisions that need to be made if adequate housing is to be delivered.
“We are delighted with the outcome because, together with our client, we felt we had made a rigorous case to deliver much needed housing and employment in this area of Norfolk.”
Blofield Parish Council, which organised a public meeting about the proposals in October 2011, had objected to the development.
The district council had received a further 139 objections to the scheme from people in Blofield and about half a dozen more from people in nearby Brundall, Little Plumstead, Lingwood, Strumpshaw and Thorpe St Andrew.
There were five letters of support.
Andrew Proctor, leader of Broadland District Council, said: “There were good reasons to refuse it at the time, but you have to respect that inspectors may disagree with certain decisions.
“We are disappointed at this decision but that is tempered to a degree by some very useful guidance which is contained within the judgment.”
Mr Proctor added that the council was trying to help secure a supply of land for housing by encouraging developers to come forward with sustainable schemes.
Other Politics Articles
- Swimming instructor’s anger at cuts to Norfolk Adult Education Service courses
- East of England: MPs to debate ambulance service
- Have your say on how £40m should be spent on transport: list of projects in Norfolk and Suffolk to vote on
- Pinebanks plans approved as 900 new homes for Thorpe St Andrew get thumbs-up from councillors
- Residents angry as “lifeline” coffee shops are taken away from 14 Norfolk care at home complexes
- Council approves 1,200 new homes for Norfolk town, despite objections
- Gardener is hoping for U-turn by Norwich City Council over threat to remove pots on health and safety grounds
- Vision for Thetford town centre development sent back out to consultation amid concerns
- Photo: Do you recognise any of these proud but dishevelled Bacton cricketers?
- Council to draw up a Plan B in case Norfolk incinerator contract is axed
- Plight of Beccles soldier raised in parliament
- County Hall meeting to discuss withdrawal from King’s Lynn incinerator contract
- Bacton cricketers evicted by parish council
- Latest on plan for 290 homes at Holt
- Mustard video: Award-winning Norwich gardener told her pot plants are a health and safety hazard
Most Read News Stories See all
BREAKING NEWS: Police investigate death of woman in West Norfolk village
Police are investigating the death of a woman whose body was found in a garden pond today.
- Naturists to be banned from Holkham beach due to anti-social behaviour
- Teenager found dead on Hunstanton Beach is named
- ‘One punch ruined our son’s life’ - Great Yarmouth assault victim left with half a skull
- Norwich couple’s appeal for the return of missing wedding photos
- Norfolk child rescued from arcade machine
- Homes24
- Jobs24
- Drive24
- Local Dating
- Buy Photos
- Family Notices
- Classifieds
- EDP Weddings
- Localsearch24
- Reader Travel
- New: Let's Talk
ADVERTISEMENT
8 comments
This case gives us grounds for despair, for many reasons. The most sinister factor here is the inspector's ruling that "the district council’s policies could not be considered up-to-date". My reaction to this is unpublishable, I'm afraid - but surely the policies are clearly up-to-date or they are not. If they are not, surely there needs to be clarity! This kind of ambiguity will be an absolute gift to developers making appeals of this kind.
Report this comment
gilded beams
Thursday, March 21, 2013
The inspector amply demonstrates total ignorance of what sort of district Broadland is with this: >>"And he agreed with Beacon Planning that there was a shortfall of housing land over the next five years in the Broadland area."<< Blofield may not be in the heart of the district but if 175 houses isn't too much for a village how high will they go? Despair people.
Report this comment
Richard Woods
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
This is democracy at work? We have a council elected by the people, they have made decision that they thought was for the good of the village, and it is now overturned on the whim of one man! Can our lovely little village sustain any more houses etc., on the present infrastructure?
Report this comment
Muggas Budal
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
This is democracy at work? We have a council elected by the people, they have made decision that they thought was for the good of the village, and it is now overturned on the whim of one man! Can our lovely little village sustain any more houses etc., on the present infrastructure?
Report this comment
Muggas Budal
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
This is democracy at work? We have a council elected by the people, they have made decision that they thought was for the good of the village, and it is now overturned on the whim of one man! Can our lovely little village sustain any more houses etc., on the present infrastructure?
Report this comment
Muggas Budal
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
The ONLY thing that anyone cares about these days is screwing money out of someone or somewhere. Welcome to Spivs' Paradise.
Report this comment
T Doff
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Communities have to become stronger.The urgent need is to expand and invest in the sewerage,water-harvesting and FFS repairing the water leaks.The road network is falling apart-literally-too.
Report this comment
Peter Watson
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Destroy Bofield, just like they have destroyed Bradwell, but with one differece. The destruction of Bradwell was with the blessing of the useless parish council.
Report this comment
"V"
Wednesday, March 20, 2013