Detached garden room at 75 Stone Road, Dereham
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Breckland Planning Committee on 16 Dec 2025.
What was proposed
The application sought a detached rear garden room replacing an existing structure, with a games room, shed and space for a hot tub.
“DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT The application seeks consent for the erection of a detached garden room to replace an existing structure at the rear of 75 Stone Road, Toftwood to provide a games room and shed with an open element to the side for the siting of a hot tub. The existing gazebo structure already houses a hot tub. External materials comprise of horizontal timber cladding with an EDPM rubber roof.”
Officer report
The site
The property is a detached two-storey home within the settlement boundary, surrounded by residential properties and a highway.
“SITE DESCRIPTION 75 Stone Road is a detached two storey residential dwelling located in Toftwood, situated within the Dereham Settlement Boundary. The site is bordered by residential dwellings to the north-west, south-east and west, with the local highway lying to the north-east.”
Officer report
Why approval was advised
The garden room was considered proportionate and unobtrusive, with acceptable effects on design, appearance and neighbouring residential amenity.
“Design/Appearance and Scale 2.1 Policies GEN2 and COM1 of the Breckland Local Plan (2023) seek to ensure the highest standards of design are achieved in all new development. The proposed development represents an acceptable design outcome for the following reasons: - the scale, form and profile of the development is respectful of the host building and character of the broader locality; - finishing materials, fenestration pattern and design detailing are typical of this…”
“Amenity 3.1 Policy COM3 of the Breckland Local Plan (2023) seeks to protect residential amenity. It is considered that the relationship of the development to neighbouring dwellings and private open space is such that visual dominance, loss of light, overlooking and overshadowing impacts all fall within acceptable parameters particularly given the replacement nature of the structure and its modest roof height. No neighbour objections have been received.”
Officer report
Consultation and objections
The town council had not responded, the environmental health officer raised no continuing objection, and no neighbour representations were received.
“ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER Having looked at the application, I have no objections in principle, however I do have some concerns regarding the situation of the hot tub and its proximity to the adjacent property. The noise level of a hot tub can vary depending on the brand, the level of insulation, the power rating and the settings used. For example, filtration cycles occurring overnight may give rise to noise disturbance as the background noise may be lower.”
“CASE OFFICER NOTE – The Environmental Health Officer (EHO) has subsequently advised that on the basis that the hot tub is already in situ within an existing structure, the above condition is not necessary. The EHO has advised the applicant should be careful in so far as the surface the hot tub will be standing on (presumably concrete due to weight) and to ensure the cover is on when not in use etc. The Applicant has been made aware of these comments.”
Officer report
Committee discussion
Members considered the application and explored its details against relevant policies and guidance; no representations were made.
“Members considered the matter and fully explored the details of the application in light of prevailing policies and guidance.”
“No representations were made in respect of the application.”
Minutes
The vote
Members voted unanimously in support of approval, subject to the listed conditions.
“DECISION: Members voted unanimously in support of the Officer’s recommendation of approval; subject to the conditions as listed in the report.”
Minutes
Councillors at the meeting
- Nigel WilkinChairConservative
- Peter WilkinsonChairConservative
- Gordon BambridgeConservative
- Claire BowesConservative
- Harry ClarkeLabour
- Keith GilbertIndependent
- Robert KybirdConservative
- Samantha TaylorConservative
- Taila TaylorConservative
- Michael WestmanReform UK
- David BlackbournSubstituteLabour
Apologies Roger Atterwill Independent, Annie Blackbourn Labour
Also attending Philip Cowen Conservative, Fabian Eagle Conservative
Source: Plota analysis of the council's minutes; parties from the council's list of councillors.
Sources
- Breckland Planning Committee minutes, 16 December 2025
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Breckland's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Breckland Planning Committee
- Council
- Breckland
- Date
- Tuesday 16 December 2025
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Vote
- Unanimous
- Councillors
- 11Conservative 7Labour 2Independent 1Reform UK 1Show councillors
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- View application →
- All decisions
- Breckland committee decisions →
This committee's year
13 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 2 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.