Decisions on contentious issues surrounding the proposed food hub at Easton have been branded 'disgusting' by opponents, who are taking the matter to the High Court.
Easton Parish Council had applied to the High Court for a review of a number of planning decisions linked to the new Food Enterprise Park at Honingham.
The parish council lodged an application for a judicial review, saying Broadland District Council had failed to comply with its legal duties in approving certain applications for the site.
One of the decisions up for review was the approval of plans for a new processing plant, linked to the future production of Colman's Mustard in Norfolk.
Broadland consented to the quashing of approval of the milling tower application, which means the plans will come back to planning in January.
But two other issues which sparked concerns were back before the planning committee at Broadland today (Wednesday, December 19).
One related to highway improvements. The parish council had said the district council should not have agreed a 'partial scheme', ahead of bigger changes once a certain amount of the food enterprise park is built.
But councillors, who considered the issue again, including revisions to the original scheme, unanimously approved it.
They also unanimously agreed proposals for an infiltration lagoon to serve the food park.
That came despite warnings from environmental consultant Dr Andrew Boswell, former Norfolk county councillor, that there were risks of run-off into the River Tud. His claim was disputed by council officers.
Paul Clarke, from Brown and Co, for the applicants Honingham Thorpe Farm, said Norfolk County Council and the Environment Agency were both content with the proposals. He said the applicant was keen to make a start on the scheme.
Peter Milliken, chairman of Easton Parish Council, said afterwards he thought it was 'disgusting' the matters had been heard, ahead of the judicial review.
He said: 'No parish council should have to take a district council to the High Court, but the facts are clear, the officers and the planning committee have got it wrong.'
The council said they had sought legal advice and it was appropriate to discuss the issues.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here