3 self-build homes at Land East Of The Village Hall, Cookes Road, Bergh Apton
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by South Norfolk Broadland South Norfolk Development Management (Planning) Committee on 13 May 2026.
What was proposed
The application sought permission for three large detached two-storey houses with garages as self-build or custom-build dwellings.
“Applicant’s Name: [name withheld] Land east of The Village Hall, Cookes Road, Bergh Apton, NR15 1AA Proposal Erection of 3 no. Self/Custom Build dwellings…”
“The application is seeking full planning permission for the construction of three detached dwellings with garaging as self-build/custom build dwellings. Each property is a large detached two-storey house comprising of 4/5 bedrooms.”
Officer report
The site and surroundings
The grassed site lies north of Cookes Road beside the village hall, with trees, hedges, open pasture, a pond and houses nearby.
“The site is located on the northern side of Cookes Road. Bergh Apton Village Hall is located adjacent to the western boundary of the site and there are existing houses on the opposite side of the road to the south. The site is primarily a grassed area with some trees located in the middle of the site. It is bounded by mature trees and hedges to the road frontage and western boundary, open pasture and trees to the north and trees and a pond to the east.”
“Bergh Apton is a village made up of groups and individual properties dispersed across the parish. This part of Bergh Apton comprises a small group of residential properties and the village hall. The village hall and properties opposite the site are within the defined development boundary. The site is outside but closely related to the development boundary.”
Officer report
Earlier planning history
An earlier proposal for two dwellings was refused and dismissed on appeal, while two access-related applications were approved.
“2018/0758 Outline planning permission for the development of two detached dwellings with garages. Refused Appeal dismissed…”
“2022/0480 Retrospective application for field access to highway, new frontage fencing and hedge planting Approved…”
Officer report
What officers recommended
Officers recommended refusal because the proposal’s harms to character, trees, landscape and sustainability outweighed the modest benefits of three homes.
“Firstly, in the context of Policy 7.5 of the GNLP whilst the basic location of the site is considered to comply insofar as it is considered adjacent to the settlement boundary, the proposal does not meet the custom and self-build criteria for the reasons set out above.”
“In the context of the NPPF, having due regard to the fact that the Council does not presently have a demonstrable 5-year housing land supply, it is accepted that 3 new dwellings would present benefits of a modest level, however the adverse impacts identified above significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits and for this reason, when considered as a whole, the scheme does not represent sustainable development in the context of the NPPF and is recommended for…”
Officer report
Main planning concerns
The proposal was not considered genuine self-build or custom-build housing, would urbanise the countryside, and lacked information to secure biodiversity net gain.
“The approach that has been submitted as part of this full application is that the designs of the dwellings have been set as part of this proposal, with no details of the occupiers or how they have had a meaningful input into the design of the dwelling(s).”
“During consideration of the proposal, the planning agent has suggested that full planning permission could be granted and subsequently amended through a Non Material Amendment or Section 73 application to allow significant end occupier input so as to meet the self-build/custom build criteria referred to above. Having considered the acceptability of such an approach it is considered that there are a number of flaws.”
Officer report
What residents said
Twenty-seven objections raised concerns about traffic, safety, noise, location, trees, wildlife, design, drainage, flooding, privacy and landscape harm.
“Concerns about significant increase in traffic • Cookes Road is a narrow and already busy road • Increased traffic and impacts for pedestrian safety • Increased traffic noise will impact quality of life • Construction noise, disruption and traffic will affect health and wellbeing • Inappropriate location due to lack of access to shops and amenities • Loss of green open space • Site has already been rejected for development • Land is ancient parkland • Proposal sites within…”
Officer report
The committee vote
Members voted unanimously to authorise refusal after the site and press notices expired.
“Decision : Members voted unanimously to authorise the Assistant Director (Planning) to refuse, for the following reasons, expiry of the site and press notices.”
Minutes
The decision
The application was refused because the development would harm the locality and street scene, lacked policy support, was unsustainable and did not demonstrate ten per cent biodiversity gain.
“The proposed housing is not supported by any specific Development Management Policy which allows for development outside of the development boundary, including Policy 7.5 of the Greater Norwich Local Plan as in this case the scheme has failed to demonstrate how…”
“The application is liable for Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), however no information has been provided to demonstrate a minimum gain of 10% which is required. This is contrary to the requirements of Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and with paragraph 180 of the Framework insofar as it requires decisions to contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by providing at least a 10% net gain for biodiversity.”
Minutes
The members' reasons
The resolution gives these reasons:
Minutes
- , expiry of the site and press notices. Reasons for Refusal
- It is considered that the introduction of built form onto the present undeveloped site together with the specific design and layout of the 3 dwellings would have an unacceptable adverse impact upon this part of Bergh Apton which is characterised on the north side of Cookes Road by open land and mature vegetation and therefore contrary to the requirements of Policies 2 and 7.5 of the Greater Norwic
- The development would require the removal of trees and hedgerow to carry out the development and to provide offsite road improvements to meet highway
Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.
Sources
- South Norfolk Broadland South Norfolk Development Management (Planning) Committee minutes, 13 May 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of South Norfolk Broadland'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
- Council
- South Norfolk Broadland
- Date
- Wednesday 13 May 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended refusal
- Committee decided
- Refused
- Vote
- Unanimous
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- South Norfolk Broadland committee decisions →
This committee's year
27 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 1 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.