development control board agenda - Borough Council of King's ...

DEVELOPMENT 

CONTROL BOARD 

AGENDA 

Monday 6 July 2009 

at 10.00 am 

(Please note the time of the meeting) 

Committee Suite 

King’s Court 

Chapel Street 

King’s Lynn 

Norfolk 

PE30 1EX

If you require parts of this document in another language, large print, audio, Braille 

or any alternative format please contact the Council Information Centre on 01553 

616200 and we will do our best to help. 

LATVIAN 

Ja Jums nepieciešamas daļas no šī dokumenta citā valodā, lielā drukā, audio, Braila 

rakstā vai alternatīvā formātā, lūdzu, sazinieties ar Padomes informācijas centru 

(Council Information Centre) pa 01553 616200 un mēs centīsimies Jums palīdzēt. 

RUSSIAN 

Если вам нужны части этого документа на другом языке, крупным шрифтом, 

шрифтом Брайля, в аудио- или ином формате, обращайтесь в 

Информационный Центр Совета по тел.: 01553 616200, и мы постараемся вам 

помочь. 

LITHUANIAN 

Jei pageidaujate tam tikros šio dokumento dalies kita kalba, dideliu šriftu, Brailio 

raštu, kitu formatu ar norite užsisakyti garso įrašą, susisiekite su Savivaldybės 

informacijos centru (Council Information Centre) telefonu 01553 616200 ir mes 

pasistengsime jums kiek įmanoma padėti. 

POLISH 

Jeśli pragną Państwo otrzymać fragmenty niniejszego dokumentu w innym języku, w 

dużym druku, w formie nagrania audio, alfabetem Braille’a lub w jakimkolwiek innym 

alternatywnym formacie, prosimy o kontakt z Centrum Informacji Rady pod numerem 

01553 616200, zaś my zrobimy, co możemy, by Państwu pomóc. 

PORTUGUESE 

Se necessitar de partes deste documento em outro idioma, impressão grande, áudio, 

Braille ou qualquer outro formato alternativo, por favor contacte o Centro de 

Informações do Município pelo 01553 616200, e faremos o nosso melhor para 

ajudar.

King’s Court, Chapel Street, King’s Lynn, Norfolk, PE30 1EX 

Telephone: 01553 616200 

Fax: 01553 616758 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL BOARD 

Please note that due to the number of applications to be considered it is 

proposed that the Board will adjourn for lunch at 12.30 pm and reconvene at 

1.10 pm. 

DATE: 6 JULY 2009 

VENUE: COMMITTEE SUITE, KING’S COURT, CHAPEL STREET, KING’S 

LYNN 

TIME: 10.00 AM 

1 APOLOGIES 

To receive any apologies for absence. 

2 MINUTES 

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the Meeting held on 15 June 

2009 and the Reconvened Meeting held on 18 June 2009 (to follow). 

3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 

Members must indicate whether the interest is a personal one only or one 

which is also prejudicial. A declaration of a personal interest should indicate 

the nature of the interest and the agenda item to which it relates. In the case 

of a personal interest, the Member may speak and vote on the matter. Please 

note that Members who are exempt from declaring a personal interest 

because it arises solely from their position on a body to which they were 

nominated by the Council or a body exercising functions of a public nature (eg. 

another local authority), need only declare their interest if and when they 

intend to speak on a matter. 

Development Control Board 

6 July 2009

If a prejudicial interest is declared, the Member should withdraw from the room 

whilst the matter is discussed unless the Member has registered to speak in 

accordance with the adopted Public Speaking Protocol, in which case the 

Member may attend the meeting for that purpose. The Member must 

immediately leave the room when they have finished or the meeting decides 

they have finished, if earlier. 

These declarations apply to all those Members present, whether the Member 

is part of the meeting, attending to speak as a local member on an item or 

simply observing the meeting from the public seating area. 

4 URGENT BUSINESS UNDER STANDING ORDER 7 

To consider any business, which by reason of special circumstances, the 

Chairman proposes to accept, under Section 100(b)(4)(b) of the Local 

Government Act, 1972. 

5 MEMBERS ATTENDING UNDER STANDING ORDER 34 

Members wishing to speak pursuant to Standing Order 34 should inform the 

Chairman of their intention to do so and on what items they wish to be heard 

before the meeting commences. 

6 CHAIRMAN’S CORRESPONDENCE 

7 RECEIPT OF LATE CORRESPONDENCE ON APPLICATIONS 

8 DECISIONS ON APPLICATIONS 

To consider and determine the attached Schedule of Planning Applications 

submitted by the Head of Development Services (pages 8-187) 

9 DELEGATED DECISIONS 

To receive the Schedule of Planning Applications determined by the Head of 

Development Services (attached at pages 188-204) 


6 July 2009

To: Members of the Development Control Board: 

Councillors Mrs V M Spikings (Chairman), M J Peake (Vice-Chairman), Mrs Z 

Christopher, D Collis, C Crofts, W Daws, R W Groom, D Johnson, J Loveless, 

T C Manley, D Markinson, Mrs J Mickleburgh, A Morrison, M Pitcher, M S 

Storey, H C Symington, G Wareham and A White 

Press 

Site Visit Arrangements 

Please note that any site inspections will be held 3 days after the scheduled meeting 

of the Board (ie. on a Thursday following a Monday meeting). When a decision for a 

site inspection is made, consideration of the application will be adjourned, the site 

visited, and the meeting reconvened on the same day for a decision to be made. 

Timings for the site inspections will be announced at the meeting. 

If there are any site inspections arising from this Meeting, these will be held on 

Thursday 9 July 2009 (time to be confirmed) and the meeting reconvened on the 

same day (time to be agreed). 

Please note: 

(1) At the discretion of the Chairman, items may not necessarily be taken in the 

order in which they appear in the Agenda. 

(2) An Agenda summarising late correspondence received by 5.15 pm on the 

Wednesday before the Meeting will be emailed (usually the Friday), and tabled 

one hour before the Meeting commences. Correspondence received after that 

time will not be specifically reported during the Meeting. 

(3) Relevant plans will be available for inspection in the Committee Suite, King’s 

Court from 8.45 am on the day of the Meeting. Any Member wishing specific 

application plans to be displayed on the wall for the Meeting should contact 

Lee Osler in the Planning Control Section before 12 noon on the working day 

before the Meeting (usually the Friday). 

For further information please contact: 

Kathy Wagg 

Democratic Services Officer 

King’s Court 

Chapel Street 

King’s Lynn PE30 1EX 

Telephone: 01553 616276 

Email: kathy.wagg@west-norfolk.gov.uk 


6 July 2009

Item 

No. 

INDEX OF APPLICATIONS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL BOARD AT THE MEETING 

TO BE HELD ON MONDAY 6 JULY 2009 

Application No. 

Location and Description of Site 

Development 

8/1 DEFERRED ITEMS 

8/1(a) 09/00609/F 

5 Lynn Road 

External alterations and conversion of first 

floor to 2 apartments 

8/1(b) 09/00498/O 

116 Wisbech Road 

Outline Application: Construction of two 

dwellings 

8/2 MAJORS 

8/2(a) 09/00558/FM 

Land Off Lancaster Crescent 

Erection of 11 new dwellings with 

associated site works 

8/2(b) 09/00699/RMM 

Land West Of Wheatfields 

Wheatfields 

Parish Recommendation Page 

No. 

HEACHAM APPROVE 8 

OUTWELL APPROVE 20 

DOWNHAM 

MARKET 

APPROVE 30 

HILLINGTON APPROVE 42 

8/3 OTHER APPLICATIONS / APPLICATIONS REQUIRING REFERENCE TO THE BOARD 

8/3(a) 09/00810/F 

Cornerways Cottage Main Road 

Conversion of house into two dwellings 

8/3(b) 09/00767/F 

The Arboretum East Harbour Way 

Burnham Overy Staithe 

Construction of 6 bedroom detached 

dwelling 

8/3(c) 09/00591/F 

50 Stocks Green 

Change of use from post office and part 

residential to residential only, refurbishment, 

alterations and extension on first floor plus 

new garden shed and wall 

BRANCASTER APPROVE 54 

BURNHAM 

OVERY 

APPROVE 66 

CASTLE ACRE APPROVE 82 


6 th July 2009

Item 

No. 






Development 

8/3(d) 09/00284/F 

46-48 Bridge Street 

Conversion of single first floor flat into 3 flats 

including extension and conversion of 

ground floor from single retail unit into 3 

separate retail units. 

8/3(e) 09/00819/O 

8 Crow Hall Estate 

Outline Application: construction of dwelling 

8/3(f) 09/00560/F 

Sunset View 55 The South Beach 

New dwelling to replace existing static 

caravan 

8/3(g) 09/00871/F 

4 Westgate 

Refurbishment and subdivision of 3 storey 

dwelling to 4No flats 

8/3(h) 09/00601/CU 

31 Tennyson Avenue 

Sub-division of existing shop with hot food 

take-away facilities into two separate units, 

grocery and news agency (A1) at the front 

and a hot food takeaway (A5) premises at 

the rear 

8/3(i) 09/00824/O 

Land Adjacent To 10 Eldens Lane 

Outline Application: construction of 

bungalow with garage 

8/3(j) 08/00874/F 

Jacaranda 65 New Road 

Permanent change of use from domestic 

dwelling to place of worship 

8/3(k) 09/00801/F 

The Old Mill Whittington Hill Whittington 

Proposed amended design only to Unit 21 

for the conversion of existing office to 

dwelling Approved scheme ref - 

2/02/1752/CU for 22 Dwellings 


No. 

DOWNHAM 

MARKET 

DOWNHAM 

MARKET 

APPROVE 90 

REFUSE 98 

HEACHAM APPROVE 106 

HUNSTANTON APPROVE 112 

KING’S LYNN APPROVE 126 

METHWOLD REFUSE 134 

NORTH 

RUNCTON 

APPROVE 142 

NORTHWOLD APPROVE 154 


6 th July 2009

Item 

No. 






Development 

8/3(l) 08/01751/O 

34 Isle Bridge Road 

Outline Application: 5 detached bungalows 

with attached single garages. 

8/3(m) 09/00719/F 

40 Common Road 

Installation of mobile home for carer use 

8/3(n) 09/00769/F 

58 The Beach 

Siting of a cut down shipping container for 

storage of boats and sailboards 

8/3(o) 09/00648/F 

2 Westgate Street 

New Store Building 


No. 

OUTWELL REFUSE 160 

SNETTISHAM APPROVE 168 

SNETTISHAM REFUSE 176 

SOUTHERY REFUSE 182 


6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Heacham 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/1(a) 

External alterations and conversion of first floor to 2 apartments 

and creation of parking area. 

5 Lynn Road Heacham King's Lynn PE31 7HU 

Tesco Stores Ltd 

09/00609/F (Full Application) 

Case Officer: Miss G Richardson 

Tel: 01553 616457 

Date for Determination: 

16th June 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – Referral to the Board by the Executive Director of 

Development Services. 

Case Summary 

The site is located off Lynn Road, Heacham and within Built Environment type 'D' and 

adjacent to the Conservation Area. Planning consent is sought for the extension to the 

former pub for convenience food store and two residential apartments and external 

alterations, and for the creation of an extended parking area. 

This application was deferred by Members at the Development Control Board meeting on 

the 15th June. Members resolved to defer the application to allow for further consideration of 

the highway issues. 

Key Issues 

Planning history; 

Development requiring consent; 

Alterations to the building; 

Acceptability of residential units at first floor; 

Noise implications; 

Highway implications; 

Crime and disorder; and 

Other material considerations. 

Recommendation 

APPROVE 

THE APPLICATION 

The application relates to a two storey building which is constructed in a Tudor style with red 

bricks. The building was used as the Wheatsheaf Public House. To the front of the building 

is a hard standing area, which would have been used for parking this is enclosed to the 

street frontage by a wall, allowing for an 'in and out' access arrangement. To the rear of the 

building is a grassed area, with some planting and trees in situ. In addition there is also a 

single storey carrstone outbuilding to the rear. An external fire escape is located on the 

western elevation. 

09/00609/F Development Control Board 

6 th July 2009

The site is adjacent to the Conservation Area boundary, which runs along the opposite side 

of the road. 

Heacham library lies to the west of the site and residential properties lie to the east and 

south. 

Planning consent is sought for the extension to former public house to help facilitate the 

convenience food store and two residential apartments, external alterations and alterations 

to site layout. The actual change of use; a public house to a retail use is permitted though 

the conversion of the upper floor into two self contained flats and external alterations, 

including formation of parking area requires consent. 

Members deferred the application from the 15th June DCB meeting to get clarification on 

highway matters. There will be a highway officer available at the meeting to explain their 

concerns. 

SUPPORTING CASE 

This is a re-submission of an application, which was refused by the Council. Since the 

refusal further discussions have be held and these changes have now been incorporated 

into the new scheme. 

The site is approximately 0.22ha in area and comprises an existing two storey public house 

(use class A4), with restaurant, manager's flat and 2 guest rooms. A single storey out 

building lies to the east, which is used for storage. 

The proposed two flats would have three car parking spaces, including one visitor space. 

These are located to the rear of the site. Access to the flats is gained by stairs to the rear of 

the building. A communal area for the flats is provided to the rear of the site, in an area that 

is easily accessible from the flats. 

There would be provision of a cycle stand and two motorcycle parking spaces for users of 

the food store. The front of the site would be used for car parking for the food store together 

with the area created by the demolition of the outbuilding and hard surfacing of some of the 

existing grass area. 

The existing front elevation of the building is recessed with a central bay window. The 

previous application proposed a glass shop front which created a flush frontage from one 

side to the other. The re-submission removes the existing bay but retains the recessed 

section. A glass and aluminium frame shop front will be inserted. The ground floor window to 

the eastern gable end will be removed and replaced with a glass shop front with vertical 

glazing bar. New columns with timber facing to match existing will be inserted to the left and 

right of the new shop front and the existing feature columns either side of the proposed 

central entrance/exit will be retained. The ATM unit will be set within a glazed surround with 

lowered cill. The path surrounding the building will have a raised kerb and will be constructed 

with natural colour paving. 

The landscaped area would be maintained by the applicant and access would be gained via 

the communal garden area. 

The application is supported by a: 

• Design and Access Statement 

• Pre Development Tree Survey (October 2008) 


6 th July 2009

• Environmental Noise Assessment (November 2008) - this concludes that noise 

emissions from the refrigeration and air conditioning equipment will not have an 

adverse effect on the nearby residential properties. 

• Transport Statement (November 2008) - this concludes that the number of vehicular 

movements associated with the proposals is not expected to have any detrimental 

effect upon the local highway network, especially given that a significant proportion of 

vehicles entering the site will have already been present on the highway network. 

PLANNING HISTORY 

08/02726/F External alterations and conversion of first floor to 2 apartments. Refused by the 

Development Control Board 13.03.09 

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION 

Heacham Parish Council: OBJECTION The PC has queried the accuracy of the traffic 

table purporting to relate to previous pub traffic. The figures quoted do not relate to the 

previous traffic on and off the site and the Council repeats that the level has been seriously 

over estimated. The projected increase in traffic on and off the site does represent a major 

change and will add unacceptable pressure on the junction of Hunstanton and Lynn Road. 

Lynn Road is the primary route in and out of the village since the closure of Broadway and 

the creation of the traffic signals at Lavender junction. It is now the safest and quickest way 

to exit and enter the village and as a result has seen increased traffic levels which in turn 

has seen increased pressure on the Hunstanton and Lynn Road junction. The Council has 

already raised concerns about pedestrian safety at this junction with the County, before it 

was aware of any change of use. 

The transport plan takes no account of the seasonal nature of the local businesses and the 

effect on the junction when volumes of traffic along Lynn Road are at their highest, it is 

therefore not prudent to accept that a vehicle will be entering or leaving the site at a rate of 

around one per minute during the busy summer season. The Council disputes the 

projections that the peak shopping will be in the evening when there is less traffic. 

In relation to deliveries the PC has no confidence that this plan would work in practice, as 

there are too many variables. The consequences of forgetting to phone ahead, traffic delays, 

arriving head of time, problems with putting bollards out having staff available at the right 

time to supervise deliveries, correct size lorries being available affect the success or failure 

of the delivery plan. The consequences of one or any variables not being carried out are that 

a large lorry is waiting in Lynn Road or driving around the village. The PC consider that the 

10 metre size lorries would be the largest able to get on and off the site and would not want 

to see the enormous lorries that deliver to Hunstanton coming into the village. There will still 

be other deliveries not mentioned in the delivery schedule, therefore if minded to approve 

there should be a condition relating to a delivery plan. 

The PC note the improvement on the previous application, however it is still considered that 

the proposed changes to the building, will look at odds with its surroundings and cannot 

support changes which will detract from the conservation area. 

There seems to be confusion over the old stable at the rear. The planning application does 

not refer to the demolition of this building and the Council are concerned given the age of 

this building as to why the applicant does not require permission to demolish. 


6 th July 2009

Highways Authority: Following the submission of a revised drawing Norfolk County Council 

Highways have made the following comments. It is noted that Highways have strong 

concerns as detailed in previous correspondence. However it is minded that the permitted 

uses of the site and the context for which the application can be considered. It is believed 

that the applicants’ revised amendments as detailed would be of an arrangement that would 

have the lead impact on the operation and safety of the public highway. Conditions are 

recommended. 

Internal Drainage Board: N/A 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: NO OBJECTION The noise 

survey conducted by the applicant included BS4142 calculations that show that the 

assessment levels for the refrigeration and air conditioning units are in minus figures which 

are indicative that these pieces of equipment will not cause any disturbance or dis-amenity 

and that complaints are unlikely. 

The issue of insulation between the Tesco express and the flats and the issue of lighting 

scheme is recommended to be controlled by a general noise condition requiring details of 

attenuation values for materials used in the structure of the building, delivery times and 

hours of use. 

Additional areas for car parking mean that there is the potential for increased noise levels 

associated with engine noise/ car doors slamming/ people noise which may cause disamenity 

or disturbance to future residents. There is no provision for closing the car park 

outside shop opening times. Car park areas have the potential to attract people who use 

these spaces to rev engines and skid cars which can cause a lot of disturbance to near by 

residential properties, especially during late evening and night time hours. Although there is 

no evidence that this would occur an informative is recommended. 

Norfolk Constabulary: The design and layout should provide a secure segregation of 

'public' and 'staffing' areas. A site perimeter that has a robust fence or wall without footholds 

to a minimum height of 2 metres. In between the properties at the rear 1.8 metre fencing is 

adequate with any access gates having anti lift hinges and key operated locks with slam shut 

mechanisms. These measures will help to prevent unauthorised persons gaining access to 

the rear of properties. 

Internal measures to prevent authorised persons entering staff areas should also be 

considered. 

The front of the proposed venue should be neat, tidy and ideally provide a flush frontage to 

support increased levels of 'natural surveillance’. A gated access should, be flush with the 

front elevation so as not to provide a recessed area that a potential offender could exploit 

adjacent to the proposed ATM. Well positioned 'white' lighting with a uniform spread should 

also be provided. In addition hard surfacing should be securely fixed to prevent removal, 

vandalism or use as potential ammunition. 

It is noted that having residential uses above a commercial provides enhanced guardianship 

and this is of course better if there is a connection between the occupier and business. Door 

and window openings should meet The Loss Prevention Standards Security Rating level 3 

and an alarm system fitted to British Standards. 

The use of the premises is not a 24 hour, 7 days a week operation and therefore the ATM 

does not have a capable guardian to overview the ATM during the night time period. Due to 

its vulnerable location we would require the approaches to the ATM being protected by PAS 

069 anti ram bollards. It should also be alarmed and monitored by remote signalling. The 


6 th July 2009

use of painted or surface treatment would also create a privacy zone, to give some personal 

space to customers. It is stated that a landscaping plan should provide a clear field of vision 

across the venue and the use of CCTV should be utilised. 

Conservation Officer: The building is on the edge of the Conservation Area and has a 

solid, vernacular appearance. These revised alterations to the front elevation are an 

improvement over the previous submission and follow guidance given. It is felt that the 

proposed alteration to the front can only be properly assessed with information such as hard 

landscaping, signs and illumination, as clutter and over-sized signs, excessive illumination 

and poor quality treatment of the hard landscaping will have a major effect on the building's 

appearance and its relationship with the Conservation Area. However it is recognised that 

the hard landscaping can be controlled by conditions and the signs and illumination will form 

a future application. 

REPRESENTATIONS 

57 letters of representation have been received in respect of this application; this includes 

one letter from Cllr Smeaton and the Tiles and Architectural Ceramics Society and ONE 

letter of support. The main issues raised include: 

• No room for Tesco in Heacham; 

• Increase in traffic (through deliveries, customers) and associated dangers on a 

notoriously busy road, reference is made to 3 recent accidents; 

• Site is close to the main bus route through the village; 

• Owners of Victoria Cottages should be allocated parking spaces on the redeveloped 

site; 

• Alterations proposed will not fit in with the conservation area; 

• Increased noise and disturbances to residents; 

• Impact upon local businesses; 

• Impact on saleability of adjacent properties; 

• Concern of resident who has access over the roadway leading to the car-park area 

about vehicular access to her gates and bin access; 

• Concern that the proposal does not consider the four sets of ceramic directional 

signs (for example tradesmen's entrance, private entrance) on the exterior of the 

building; 

• The Wheatsheaf building is a part of Heacham's history and to change any part of it 

would be a loss to the village; and 

• The building shall stay as a village inn. 

• Heacham already has two quick stop shops with two garages; 

• Questions raised about the accuracy of the submitted Transport Statement; 

• Adequate facilities and nearby Tesco’s in Hunstanton, Gaywood and Hardwick Road, 

King's Lynn; 

• 'Wheatsheaf' hanging sign will be replaced by a standard Tesco sign and will be 

dominant; 

• Concerns raised in relation to light pollution; 

• Lynn Road is the road that the emergency services will use; and 

• There should be a first-aider on site. 

Henry Bellingham MP, has made comments raising strong objections to the proposal on 

the grounds of the development is totally inappropriate and out of keeping with this part of 

Heacham. It will undoubtedly have a hugely adverse impact on the character of this very 

special village and the Conservation Area. 


6 th July 2009

NATIONAL GUIDANCE 

PPS3 – Housing (2006) sets out the national planning policy framework for delivering the 

Government’s housing objectives. 

PPS6 - “Planning for Town Centres” (2005) aims to sustain and enhance the vitality and 

viability of town centres and contains advice on the consideration of shopping and leisure 

proposals. 

PPG13 - “Transport” (2001) aims to integrate planning and transport, promote sustainable 

forms of development, improve accessibility by public transport, walking and cycling, and 

reduce the need to travel, especially by car. 

PPG15 - “Planning and the Historic Environment” (1994) provides advice on development in 

Conservation Areas and that involving Listed Buildings. 

PPG24 - “Planning and Noise” (1994) provides guidance on the considerations to be taken 

into account when determining planning applications for noise sensitive development and 

those activities which generate noise. 

PPS1 - “Delivering Sustainable Development” (2005) sets out overarching policies on the 

delivery of sustainable development through the operation of the planning system and 

contains advice on design considerations. 

Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention (2004) ODPM provides guidance 

on the way in which good quality design can contribute to making places safer and secure. 

EAST OF ENGLAND PLAN 

Policy ENV6: The Historic Environment - Local planning authorities should identify, protect, 

conserve and, where appropriate, enhance the historic environment of the region, its 

archaeology, historic buildings, places and landscapes, including historic parks and gardens 

and those features and sites (and their settings) especially significant in the East of England. 

Policy ENV7: Quality in the Built Environment - Local Development Documents should 

require new development to be of high quality which complements the distinctive character 

and best qualities of the local area and promotes urban renaissance and regeneration. 

PLANNING POLICIES 

The King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) contains the following saved policies 

that are relevant to the proposal: 

4/7 - aims to protect and enhance important landscape features such as trees and 

woodlands. 

4/14 - requires that development proposals within the vicinity of Conservation Areas should 

have regard for views into and out of the areas. 

4/21 - indicates that in built-up areas of towns or villages identified on the Proposals Map as 

Built Environment Type C or D development will be permitted where it is in character with the 

locality. 


6 th July 2009

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 

The key planning considerations relevant to the determination of this application are: 

• Planning history; 

• Development requiring consent; 

• Alterations to the building; 

• Acceptability of residential units at first floor; 

• Noise implications; 

• Highway implications; 

• Crime and disorder; and 

• Other material considerations 

Planning History 

The application is submitted further to the refusal of the original scheme by Members at the 

reconvened meeting of the Development Control Board (following a site visit) on 5th March 

2009. The proposal was refused planning consent on the basis of the proposed front 

elevation, particularly the design of the proposed new shop front, which would impact upon 

views out of the Conservation Area. Since this refusal the scheme has been amended to try 

and overcome the previous reason for refusal. 

Development Requiring Consent 

The existing use of the premises as a public house falls within Class A4 of the Use Classes 

Order 2005, whilst the proposed use as a convenience food store falls within Class A1. The 

Use Classes Order allows for change of use from A4 to A1 without requiring a formal 

planning application to be made. The change of use of the premises to a convenience food 

store is therefore permitted development and does not require planning permission. Issues 

of principle such as the need of a further food retail shop, loss of a public house, and indeed 

highway issues relating to this use, therefore cannot be considered as part of this 

application. In addition, the demarcation of parking spaces is not held to constitute 

development requiring consent. 

Development which does require consent includes the conversion of the upper floor into two 

self contained flats, external alterations including the insertion of a cash dispenser, 

installation of shop front, rear canopy, access to flats and refrigeration and air conditioning 

units, and the extension of the parking area. 

Alterations to the Building 

The building at present has a certain symmetry to its front elevation, this is however not the 

case on any other elevation. The proposal will involve the removal of the existing front 

external staircase, insertion of roof lights and ground floor window with ATM access door on 

the western elevation, installation of new shop front and ATM to front elevation. Alterations 

to the east elevation involve bricking up of a doorway and window. The alterations to the rear 

elevation involve a new external stair case to the two flats, canopy over part of the rear yard 

and bin area enclosed by close boarded fence and a metal security fence. In addition some 

of the area currently laid to grass will be hard surfaced for use as a parking area. 

The conservation officer contended the alterations to the front elevation on the original 

submission would detract from the appearance of the building, as it introduced a brash, 

modern shop front that unbalanced the front elevation and further degraded the forecourt. 

This element of the scheme, which formed the only reason for refusal has been amended 

and now retains many of the features of this building. 


6 th July 2009

The improvements to the design include the retention of the feature columns, the reduction 

in glazing to the shop front, the glazed area being further set back, reduction in size of the 

ATM surround and material, and reduction in the size and position of the fascia signage to 

allow for more of the features of the building to be retained. 

The insertion of windows where doors are currently located, infilling doorways and bricking 

up of a window within the site elevation are in themselves considered acceptable. 

The proposed ATM would be located in the front of the building, close to the front entrance; it 

would be of standard size and scale within a glazed surround. It is considered that this ATM 

has been sympathetically integrated into the shop frontage and as such there would be 

minimal visual impact on the street scene. 

The rear elevation again involves external works to allow for the two new residential units 

and rear yard area. This would be visible from the parking area for the store, but not from a 

publicly visible location outside of the site. The rear yard area would be screened by the 

proposed means of enclosure, and whilst a relatively harsh feature, it would serve the 

purpose of containing the chiller cabinet, condenser, air conditioning units and bin storage 

area. On balance it is considered that this element is acceptable. 

The proposal would also result in the partial loss of an existing area laid to grass and 

outbuildings to make sufficient space for the car parking area. The outbuildings referred to 

are constructed in carrstone. As the site does not fall within the confines of the Conservation 

Area and the outbuildings in themselves are not listed or in the grounds of a listed building, 

they do not require consent for their removal. The layout of the parking area remains as the 

previous scheme and is considered acceptable. 

Acceptability of Residential Units at First Floor 

The site lies within the confines of Heacham, where the principle of new residential 

development is acceptable in land use terms. Residential accommodation was previously 

provided at first floor level (managers flat and two guest rooms). Access to the new flats is 

provided to the rear and across a flat roof paved area which is enclosed to three sides by the 

u-shape of the building. Both units have their own respective entrances. Rooms to flat 2 are 

largely similar to the previous residential layout; no additional openings are therefore 

required. It is considered that no material harm would result. With regard to flat 1 a doorway 

served by the fire escape is replaced by a window serving a kitchen. Roof lights are also 

proposed to the second bedroom and shower room. No increased overlooking would result 

to properties in the High Street as they serve a shower room and wardrobe area. The 

residential units have access to a communal garden area; this level of amenity space is 

considered satisfactory. This element of the scheme has not changed. 

Noise Implications 

Whilst no objection is raised by Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance (CSNN) 

they do have some concerns. In particular concern is raised about noise protection between 

the commercial unit and the two proposed flats above.However sound resistance would be 

covered by Part E of the Building Regulations. As the use has changed and the residential 

units above would no longer be ancillary to the use at ground floor the Council's Building 

Control officers are of the view that there would be a need for increased sound resistance, 

but this would be covered by the Building Regulations, and does not involve late night uses 

requiring a specific scheme for sound proofing. 

After consideration of the submitted noise report it has been shown that no dis-amenity will 

result from the proposed refrigeration and air conditioning units. 


6 th July 2009

It is recognised that the use of the car parking after the close of business (between 10pm 

and 7am) may lead to some disturbance, but this is similar to the previous pub use, and the 

new residents will provide an on-site presence. Notwithstanding this, the applicant has also 

been asked to comment what steps they propose to limit this concern. 

It is considered that the general noise condition suggested by CSNN, requiring details of 

delivery times and hours of use of the commercial element is unreasonable, as that does not 

require planning consent in its own right. 

Whilst the creation of a hard standing for car parking would take vehicles further into the 

back of the site and closer to residential properties it is considered that noise disturbance 

resulting from car doors closing and general noise in association with people parking and 

walking to the store would be reasonable given the proposed hours of use. Due to the 

proposed hours of use it is likely that car lights would be used, and it is appreciated that the 

shining of car lights can cause harm. However, given the hours of use and current boundary 

treatments, this harm is not considered to be material. 

Highway Implications 

The parking layout provides three spaces for the two residential units accessed by lockable 

posts and thirteen spaces for the retail unit. In addition there are two motorbike bays and a 

cycle park (uncovered). The entrance and egress to the site is the same as the original 

submission, although two parking spaces to the shop frontage have been removed. 

The Highway Authority asks that the cycle area is covered; a revised plan has annotated this 

requirement. However more details of its appearance would be required, and is considered 

that this can be satisfactorily controlled by the use of a condition. Whilst reference is made to 

advertisement this would form part of a separate application and considered at that time. 

The agent has been advised of NCC Highways comments and submitted a further plan to 

address the issues raised. In response to this amended plan NCC Highways have stated 

that they still question the appropriateness of the collision protection around the telegraph 

pole but note that this is on private land and not a direct highway concern. The applicant has 

stated that the removal of the telegraph pole is something that they will look at in the future. 

Concern is expressed in relation to the relocated bollards at the western access given the 

position of the ATM. It is believed by NCC highways that this arrangement would have the 

potential to create an area where people would park to use the machine or store and then 

reverse onto the highway at this point. It is considered by your officers that the use of the 

lockable bollards to the western frontage to prevent access with the exception of deliveries 

to the store and the removal of the 3 droppable bollards to allow for turning would prevent 

this. This was the arrangement on the previous submission. The applicant has submitted this 

arrangement on a revised plan and Norfolk County Highway have not raised any objection. 

Crime and Disorder 

It is recognised that the building is set back from Lynn Road however; it would be readily 

visible from the public highway. The use would mean that the site would be active during 

working hours and in addition with the use of the first floor as residential there would be 

activity during the evenings. In order to mitigate the risk of ram raids Norfolk Constabulary 

have suggest the use of anti ram bollards, this aspect can be secured by condition. In 

addition it is considered that the lighting issue and refuse storage could also be satisfactorily 

secured by condition. 


6 th July 2009

Other Material Considerations 

Whilst the formal comments of the Council's Landscape Officer have not been received no 

objection was raised to the original application. It was requested that a condition is imposed 

requiring a scheme for landscaping planting, in order to mitigate the impact of the car 

parking. 

Third party representations raise concerns that the proposal will affect their respective rights 

of way over the application site. The agent has verbally confirmed that these residents have 

no legal right over the application site. However the proposal will not take away access 

currently enjoyed in the event there is a right of way. 

CONCLUSION 

This application deal with the physical alterations and change of use creating two flats at the 

former Wheatsheaf Inn. The change of use of the ground floor from a pub to a shop is 

permitted through the Use Classes (Amendment) Order 2005, and the General Permitted 

Development (Amendment) Order 2005. This therefore deals with many issues of principle. 

Taking into account the above it is considered that the revised plans address the previous 

reason for refusal and that the proposal will not result in any harm to the adjacent 

Conservation Area. The remaining issues were not objected to previously, and as before can 

be adequately addressed by condition or by a further submission for items such as 

advertisements. The application is therefore recommended for approval. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

APPROVE subject to the imposition of the following condition(s): 

1 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 

three years from the date of this permission. 

1 Reason To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990, as 

amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004. 

2 Condition Prior to the first occupation detail of the location of the refuse storage 

facilities for the two residential units shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the 

Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the 

approved plan. 

2 Reason To secure a satisfactory standard of development and in the interests of the 

visual amenities of the locality. 

3 Condition No development shall take place until a drawing showing anti-ram raid 

bollards to the front of the ATM and CCTV cameras coving the machine and immediate 

pavement area has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning 

Authority and the development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the 

approved details. 

3 Reason In the interests of visual amenities and crime prevention. 

4 Condition Prior to the installation of any outdoor lighting, a detailed scheme shall be 

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme 

shall include details of the type of lights, the orientation/angle of the luminaries, the 


6 th July 2009

spacing and height of the lighting columns, the extent/levels of illumination over the site 

and on adjacent land and the measures to contain light within the curtilage of the site. 

The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with approved scheme and thereafter 

maintained. 

4 Reason In the interests of crime prevention and to protect the amenities of adjacent 

residential occupiers. 

5 Condition The development shall not be brought into use until a covered cycle storage 

area has been provided in accordance with a detailed scheme to be submitted to and 

approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The cycle storage area shall be 

constructed in accordance with the approved scheme and thereafter used for no other 

purpose. 

5 Reason To ensure that cycle storage facilities will be available to serve the 

development. 

6 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted the 

vehicular access alterations, detailed on plan 1718/04V shall be constructed in 

accordance with the Norfolk County Council residential access construction 

specification. 

6 Reason To ensure satisfactory access into the site. 


proposed access / on-site parking / servicing / loading, unloading / turning / waiting 

area shall be laid out, demarcated, levelled, surfaced and drained in accordance with 

the approved plan and retained thereafter available for that specific use. 

7 Reason To ensure the permanent availability of the parking / manoeuvring area, in the 

interests of highway safety. 

BACKGROUND PAPERS 

Application file reference: 09/00609/F 

Norfolk Structure Plan (1999) 

King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) 


6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Outwell 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/1(b) 

Outline Application: Construction of two dwellings 

116 Wisbech Road Outwell Wisbech Norfolk 

Mr John Jordan 

09/00498/O (Outline Application) 

Case Officer: Mr K Wilkinson 

Tel: 01553 616794 



Reason for Referral to DCB – The Parish Council’s views are at variance with the Officer’s 

recommendation. 

Case Summary 

The site is that of 116 Wisbech Road, which is a large bungalow set in expansive grounds 

(0.3Ha), on the eastern corner of the mini-roundabout junction of Wisbech Road 

(A1122)/Hall Road/A1101. The site is bounded to the rear by agricultural land, with 

bungalows to the south-east fronting the A1122 and houses fronting Hall Road to the north. 

It is contained by boundary walls and railings onto Wisbech Road and mostly fencing to Hall 

Road, and contains several mature trees alongside the A1122. 

Outline permission is sought for two building plots for bungalows – one either side of the 

existing dwelling No.116. Access and layout are to be considered at this stage with all other 

matters reserved for future consideration. In order to accommodate a dwelling to the southeast 

of No.116, a sun room extension on the side of the existing property will be removed. 

Members chose to defer determination of this application at the 15th June 2009 DC Board 

meeting, to inquire why County Highways had not sought improvements to visibility from Hall 

Road at the mini-roundabout. A response from County Highways is awaited at the time of 

compiling this report and is expected to be reported in late correspondence. The highway 

engineer is expected to attend the forthcoming meeting and will be available to discuss this 

matter more fully. 

Key Issues 

Principle of development 

Impact upon form and character 

Impact upon trees 

Access and highway safety 

Impact upon neighbouring properties 

Crime and disorder 

Any other material considerations 


APPROVE 

09/00498/O Development Control Board 

6 th July 2009


The site is that of 116 Wisbech Road, which is a large bungalow set in expansive grounds 

(0.3Ha), on the eastern corner of the mini-roundabout junction of Wisbech Road 

(A1122)/Hall Road/A1101. The site is bounded to the rear by agricultural land, with 

bungalows to the south-east fronting the A1122 and houses fronting Hall Road to the north. 

It is contained by boundary walls and railings onto Wisbech Road and fencing to Hall Road, 

and contains several mature trees alongside the A1122. 

Outline permission is sought for two building plots for bungalows – one either side of the 

existing dwelling No.116. Access and layout are to be considered at this stage with all other 

matters reserved for future consideration. Access is proposed to serve Plot 1 off Hall Road 

and Plot 2 by a modification to the existing access off the A1122 serving both the new 

property and No.116. In order to accommodate a dwelling to the south-east of No.116 (Plot 

2), a sun room extension on the side of the existing property will be removed. The layout of 

the new dwellings is consistent with the front elevation of the existing bungalow. 


A Design and Access Statement accompanies the application which raises the following 

points: 

The site is currently used by the owners of 116 Wisbech Road as garden land. The site 

currently has one main access point off Wisbech Road (A1122). The proposed development 

has been located to ensure continuity of the street scene in respect of adjacent dwellings i.e. 

‘Ruindus’ to the north-west and No.1 to the south-east. 

The application site is 0.29 hectares. The proposed dwellings are designed to be single 

storey with a maximum height of 6.5 metres, a maximum width of 11 metres and maximum 

length of 17.9 metres. Proposed floor areas are as follows: Units 1 & 2 – 3 bed bungalows 

115m² each. 

Although landscaping is not part of this outline application and the exact details will be 

determined on the submission of a reserved matters application, we would envisage the 

landscaping scheme to be a harmonious mix of both hard and soft landscaping both for the 

enjoyment of the occupants of the proposed bungalows and to soften the visual impact on 

the surrounding area. 

The exact details of the materials will be dealt with under a separate reserved matters 

application; however they would complement the neighbouring properties so as to blend into 

the street scene. 

Vehicular and pedestrian access to Plot 2 is to be provided via Wisbech Road, and Plot 1 

provided via Hall Road. 

A Tree Survey, Arboricultural Implication Assessment, Arboricultural Method Statement, 

Sensitive Development Questionnaire and a Flood Risk Assessment also accompany the 

application. 


None recent 


6 th July 2009


Parish Council: OBJECTION – Not in keeping with the street scene; highways issue as 

entrance onto A1122 is so close to the mini-roundabout; and identifies incorrect and 

misleading information submitted with the application details relating to land contamination. 

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions. 

Internal Drainage Board: No response received at the time of writing this report. 

Environment Agency: NO OBJECTION 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: NO OBJECTION subject to 

conditions and informatives. 

Norfolk Constabulary: NO OBJECTION 

KLWNBC Landscape Officer: NO OBJECTION subject to retention of trees as shown on 

submitted plans; and protection of retained trees during construction as per the arboricultural 

method statement. 


ONE letter of objection received raising the following grounds: 

• The mini-roundabout is a very busy junction; it would be a mistake to add new 

accesses so close to it. Vehicles back up on the A1122 and there is a restricted 

sight-line into Hall Road; there have been several collisions at this junction; 

• Disturbed to see the loss of mature trees which should be protected; and 

• There has been a lot of development in Outwell and Upwell in recent years and must 

be putting a strain on services, particularly the Upwell Medical Centre. There are a 

number of new/nearly new houses for sale in the two villages; surely there is no need 

for more. 










PPS23 - “Planning and Pollution Control” (2004) contains guidance on the consideration of 

land, air and water quality issues, the pollution control regime, and the development of 

contaminated land. 

PPS25 - “Development and Flood Risk” (2006) provides advice on land-use planning and 

flooding considerations. 


6 th July 2009


Policy SS1: Achieving Sustainable Development - The strategy seeks to bring about 

sustainable development by applying the guiding principles of the UK Sustainable 

Development Strategy 2005, the elements contributing to the creation of sustainable 

communities described in Sustainable Communities: Homes for All: 





The Norfolk Structure Plan (1999) contains the following policies that are relevant to this 

application: 

T.2 - requires that the traffic implications of new development are assessed. 




woodlands. 



locality. 

8/1 - indicates that individual and small groups of dwellings will be permitted in settled or 

built-up areas of villages defined as Built Environment Types C and D. 


In assessing this application the key issues are considered to be as follows: 

• Principle of development 

• Impact upon form and character 

• Impact upon trees 

• Access and highway safety 

• Impact upon neighbouring properties 

• Crime and disorder 

• Any other material considerations 


The application site lies within Built Environment Type D as defined by the King’s Lynn and 

West Norfolk Local Plan (1998); policies 4/21 and 8/1 would therefore apply. The proposal 

for residential development is acceptable in principle in this location, provided it has regard 

for and is in harmony with the building characteristics of the locality. PPS1 and 3 encourage 

the development of brownfield sites within built-up areas to make efficient and effective use 

of the land. 


6 th July 2009


One of the main issues to consider when determining this application is whether the 

proposed dwellings would be in character with the surrounding area. A layout plan shows 

how the site would be developed, with bungalows either side of that existing and on the 

same building line. The plot sizes are similar to those containing bungalows on Wisbech 

Road. 

Impact upon trees 

The site contains a mix of eight mature, semi-mature and young significant trees along its 

frontage to the A1122 which contribute to the street scene but are not subject to a Tree 

Preservation Order (the line of trees along Hall Road in the field to the rear of the site are 

protected). There are some smaller trees within the site and adjacent the existing access 

that are proposed to be removed. The application is accompanied by an arboricultural report, 

which contains a tree survey, method statement and tree protection plan. This defines the 

health of the trees, those to be retained and protected and the methods of protection during 

construction works. The report states that the closest retained trees to the proposed 

dwellings is an oak at a distance of at least 14 metres. The new dwellings are positioned to 

the north and north-east of the trees, at a distance that does not allow significant shadows of 

the trees at full mature height to be cast upon the buildings. This will allow adequate 

sunlight during the summer and winter months to reach all the windows. 

This assessment has been viewed by our Landscape Officer, who agrees with the content 

and requests that the implementations of the recommendations of the report are adhered to. 

This may be controlled via condition. 

There is however a TPO oak close to, but beyond the rear boundary of the site on the 

southern side of Hall Road, but this was not covered by the tree survey. Additional 

information regarding this has been requested from the agent and will be reported as late 

correspondence, however given the separation distances involved this is not likely to be 

adversely affected by the proposed bungalow and access driveway on Plot 1. 

Access and highway safety 

As stated earlier in this report the access is to be determined at this stage with a layout plan 

showing access to Plot 1 off Hall Road and to Plot 2 modifying the existing access to No.116 

off Wisbech Road/A1122. The layout plan also shows parking and turning areas within the 

curtilages of all three dwellings. Whilst the Parish Council and a local resident have raised 

concerns regarding the suitability of the access arrangements and the impact on the 

highway, County Highways were consulted prior to the application being submitted and raise 

no objection to the proposal. This is on the basis that certain conditions are attached to any 

permission relating to the provision of the parking and turning areas, no gates and 

specification of construction. 

Impact upon neighbouring properties 

Whilst this proposal is in outline form and details of the proposed dwellings would be the 

subject of further planning applications, the separation distances identified on the layout plan 

(combined with the existing trees to be retained and new boundary treatments) would not 

likely infringe upon the amenities of adjoining residential properties. The only property 

directly affected by the proposal would be the donor property itself, and that would be 

protected by definition of the common boundary treatments that could be controlled by 

condition. 


6 th July 2009


The proposed development does not raise any significant issues regarding crime and 

disorder. Norfolk Constabulary ALO has viewed the application and raised no objection to 

the proposal, and indeed has offered advice as to pursuing Secure by Design accreditation. 

Other material considerations 

The application site lies within Flood Zone 1 of the Council’s adopted Strategic Flood Risk 

Assessment and there are no objections to the scheme from the Environment Agency. 

The site lies close to the former Wisbech Canal which was missed on the application 

questionnaire (identified by the Parish Council) but recognised by our Environmental Quality 

team. This has been redressed and there is no objection to the proposal subject to certain 

conditions to be attached to any permission. 

The introduction of two additional dwellings on a ‘windfall site’ will not significantly affect the 

service provision of the village. 

CONCLUSION 

The proposal involves two additional plots on a large, well landscaped site. There are no 

objections in principle, and provided conditions are imposed covering highway issues, 

contamination issues and the protection of trees, the proposal is acceptable. 

Overall, the proposal therefore complies with PPS1 and PPS3, Policies 4/7, 4/21 and 8/1 of 

the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998) and Policies SS1 and ENV7 of the East 

of England Plan (2008). 

In light of National Guidance, Development Plan Policies and other material considerations 

outline planning permission may be granted for the development as proposed. 



1 Condition Approval of the details of the scale, appearance and landscaping of the site 

(hereinafter called ‘the reserved matters’) shall be obtained from the Local Planning 

Authority before any development is commenced. 



2 Condition Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to in Condition 1 

above shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority in writing and shall be carried 

out as approved. 



3 Condition Application for the approval of reserved matters shall be made to the Local 

Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. 


6 th July 2009



4 Condition The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than the 

expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of 

approval on different dates, the final approval of the latest such matter to be approved. 



5 Condition Prior to the commencement of the development, an investigation and risk 

assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, 

must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of 

any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of 

the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The 

investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a 

written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the 

approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must 

include: 

(i) A survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; 

(ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: 

• human health, 

• property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, 

• woodland and service lines and pipes, 

• adjoining land, 

• groundwaters and surface waters, 

• ecological systems, 

• archaeological sites and ancient monuments; 

(iii) An appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). 

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s 

‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’. 

5 Reason To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land 

and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, 

property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried 

out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite 

receptors in accordance with PPS23 Planning and Pollution Control. 

6 Condition Prior to the commencement of the development, a detailed remediation 

scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing 

unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and 

historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the 

Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, 

proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site 

management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as 

contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation 

to the intended use of the land after remediation. 




6 th July 2009




7 Condition The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with 

its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry 

out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of 

commencement of the remediation scheme works. 

Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a 

verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the 

effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the 

approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. 






8 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development on Plot 1 hereby permitted, a 

visibility splay measuring 2.4m x 24m shall be provided to the south-west of its access 

where it meets the highway and such splay shall thereafter be maintained free of any 

obstruction exceeding 0.225m above the level of the adjacent highway carriageway. 

8 Reason To ensure that a safe means of access is available to serve the development 

in accordance with the principles of PPG13. 

9 Condition Prior to the first occupation or use of the development hereby permitted the 

vehicular accesses shall be constructed in accordance with the Norfolk County Council 

residential access construction specification, and additionally to accord with details to 

be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, for the first 5 metres into the 

site as measured back from the near edge of the adjacent carriageway. The shared 

access onto Wisbech Road shall be a minimum width of 4.5 metres. 



10 Condition Notwithstanding the provision of Class A of Schedule 2, Part 2 of the Town 

and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or any Order 

revoking, amending or re-enacting that Order) no gates shall be erected across the 

approved accesses unless details have first been submitted to and approved in writing 

by the Local Planning Authority. 

10 Reason In the interests of highway safety in accordance with the principles of PPG13. 


proposed associated access, on-site parking and turning areas shall be laid out, 

levelled, surfaced and drained in accordance with the approved plans and retained 

thereafter available for that specific use. 

11 Reason To ensure that parking and servicing facilities will be available to serve the 

development in accordance with the principles of PPG13. 


6 th July 2009

12 Condition The proposed development shall be implemented in accordance with the 

details of the Arboricultural Report submitted with the application, retaining the trees 

identified and protecting them during construction as per the method statement and 

protection plan. 

12 Reason In order to secure the retention and protection during construction of 

significant trees on and adjoining the site in the interests of visual amenities and to 

accord with Local Plan Policy 4/7. 


Application file reference: 09/00498/O 




6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Downham Market 


Erection of 11 new dwellings with associated site works 

Land Off Lancaster Crescent Downham Market Norfolk 

Wherry Housing Association 


Tel: 01553 616794 

09/00558/FM (Full Application - Major Development) 


17th August 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – This application requires a Section 106 legal agreement to 

ensure that the dwellings are retained as affordable housing. 

Case Summary: 

Full permission is sought for the erection of 11 affordable dwellings with associated roads 

and infrastructure. The application site covers an area of 0.35 Ha of Council-owned land, 

currently containing a parking area and redundant scrubland. Access is from Lancaster 

Crescent to the west with residential development to the north (Rosemary Way) and east 

(Basil Drive). 

The dwellings comprise a bungalow for wheelchair access, 6 No. two bedroom houses, 3 

No. four bedroom houses and a five bedroom house. The dwellings are intended to be 

developed by Wherry Housing Association a Registered Social Landlord. 

Members will recall an earlier application ref: 08/02063/FM which was refused by the DC 

Board at its meeting on 1st December 2008. This is a further application seeking to address 

members’ previous concerns. 

Key Issues: 

Principle of the development 

Housing need 

Design and layout 

Highway issues 

Impact on residential amenities 



Building for Life Score- 16 

Scores out of 20: 

Very Good – 16 or more positive answers 

Good – 14 or more positive answers 

Average – 10 or more positive answers 

Poor – less than 10 positive answers 

Recommendation: 

APPROVE subject to a S.106 agreement ensuring the provision of affordable housing 

09/00558/FM Development Control Board 

6 th July 2009


Full permission is sought for the erection of 11 affordable dwellings with associated roads 

and infrastructure. The application site covers an area of 0.35 Ha of Borough Council-owned 

land, currently containing a parking area and redundant scrubland. Access is from Lancaster 

Crescent to the west with residential development to the north (Rosemary Way) and east 

(Basil Drive). 

The dwellings comprise a bungalow for wheelchair access, 6 No. two bedroom houses, 3 

No. four bedroom houses and a five bedroom house. The dwellings are intended to be 

developed by Wherry Housing Association a Registered Social Landlord. 


A Design and Access Statement accompanies the application and states that: 

The site is fairly level with no significant vegetation within the site boundaries; the site layout 

has resulted from considerable consultation with the planning officer. A footpath has been 

incorporated to run through the site to link existing footpath networks, which terminate at the 

site boundaries to the north and south. The dwellings will be 100% affordable and for rent. 

Vehicular access is maintained via the existing access of Lancaster Crescent, and parking 

spaces are provided to meet County Council standards. Parking spaces have been kept 

away from the western boundary to avoid disturbance to existing properties. Since the 

previous application additional general use parking spaces have been provided close to the 

site entrance. Research and consultation has shown the existing car park, which forms part 

of the application site, to be used very little. The occupants to No.60, adjacent to the site 

entrance appear to be the only regular users of this facility. Their use is accommodated by 

the additional space provision. A survey in the immediate vicinity shows that the majority of 

occupants of Lancaster Crescent park within the curtilage of their property or use 

immediately adjacent garages or parking spaces. The dwellings have been located to fit in 

with the surrounding existing properties, avoiding overlooking and minimising inconvenience 

to existing neighbours. The proposed bungalow has been located adjacent to an existing 

bungalow. Windows have been provided in gable elevations where appropriate to overlook 

the cycle path and parking areas for security purposes. All dwellings will comply with the 

Wherry Housing Association Design Brief, meet the requirements of Lifetime Homes and be 

to Sustainable Code 3. Since the previous application elevations have been amended to 

incorporate variations in the roof line and brickwork features taking a lead from the Local 

Design Guide. Additional roof gables have been introduced with brick quoins and features. 

To feature gables, panels of darker brickwork are proposed to simulate the carrstone feature 

of traditional buildings in the town. 

A desk study summary investigation relating to contamination and a Code for Sustainable 

Homes report also accompany the application. 


08/02063/FM – Construction of 11 dwellings – Refused 01.12.2008 

2/99/0477/O – Adjacent Site - Site for residential development 14.9 Ha – Approved July 

2000. 


6 th July 2009


Town Council: CONTENT WITH THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT – In approving the 

application the following reasons were identified: 1. In accordance with PPS3 and Policy H2 

of the East of England Plan – the proposed development will enhance the area and fulfil the 

need for affordable housing in Downham Market. Members wished to note the following: It is 

understood that the footpath (currently not accessible) is to be reinstated across the site. 

Residents in the area are unhappy at the increased volume of traffic which will be generated 

using Retreat Estate as an access road. It is hoped that consideration was given to access 

via the new development to the east. 

Local Highway Authority (NCC): NO OBJECTION subject to conditions. 

Norfolk Constabulary (ALO): NO OBJECTION but raises concerns in relation to the 

footpath links through the site making the area too permeable; also surveillance and lighting 

to the footpaths and parking areas. It is not likely that an award of Secure by Design will be 

made on the scheme as submitted. 

KLWN – Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: NO OBJECTION 

subject to conditions and informatives added to any permission. 

KLWN Environmental Planning: NO OBJECTION – as there is little biodiversity interest on 

site, enhancement in line with the report recommendations should be carried out. This 

includes the provision of bat boxes, native shrub planting to create ecological corridors, 

healthy native trees to be retained and no clearance of vegetation during the bird breeding 

season (March-July inclusive). 

Internal Drainage Board: NO OBJECTION 

Anglian Water Services Ltd: NO OBJECTION 

KLWN – Housing Enabling Officer: Supports the proposal and confirms that the mix 

provided will meet an identified housing need in Downham Market. 

KLWN Landscape Officer: NO OBJECTION subject to landscaping scheme including 

native and non-native trees to be submitted prior to development. 

Environment Agency: Application site lies within Flood Zone 1 and standing advice applies. 


Downham Market Amenity Society: NO OBJECTIONS 

A 128 signature PETITION received objecting on the grounds of inappropriate access 

through Retreat Estate. 

TEN letters of OBJECTION from Third Parties raising the following grounds of objection: 

• loss of the existing car parking area , resulting in congestion on the streets from onstreet 

parking 

• flooding 

• disturbance during construction 

• damage to boundary fences during construction 

• increased number of children and impact on schools 


6 th July 2009

• loss of trees 

• effect on wildlife 

• overlooking 

• devaluation of property 

















Policy SS2: Overall Spatial Strategy - The spatial strategy directs most strategically 

significant growth to the region’s major urban areas. 

Policy SS4: Towns other than Key Centres and Rural Areas - Local Development 

Documents should define the approach to development in towns other than those listed in 

Policy SS3 and in rural areas. 




Policy H2: Affordable Housing - Identifies targets for setting the amount of affordable 

housing within housing requirements of Policy H1 for Development Plan Documents. Sets an 

overall regional target of 35% of affordable housing being provided through planning 

permissions. 



application: 



6 th July 2009





locality. 

OTHER GUIDANCE 

Downham Market: By Design. 


Members will recall a previous application for development of this site which was refused at 

the DC Board on 1st December 2008. The reasons for refusal were: 

1. The proposed development would result in the loss of parking facilities that serve the 

existing dwellings in the vicinity, therefore potentially causing an increase in on-street 

parking to the detriment of both visual amenity and highway safety. 

2. The design and layout of the development proposed fails to take the opportunities 

available for improving the character and quality of the locality and adversely affects 

the form and character of the area. The proposal fails to accord with the guidance 

contained in Planning Policy Statement 1 and Planning Policy Statement 3. 

The scheme has been reviewed and amended and seeks to address those concerns and 

these issues will be expanded upon within this report. 

The issues to be addressed in this instance are:- 

• Principle of the development 

• Housing need 

• Design and layout 

• Highways issues 

• Impact on residential amenities 




This area of land lies within the defined area of the town in a Built Environment Type D as 

shown on the Local Plan inset map for Downham Market. The eastern half of the site lies 

within the Downham North East allocation for estate development. The adjoining land has 

progressively been developed – Rosemary Way to the north and Basil Drive to the east. It is 

therefore surrounded by residential development and the proposal is acceptable in land use 

terms. 

On the master plan related to the previous outline application for the Downham NE 

development this parcel of land was indicated as taking affordable housing, the principle of 

residential development on the site has therefore been previously established. 


6 th July 2009

Housing need 

Notwithstanding the construction of affordable dwellings on the adjoining site to the east off 

Basil Drive (Members will recall approval for 78 dwellings on 4 tranches of land within the 

estate by Persimmon/Longhurst HA last year), there is still a need for affordable dwellings in 

the town. The flats and houses to the immediate east of the application site are now 

completed and occupied. 

The Housing Needs Survey identified that an additional 64 dwellings each year were 

required in Downham Market. Our Housing Enabling Officer is in full support of this 

application. 

In addition this area was shown as being made available for affordable housing in the 

masterplan on the adjacent estate approval, although technically it was not part of that 

consent. 

In order to secure the tenure of these units in perpetuity a Section 106 legal agreement is 

necessary. The applicants are aware of this and the S.106 agreement is being 

produced/finalised. 

Design and layout 

This is an L-shaped site which has certain constraints which seriously affect the 

configuration of new development in terms of layout and siting of the dwellings. The access 

point is fixed from Lancaster Crescent, which presents a continuation of the built form 

parallel to the northern boundary of the site. A bungalow is positioned adjacent to the 

existing bungalow to the west, and there is a progression with a pair of semi-detached 

houses and subsequently a terrace of 4 houses towards the east. In street scene terms, this 

presents a natural progression from single storey up to two storey, which relates to the 

adjoining development to the east of the site. 

A terrace block of three houses lies parallel to the southern boundary of the site, which is 

situated adjacent to the adjoining block of apartments which has been constructed on Basil 

Drive. In terms of physical massing this relates to the properties to the immediate south and 

a terrace of houses to the west of the site, which relate to Lancaster Crescent. The private 

amenity spaces related to these houses are to the immediate north with parking facilities 

beyond served off the cul-de-sac estate road. In the centre of the site between the two rows 

of development is a five bedroomed house - two storey with accommodation in the roof. This 

is positioned to achieve surveillance along the new access road, parking areas and 

footpath/cycle paths. 

Another factor that influences layout is the requirement to link the existing footpath from 

Rosemary Way (north) to Chervil Walk (south). This linkage was identified in the Local Plan 

and masterplan for the estate, and presents a more direct route for children to travel to 

school. Property owners in the Stamford Homes part of the estate will expect this linkage to 

be formed as originally planned. 

In design terms the elevational treatment of the dwellings has been reviewed and more brick 

detailing has been added, and the different coloured brick panelling takes a lead from 

Downham ‘By Design’. Modifications to incorporate variations in the roofline of the blocks 

have also been undertaken. Additional roof gables have been introduced with brick quoins 

and features. To feature gables, panels of darker brickwork are proposed to simulate the 

‘carrstone’ features of traditional buildings within the town. Taking into consideration that the 

adjoining development to the west of the site is 1950s Council housing and to the east more 


6 th July 2009

contemporary estate development, this proposal now bridges the gap between the two 

styles, and as proposed is a good quality scheme. 

Given the physical constraints of the site, the design and appearance of the new dwellings 

are considered to be compatible with those adjoining the site. It is considered that the new 

development will respect the building characteristics of the locality and therefore meet the 

requirements of Local Plan Policy 4/21 and Policy ENV7 of the East of England Plan. 

The construction of 11 units on the site equates to 32 dwellings per Hectare, which is in line 

with advice contained within PPS3. 

Highway issues 

Concerns have once again been expressed locally regarding the suitability of the highway 

network to accept the increased number of vehicular movements associated with this 

development. The principle of the road network serving this additional development is 

considered to be acceptable from the highway perspective; indeed County Highways once 

again raise no objection to the proposal. Any concerns over construction traffic are noted 

but this is only a short-term impact whilst the houses are being built. 

The site currently contains a parking area associated with the former council houses on 

Lancaster Crescent. It would appear that the parking area is not the subject of natural 

surveillance and as a consequence is not greatly used. Properties within the vicinity have 

created their own parking provision within their sites. Additional work has been undertaken 

by the agents identifying in plan form that the majority of properties on Lancaster Crescent 

have on-plot parking or served by garages. People naturally wish to park close to their 

residences in order to look after their vehicles and for convenience. 

It is not considered that the loss of the existing parking area would have such a significant 

impact likely as to warrant concern, and in the absence of any objection from County 

Highways a refusal on this ground would not be sustained at appeal. 

In addition, it should be noted that further spaces, to compensate for the loss of this area, 

are now proposed. Five spaces are available (previously it was two), including provision for 

the adjacent resident. 

Impact on residential amenities 

The spatial relationships between the new dwellings and those adjoining the site are 

considered to be acceptable. There are separation distances of 9-11m rear gardens from the 

side elevations/gardens of the properties on Rosemary Way, with common boundaries 

comprising substantial fencing. 

These separation distances and window positions are considered to be acceptable with 

regard to potential impact on amenity caused through overlooking. The same applies to 

impacts relating to overshadowing given separation distances and building orientation. 

There are no other building to building relationships that would warrant an objection on the 

grounds of overlooking, overshadowing or being overbearing. 


Government guidance states that community safety must form an integral part of the design 

agenda and that design and layouts should take account of public health, crime prevention 

and community safety. The scheme has been considered by the Norfolk Constabulary 


6 th July 2009

Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO), who raises no objection but identifies certain areas for 

improvement should Secure by Design accreditation be pursued. The site has constraints 

given the design brief requirements for connectivity of the existing cycle/footpath network. 

These conflicting requirements may result in Secure by Design not being fully achieved, but 

a balance has to be struck in terms of practicality and other requirements (e.g. links to play 

areas). Improved surveillance is achieved along both footpaths and cycle path and the 

parking areas are considered to be adequately overlooked from gable windows. Lighting of 

parking areas and footpaths/cycleways can be conditioned. 

Building for Life 

The proposal is now rated as achieving a score of 16 using the ‘Building for Life’ criteria. 

This equates to ‘very good’ and the scheme scores especially well in relation to community 

issues and sustainability, aiming to achieve Code 3 sustainable homes. 


Queries have been raised about the lack of infrastructure provision and contributions from 

this development. However, the size of the development is under the threshold limit for 

requiring County contributions towards education and library books. The same applies to the 

provision of play areas. 

Noise and disturbance during clearing and construction works are usually covered by S.60 & 

61 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 and the British Code of Practice BS5228:1984, and 

falls within the remit of Environmental Health rather than Planning Control. However in some 

circumstances conditions controlling this in some way can be attached, although 

consultation with Environmental Health has indicated that control by condition is not 

necessary in this case as the sites lie within an existing estate where building operations 

would not be unexpected. An informative may be attached to any consent. 

It has been alleged by objectors that the trees and bushes on the site are a haven for 

wildlife. An ecological survey has been undertaken in response to these concerns and it has 

been found that the trees and bushes do not provide a roost for bats, and if they are present 

in the area they will be merely foraging. The trees and bushes on the scrubland are not 

protected, and their removal is acceptable. Structured landscaping can be accommodated 

within the new development to mitigate any loss along with the recommendations of a report 

undertaken by Norfolk Wildlife Services. This may be controlled via condition. 

With regards to reported surface water drainage problems, the IDB have raised no objection 

to the proposal subject to the indicated soakaway system being adequate to serve the 

development. Should that method change to a positive piped system then full details would 

have to be agreed with the IDB given recent problems in the town. Anglian Water Services 

Ltd indicates adequate capacity in the foul water sewer to serve the scheme. 

Members will be aware that the impact of development on property values, either increases 

or decreases, is not a material planning consideration. 

CONCLUSION 

The principle of housing is fully acceptable in this urban location. This area of land forms the 

remaining part of affordable housing always envisaged for the adjacent estate. The modified 

details submitted as part of this full application are now considered to be acceptable when 

judged against the Development Plan, Central Government guidance and other material 

considerations, and are considered to address the previous objections to the scheme. It is 


6 th July 2009

therefore recommended that full permission be granted subject to a S.106 agreement being 

completed to ensure the provision and retention of these units as affordable housing. 







2 Condition No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in 

the construction of the external surfaces of the building(s) hereby permitted have been 

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The 

development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 

2 Reason To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and grouping of materials in 

accordance with the principles of PPS1. 

3 Condition Prior to the commencement of the development, an investigation and risk 

assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, 

must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of 

any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of 

the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The 

investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a 

written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the 

approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must 

include: 

(i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; 

(ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: 

• human health, 

• property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, 

• woodland and service lines and pipes, 

• adjoining land, 

• groundwaters and surface waters, 

• ecological systems, 

• archaeological sites and ancient monuments; 

(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). 

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s 

‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’. 







6 th July 2009

4 Condition Prior to the commencement of the development, a detailed remediation 

scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing 

unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and 

historical environment must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the 

Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, 

proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site 

management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as 

contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation 

to the intended use of the land after remediation. 






5 Condition The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with 

its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry 

out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of 

commencement of the remediation scheme works. 

Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a 

verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the 

effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the 

approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. 






6 Condition No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft 

landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local 

Planning Authority. These details shall include finished levels or contours, hard 

surface materials, boundary treatments, refuse or other storage units, street furniture, 

structures and other minor artefacts. Soft landscape works shall include planting 

plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with 

plant and grass establishment) schedules of plants noting species, plant sizes and 

proposed numbers and densities where appropriate. 

6 Reason To ensure that the development is properly landscaped in the interests of the 


7 Condition All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the 

approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation or use of any 

part of the development or in accordance with a programme to be agreed in writing 

with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants that within a period of 5 years 

from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously 

damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of 

similar size and species as those originally planted, unless the Local Planning 

Authority gives written approval to any variation. 

7 Reason To ensure that the work is carried out within a reasonable period. 


6 th July 2009

8 Condition No development shall commence on site until details of the method of 

lighting and extent of illumination to the parking court(s) and footpath/cycleways has 

been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The 

lighting scheme shall be implemented as approved prior to the occupation of the 

dwelling(s) to which it relates, or another timescale to be agreed in writing by the 

Borough Planning Authority. 

8 Reason In the interests of the residential amenities of the future occupants of the 


9 Condition No development shall commence on the site until such time as detailed 

plans and specifications of the roads, footways, cycleways, foul and surface water 

drainage have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning 

Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved 

plans and specifications. 

9 Reason To ensure a satisfactory standard of highway design and construction in 

accordance with the principles of PPG13. 

10 Condition No works shall be carried out on roads, footways, cycleways, foul and 

surface water sewers otherwise than in accordance with the approved plans and 

specifications. 

10 Reason To ensure a satisfactory standard of highway design and construction in 

accordance with the principles of PPG13. 

11 Condition Before the development is first occupied the road(s), footway(s) and 

cycleway(s) shall be constructed to Base Course surfacing level from the development 

to the adjoining adopted highway in accordance with the details to be submitted to and 

approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

11 Reason To ensure that access is available to serve the development in accordance 

with the principles of PPG13. 

12 Condition The recommendations of the submitted report compiled by Norfolk Wildlife 

Services Ltd dated November 2008 shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the 

dwellings hereby approved or other such time as may be agreed in writing with the 

Local Planning Authority. The mitigation measures as agreed shall be retained and 

maintained thereafter. 

12 Reason To define the terms of the consent in the interests of the ecology of the site 

and its surroundings. 


Application file reference: 09/00558/FM 




6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Hillington 


Construction of new Norfolk Hospice with associated facilities and 

car parking 

Land West Of Wheatfields Wheatfields Hillington Norfolk 

Mrs J Doyle 

09/00699/RMM (Reserved Matters Application) 


Tel: 01553 616457 


27th July 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – Referred to the Board by the Executive Director – 

Development Services. 

Case Summary 

The reserved matters application relates to a field outside Hillington that covers 1.71 

hectares. Outline consent was approved in April 2008 with all matters reserved with the 

exception of access. The current reserved matters application seeks to gain approval for the 

outstanding matters; appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. 

Key Issues 

Appearance; 

Landscaping; 

Layout; 

Scale; 

Impact Upon Local Amenity; and 

Other Material Considerations. 


APPROVE 


The application relates to a field currently in agricultural use to the west of Wheatfields, a 

residential street in the village of Hillington. The site is roughly square and covers just over 

1.7 hectares; it has a slight fall with land in the north-western corner being about 0.5m lower 

than in the southeast. 

To the east are large, detached properties on Wheatfields with a mixture of domestic fencing 

and hedging along the border of the site. To the north is an area of rough scrub and tree 

planting with a horse paddock beyond. A more substantial tree belt lies on the western 

boundary with a field drain beyond. To the northwest lies a development of bungalows on 

Pastures Close. There is more scrub and low tree planting on the southern boundary, which 

has an irregular line and is also marked by field drains. Beyond the planting belts are fields 

to the south and west whilst a former County Council depot lies to the southeast. 

09/00699/RMM Development Control Board 

6 th July 2009

This application is a reserved matters application for the construction of a hospice. It is 

proposed to construct a hospice building covering around 2800 square metres providing 10 

bed spaces for in-patient care as well as out-patient care, day care, a chapel and associated 

staff and administration facilities. The layout plans show the building having a horseshoe 

layout around 65m wide and 65m deep. Accommodation would be predominantly single 

storey along the curve of the horseshoe in a building with a maximum height of around 7.2m 

although most is shown as being no more than 5m high. The two ends of the horseshoe are 

joined by a two-storey element, with the first floor set back above the ground floor with a 

maximum height of 8.4m. 

The site layout shows an earth bund adjacent to the eastern boundary with screen planting 

along the top which would be constructed from materials resulting from excavations 

associated with the construction of the hospice. More planting is proposed to the north and 

east around service areas and car parking respectively. The site would provide parking for 

70 cars. The plans also indicate that the existing planting around the site would be 

reinforced, although these lie outside the site boundary. 

Access to the site, would be via a 4.8m wide road off an existing hammerhead on 

Wheatfields. Parking spaces are provided for just fewer than 70 vehicles, which includes 

provision for two disabled spaces. There is also a vehicle drop-off point. 


The application is supported by a Design and Access Statement, Drainage Design Strategy 

Statement, External Lighting Strategy, Acoustic and Environmental Service Report and 

Contamination Phase 1 Environmental Risk Assessment. 

It is stated that the building retains a clear and logical distinction between different elements. 

The building is laid out with clearly identifiable departments. The entrance foyer acts as the 

hub of activity during the day. From the foyer, the closest department is the Out Patients, 

who may only come for a short period for assessment or appointments, the Day Patients 

who spend the day here and beyond this there is the in-patient wing that may stay several 

weeks. The In-Patient wing is the only part of the building which is occupied 24 hours a day. 

This wing faces west and is not visible from any of the adjacent neighbouring properties. The 

approach reduces unnecessary pedestrian traffic through the building, facilitates zoning for 

security and services. 

The staff wing completes the landscaped courtyard garden with the administration offices at 

first floor above this wing. 

Hard landscaping has been designed to allow water to permeate into the ground below in 

accordance with SUD's approach. The building is partly cut into the ground on the south east 

corner and partly out of the ground on the north west corner. A plateau at finished floor level 

has been introduced to ensure level wheelchair access wherever possible. 

The courtyard garden is set just below finished floor level and would be drained via a system 

of French drains which discharge through the gap between the buildings on the south west 

corner and into the balancing pond. 

Secure by Design issues have been incorporated into the scheme and it is the applicant’s 

intention to pursue this further when reserved matters approval has been granted. 

Within the Drainage Design Statement it is confirmed that the applicant is pursing two 

options to resolve the issue in relation to foul water. In relation to surface water it is stated 


6 th July 2009

that rainwater runoff from the roofs will be piped to a large capacity underground storage 

tank for rainwater harvesting, excess rainwater will discharge into the balancing pond. This 

will then be slowly released into the ditch system. It is stated that the rainwater system will 

not cause any flooding to adjacent properties and will help to relieve any surface water 

ponding that occurs. It is noted that there is an existing problem with saturated 

ground/surface water ponding that occurs. A soil mound is proposed running between 7 and 

9 metres from the eastern boundary; this mound will have irrigation pipes running through to 

prevent storm water build up on the eastern side. To alleviate concerns of the residents a 

French Drain will be located approximately 1.5 metres from the eastern boundary. This will 

fall to the south east where it will discharge into the existing ditch. The effect of the drain will 

be to lower the water table alleviating surface water ponding. 


07/02568/OM Construction of new Norfolk Hospice Tapping House with associated facilities 

& car parking. Approved 14/04/08 


Parish Council: OBJECTION the building is much larger than any other in Hillington, and is 

therefore inappropriate in scale for a small village. The materials proposed and the general 

design, being very modern and industrial in nature, are not in harmony with either village 

architecture or the surrounding houses. 

Concern is expressed in relation to the Drainage Engineer's assertions that the existing 

system of ditches around the site are adequate to cope with additional surface and foul 

water which will be generated by the Hospice, especially because the ditches are not in the 

ownership or control of the applicant, but also because there is a long history of drainage 

problems throughout the village. If the connection cannot be established with the Pasture 

Close sewage plant, then in order to protect parishioners and the applicant from potential 

problems, the PC will consider seeking permission to obtain an independent drainage 

survey. A condition is requested that the applicant has legal agreements in place with the 

land owners regarding the maintenance of the ditches, and that the provision of a French 

drain and newt corridor along the whole length of the eastern boundary, including 

underneath the entrance roadway. 

The design does not include the provision of the use of solar and wind power. Whilst 

rainwater will be harvestered it will be used for the gardens only. This is not compatible with 

sustainability policies. 

The lighting proposed for the car parking areas contravenes NCC Environmental Lighting 

Zones Rural Dark Landscape policy. 

Parishioner’s feel that the proposals have not taken full account of their concerns. This is 

highlighted by the presence of a footpath between the earth bund and the rear boundaries of 

the adjacent properties situated on Wheatfields. Residents feel that this area could become 

a magnet for undesirable activity. The security for residents adjacent the site has also been 

raised as an issue, it is requested that security fencing and planting is used together with 

semi-mature and mature planting across the 3 metre wildlife habitat strip and over the bund. 

It is requested that the building is rotated so that the two storey element overlooks fields 

instead of adjoining gardens. A condition is requested regarding the future use of the site 

should the Hospice fail to be built for any reason or fail to succeed once operational due to 


6 th July 2009

lack of funds in the future, and to control possible future development and extension of the 

site. A 20mph speed limit should be applied to Wheatfield’s and Wheatfield’s Close from the 

commencement of construction and in perpetuity. Any traffic calming measures at the 

entrance to the Hospice should be silent in nature. Construction activity should be limited to 

8am to 6pm and there should be no parking on Wheatfield’s for construction or site staff 

vehicles, no queuing of delivery vehicles on Wheatfield’s, and the access roadways to the 

site should be cleared twice daily as is the practice on residential development sites, with 

care not to block the storm drain with detritus. 

Highways Authority: The level of car parking proposed for the site is considered 

satisfactory. However it is noted that the site will be subject to lighting of the access and the 

parking areas and whilst it is not anticipated that there would be any issue in relation to this, 

before recommending conditions it is requested that the applicant be asked to provide 

details of the lighting design, so that any adverse highway impact can be assessed. 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: Following a review of the 

RPS Environmental Risk Assessment report, no further comments are required from a 

contaminated land perspective. 

Environmental Health- Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance: NO 

OBJECTION As there is going to be an externally located generator it is requested that a 

condition is imposed relating to control of noise emanating from the site. There is mention of 

an acoustic fence for the generator but full details would be required of predicted noise 

levels from the generator. The condition would require the applicant to identify al possible 

sources of noise and establish any methods/controls that could be put in place to ensure that 

the noise source does not cause any disturbance to neighbouring residents; this would 

include any external plant and machinery. When considering whether attenuation methods 

are required it would be necessary to look at different sound power levels or sound pressure 

levels at prescribed distances and take account of the average background noise levels of 

the area. 

Norfolk Constabulary: The applicant's intention to pursue a Secured by Design Award for 

this development is welcomed. However it is considered that a rumble strip or change of 

surface together with brick pillars be incorporated at the road entrance of the site to create a 

symbolic barrier. Planting should have a maximum growth height of 1 metre; trees should be 

pruned to a minimum height of 2 metres, which maintains a clear field of vision around the 

site. Trees should not provide climbing aids. 

A carefully designed lighting scheme should cover all vulnerable areas. White light to British 

Standard BS5489 is advisable. 

Common entrances to the units should have opaque, vandal resistant, compact fluorescent 

bulkhead lights operated by photo electric cells fixed above them at high accessible points. 

The storage area for the mini-bus would be more secure if it was a garage as opposed to a 

canopy to provide complete protection to the vehicle, although it is acknowledged the 

intention to enhance the potential target areas with motion sensors. 

Natural England: No comment to make in respect of this application 

Environment Agency: No comment to make upon the specific reserved matters 

submission. 

Landscape Officer: Concern is expressed about the effect of the proposed French drain 

along the eastern boundary on the very significant oak tree growing just within the garden of 

a Wheatfield’s property. This will effectively sever the roots of this tree which contributes to 


6 th July 2009

the landscape, the screening and the bio-diversity of both the houses and the new site. The 

tree is likely to die from both root loss and loss of the ground water that currently supplies it. 

The tree is shown in the photos on drawing 2025/P25 (of the eastern boundary and more 

clearly along the northern boundary to Wheatfield’s). The tree also may be affected by site 

works including constructing the tree lined walk and mounding. 

It is therefore recommended that this proposed drainage is amended so that any drains or 

other site works are outside the root protection area of this tree, as defined by BS5837:2005 

and that the tree is also protected by fencing designed to this standard. It is also 

recommended that all trees retained around the site are protected to this standard. Thus an 

Arboricultural implication assessment, method statement and root protection plan to BS 

5837 are recommended, and that the drainage plan is revised to ensure the protection and 

retention of boundary trees. The tree is currently helping to drain the site around it because 

of its relatively high water uptake due to its species and size. 

The development also requires a detailed landscape scheme to address the issues of 

development in the countryside, and the amenity of both site users and existing residents, so 

a condition is needed for this. 

Campaign to Protect Rural England: Concern is expressed in relation to the effect the 

development will have on the quality of life of residents who adjoin the site. In particular 

concern is expressed in relation to over-looking and noise generation activities which are 

located towards the properties in Wheatfield’s. 

In relation to lighting it is confirmed that this will certainly change the character and 

appearance of this dark skies area. The External Lighting Report says that the lighting will be 

controlled by time switches and photocells but does not specify the time periods over which 

lights will be switched on and what proportion of the lights will be 'dusk to dawn'. The 

proposed 70 watt high pressure sodium lamps will produce a very urbanising effect on 

surrounding rural landscapes. There are more energy efficient white light sources currently 

available, these should be used. The report refers to the shielding of lights it does not specify 

the use of the full cut off flat glass fitments. Such lights not only minimise upward light spill 

but they also reduce the horizontal light spill over the surrounding areas. 


Twenty-one letters of representation have been received. Fourteen of these letters support 

the application. The letters of objection raise the following concerns: 

• Consultation exercise carried out by the applicant was just a 'tick box' exercise; 

• Two storey element is much closer towards gardens resulting in over-looking; 

• Drainage measures are too vague; 

• Should be responsibility for the maintenance of adjoining ditches and an undertaking 

by the Environment Agency to investigate the aquifer on site; 

• Footpath on the eastern side of the site should be deleted; 

• Concern in relation to light pollution from the building and adjoining car parking 

areas; 

• Substantial landscaping should be incorporated and be in place before work in 

commenced; 

• The earth mound should be in the order of 3 metres in height along the eastern 

fringes of the site; 

• Impact on wildlife needs to be fully assessed; 

• Time limits should be imposed relating to hours of construction; 

• Concern in relation to traffic assess and parking; 


6 th July 2009

• Request that there is a clause to say that the if the project cannot be started until 

there is a guarantee of adequate funding for completion and maintenance; 

• Concern in relation to noise generated from the site; 

• French Drain should be sited further away from boundary of Wheatfield’s, vegetation 

roots would be less likely to intrude upon the house gardens; 

• The strip of land to the north of the site had not been shown on previous coloured 

plans, has this land now been acquired? 

• No parking should be allowed in Wheatfield’s or Wheatfield’s Close; 

• Bund should be located as close to the boundary of gardens in Wheatfield’s as is 

sensibly possible; 

• Construction detritus should be removed daily; 

• French drain promised to residents at the meeting with Tapping House will not be a 

priority and may not come to fruition; 

• Use of the site as hospice will open the way up for future commercial/industrial use; 

• Service area to close to resident of Wheatfield’s; 

• General style of building has no regard for form and character of the village; and 

• No provision for green energy. 

• The letters of support raise the following points: 

• A desperate need for a hospice to provide care for people from Norfolk and beyond; 

• The design and layout have been conceived in a sympathetic manner; and 

• An increasing aged population will benefit from the hospice facilities. 





PPS9 - “Biodiversity and Geological Conservation” (2005) aims to promote sustainable 

development, to conserve, enhance and restore the diversity of England’s wildlife and 

geology, and to contribute to rural renewal and urban renaissance. 




PPS23 - “Planning and Pollution Control” (2004) contains guidance on the consideration of 

land, air and water quality issues, the pollution control regime, and the development of 

contaminated land. 









6 th July 2009




Policy WAT4: Flood Risk Management - States that the priorities are to defend existing 

properties from flooding and locate new development where there is little or no risk of 

flooding. 



application: 




4/6 - aims to protect areas of important landscape quality from inappropriate development. 


The application seeks approval of reserved matters following the original grant of outline 

permission in 2008. The principle of the construction of a hospice and associated facilities on 

this site is therefore established. 

The key issues for consideration in relation to this application are: 

• Appearance; 

• Landscaping; 

• Layout; 

• Scale; 

• Impact on Local Amenity; and 

• Other Material Considerations. 

Issues relating to the principal of development, and access were dealt with at outline stage. 

Appearance 

The site is located within defined countryside as depicted within the King's Lynn and West 

Norfolk Local Plan. The core principle of PPS7 'Sustainable Development in Rural Areas’, is 

making decisions using the principles of sustainable development. Alongside protection of 

the environment and maintaining high and stable levels of economic growth and employment 

is social inclusion, recognising the needs of everyone. 

PPS1, which encourages all new developments to be of a high standard of design, 

establishes the design of new development to be an important material consideration in the 

determination of all planning applications. 

The building proposed does not seek to replicate any existing buildings within the vicinity, 

and a design has been put forward for a modern building to house the facility which is quite 

different and unique to the area. The layout plans show the building having a horseshoe 

layout around 65m wide and 65m deep. Accommodation would be predominantly single 


6 th July 2009

storey along the curve of the horseshoe in a building with a maximum height of around 7.2m 

although most is shown as being no more than 5m high. The two ends of the horseshoe are 

joined by a two-storey element, with the first floor set back above the ground floor with a 

maximum height of 8.4m. 

The types of materials to be used include carrstone/Sandringham stone on key building 

features together with local character bricks. Three different roof finishes are proposed 

including blue/black slate, particularly over the single storey element, terracotta colour 

pantiles on the two storey roofs and a small amount of copper on key features. Cedar 

cladding is also used in horizontal boards which are designed to weather to a natural silver 

colour. 

It is, however, considered that the success of this particular building depends upon a high 

quality of construction and material finishes. The specifics of this can be controlled by 

condition in order to ensure an appropriate palette of materials and location thereof. 

Landscaping 

Large areas of landscaping have been shown on the submitted plans. A precise planting 

scheme including details of species and planting densities has not been submitted. In 

addition precise details of the hard surfacing and other structures for example seating, and 

the garden pavilion have not been included, however this could all be controlled by 

condition. 

The landscape officer raises concern in relation to an existing oak tree in an adjacent 

properties and the impact of a French drain. He recommends that an Arboricultural 

implication assessment, method statement and root protection plan to BS 5837 are provided 

for the development and that the drainage plan is revised to ensure the protection and 

retention of boundary trees. 

It is considered that this can be suitably addressed under the original drainage condition and 

it is suggested that an informative is added stating notwithstanding the information submitted 

the drainage scheme shall take into account the Oak tree which the Landscape Officer refers 

to. When a scheme is submitted under condition 8 of the outline consent the impact upon 

this tree shall be fully taken into account in order to ensure its retention. 

Layout 

The building location is located fairly centrally within the application site. The building is 

based around a central court-yard feature. Surrounding the building are areas for car parking 

and landscaped areas. Car-parking is located to the east of the building in close proximity to 

the front entrance foyer. In terms of internal layout the second floor area is used for 

administration/office accommodation for staff; no patient accommodation is located in this 

area. 

The ground floor area is separated into four distinct zones; in patient area, day care, outpatient 

and service area. These zones are defined for the most part by glazed areas 

sections with the exception the transfer from service area to in patient area. 

Scale 

The building proposed is largely single storey in nature with a two storey element to the east 

facing elevation. The design of the building incorporates a shallow pitch in order to keep the 

level of the ridge height as low as possible. In addition it is noted that the proposal is 


6 th July 2009

designed as a series of connected buildings to assist in the break up of the massing and 

bulk. 

The two storey element is located on the east facing elevation and forms the front elevation, 

which would be seen on arrival into the site, this element has a maximum height of 

approximately 7.5 metres. This height is comparable with the scale of two storey dwelling 

houses. 

Impact on Local Amenity 

The nearest properties affected by this development are located on Wheatfields to the east 

of the site. All vehicles visiting the site would access from Station Road and onto Wheatfields 

and the car parking on site. 

The nearest property at number 3 Wheatfields (two-storey) is situated approximately 67 

metres from the proposed development. A two-storey Hospice building is proposed in this 

area which has an out patients area on the ground floor and a staff training room first floor. It 

is therefore considered that the proposal is sufficiently far away from local residential 

properties not to have a detrimental impact on their amenity. 

A gravel path is proposed to run adjacent to Wheatfields. However, in order to limit concerns 

in relation to overlooking into the gardens of properties in Wheatfields the applicant has been 

asked to realign this path and an amended plan/comment is outstanding on this issue. 

In relation to noise Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance have confirmed that 

they have no objection, subject to the condition. 


Issues have been raised in respect of lighting to the site; it is considered that a suitable 

scheme can be secured by a condition. Environmental Health has requested conditions 

relating to noise, and whilst a condition has been imposed relating to the detail of an 

acoustic fence around a generator, a general noise survey cannot be requested at this 

reserved matters stage. 

An issue has been raised in relation to construction activity from the consultation process 

carried out. This has already been secured by condition on the outline consent. Condition 17 

states that site clearance works and or construction including the delivery of personnel and 

materials shall only take place during the period 0700 and 1900 Monday to Fridays and 0800 

and 1300 on Saturdays. The condition precludes activity on Sundays and bank holidays. 

This condition would therefore limit the noise generated from the site during the construction 

period. Concern is raised by third party objectors in relation to light pollution and landscaping 

conditions have been attached to the this submission in order that these aspects can be 

controlled. 

It is not considered reasonable for the Local Planning Authority to impose a condition stating 

that the works cannot be started until there is adequate funding in place for completion and 

maintenance. It is also confirmed that the site area of the outline and reserved matters 

application are the same. 

Some residents of Wheatfield and Wheatfields Close have raised concern in relation to 

parking of vehicles in these residential streets. A condition could not be reasonably imposed 

to restrict such activity and in addition it would be difficult to enforce. It is also acknowledged 

that cars can be parked there presently. 


6 th July 2009

The Parish Council make reference that only water capture will be used and the water will 

only be recycled in watering the garden areas. However, the plans submitted also indicate 

that solar panels will be incorporated into an area on the southern elevation of the building. 

In addition concerns are also raised in relation to drainage issues and wildlife issues; these 

aspects were secured in the form of conditions 7, 8 and 9 on the outline consent and will still 

need to be fully met and complied with. 

Concern is raised that in allowing a hospice on this site will open the way up for future 

commercial and industrial uses, however, it is confirmed that each application is treated on 

its own merits. 

The bunding shown on the scheme will help to mitigate against noise generated from the site 

and in addition a condition has been appended to this consent to make provision for an 

acoustic fence around the externally located generator. 

CONCLUSION 

The principle of developing a hospice has already been accepted by the approval of 

07/02568/OM. Only the remaining reserved maters are to be approved, and the proposed 

development is satisfactory in terms of its design, scale, layout, locational relationship to 

existing development adjacent to the site, and impact upon the locality in general. 









2 Condition Notwithstanding the details submitted with the application, no development 

shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been 

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details 

shall include finished levels or contours, hard surface materials, refuse or other storage 

units, street furniture, structures and other minor artefacts. Soft landscape works shall 

include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations 

associated with plant and grass establishment) schedules of plants noting species, 

plant sizes and proposed numbers and densities where appropriate. 










6 th July 2009




4 Condition Prior to the commencement of the development a detailed outdoor lighting 

scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

The scheme shall include details of the type of lights, the orientation/angle of the 

luminaries, the spacing and height of the lighting columns, the extent/levels of 

illumination over the site and on adjacent land and the measures to contain light within 

the curtilage of the site. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with 

approved scheme and thereafter maintained. 

4 Reason In the interests of minimising light pollution and to safeguard the amenities of 

the locality. 

5 Condition Prior to the erection of any walls and fences precise details of the siting, 

design and materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local 

Planning Authority. The approved walls and fences shall be erected prior to the 

hospice to which they relate being first occupied in the approved form. 

5 Reason To ensure a satisfactory external appearance. 

6 Condition Full detail of the acoustic fence to be erected around the externally located 

generator shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority 

to prior to the first use of the generator. The approved detail shall be erected and 

installed prior to the first use of the generator. 

6 Reason In order to protect the amenities of adjacent residential properties and in the 

interests of visual amenity in accordance with PPS1 and PPG24. 


Application file reference: 09/00699/RMM 




6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Brancaster 

Conversion of house into two dwellings 


Cornerways Cottage Main Road Brancaster King's Lynn 

Client Of R C F Waite 


Case Officer: Mrs K Lawty 

Tel: 01553 616403 



Reason for Referral to DCB – The Parish Council object to overdevelopment of the site. 

Case Summary 

The site comprises Cornerways Cottage, a two storey semi-detached dwelling with private 

walled garden. The property adjoins Brancaster House to the west, which has recently been 

converted into three smaller residential units. The site is bounded to the north, north east 

and east by detached dwellings and their gardens. To the south on the opposite side of the 

road are other residential properties. 

This application seeks full planning permission for the conversion and extension of the 

existing property to create two separate dwellings with associated parking, following the 

demolition of the existing garage and fascia of the house. 

The site is within the Conservation Area and the AONB. 

Key Issues 


The design, form and character of the development 

The impact of the development upon the Conservation Area 

Impact upon the AONB 

Highway implications 

Residential amenity 


APPROVE 


This application seeks full planning permission for the conversion and extension of the 

existing property to create two separate dwellings with associated parking, following the 

demolition of the existing garage and fascia of the house. 

The site is within the Conservation Area and the AONB. 


6 th July 2009

Previously planning permission was refused under delegated powers for the conversion of 

the house into two dwellings (LPA Ref: 08/02330/F) for the following reasons:- 

1 The proposed severance of the site and extensions to the building to create two 

dwellings would lead to a cramped and contrived form of development, at odds 

with and not in harmony with the form and character of the building 

characteristics of the locality contrary to Policy 4/21 of the King's Lynn and West 

Norfolk Local Plan, 1998. 

2 The proposed extensions to the building required to create two dwellings would 

result in the loss of the articulation of the differing roof heights and the character 

of the building. As the building is prominent in the streetscene this would have a 

harmful effect upon the character of the Conservation Area, contrary to the 

provisions of PPG15 - Planning and the Historic Environment. 

3 The layout of the proposed development would result in a poor relationship 

between the communal parking area and the principal living room of Unit 1 and 

have a significantly detrimental impact upon the amenity of the residents thereof. 

The proposed development, therefore, is considered to be contrary to the aims 

and objectives of PPS1 and PPG3 which seeks to provide high quality new 

development and improve the well being for communities. 

This application has been amended so that the site has been divided in a way that Unit 1 

has more amenity space and the proposed communal parking area is no longer immediately 

adjacent to its living room windows. The revised design has now incorporated more 

articulation and variation into the roof formation. 


The application has been supported by a Design and Access Statement. This states that the 

existing property consists of a large two-storey dwelling, incorporating Kitchen, Dining Room, 

Sitting Room, Utility, and Study at Ground Floor with four Bedrooms and Bathroom at First 

Floor. The property also contains, within its site, a large Garage Outbuilding, all as illustrated 

on Drawing No 2/275/4B. 

The proposal is to convert this building into two smaller properties which can be carefully 

achieved with alterations internally, together with an extension of the existing property to the 

north of the site. 

The site of the existing property will allow conversion, maintaining the existing building to the 

south (fronting on to the main road) with an extension of the building, as illustrated on 

Drawing No 2/275/2F. 

The proposals will create two units of the following floor areas: Unit 1 (north) 107 sq. metres 

total floor area and Unit 2 (south) 109 sq. metres total floor area. Both units will create a two 

bedroom property, each with Kitchen, Dining Room, Sitting Room and WC at Ground Floor 

and with en-suite(s) and Bathroom at First Floor, as shown on Drawing No 2/275/2F. 

Following initial consultation with the Planning Officer, the proposed development is planned 

to make best use of the existing buildings and to be in keeping with the local area in terms of 

size of property and amenity space and would be comparable to the adjoining site 

(Brancaster House to which this is attached). 


6 th July 2009

The existing property is sheltered within the masonry boundary wall to all sides and the 

nature of the site provides private spaces which it is proposed to maintain by carefully 

arranging the site and segregation of the land to provide each unit with sufficient individual 

space, whilst minimising the impact of overlooking and retaining the village essence of the 


The proposal for the site includes for the adjustment of the existing access slightly to the 

east to allow provision for parking spaces to each property (two spaces each) and allow for 

vehicles to turn to exit the site in forward gear. The nature of the site offers good accessibility 

directly on to the A149 and we indicate on Drawing No 2/275/I, the visibility along this road in 

both directions, exceeding 100 metres. This provides a good link into the village transport 

network, with the village being provided with good local bus services. 

The scale of the development will be limited in terms of changing the street scene with the 

majority of new works being located within the site and not affecting the elevation fronting on 

to the main road hidden behind a high wall. 

The landscaping for the development is proposed to provide walls in brick and flint for 

segregation between the individual properties and provide amenity space for each unit. 

It is proposed to construct the parking areas, rearranging the existing drive and turning area 

and continuing with the gravelled finish with the construction of flint/brick walls, indicating the 

boundary to this area to provide both security and screening. 

It is proposed to lay the gardens to the properties with a mixture of grass and paved areas 

with mixed planting, in order to maintain gardens within the two individual properties. 

The proposed materials for the new build will be of brick with flint infill panels to match local 

buildings within the village and with clay pantile roof to match the existing with the removal of 

the existing flat roof building and the painted brick walls which are currently present, 

windows and doors will be painted timber, all of which provides a consistent appearance 

replacing the slightly ad-hoc present arrangement. 

The site currently has access through double gates, providing access to and from the main 

road. This access currently allows for vehicles to access and leave the site in a forward gear 

and it is proposed, with the new development, to maintain this. It is proposed to move the 

access slightly, to enlarge the opening width and provide the visibility as stated above to 

both the east and the west. 

Four car parking spaces in total are proposed adjacent to the eastern boundary wall in the 

location of the existing garage. 

The turning area has been maintained and enlarged to allow the turning of vehicles to 

maintain the forward gear exit from the site and to allow passing space to come into and out 

of the site. 

The scope of the present house is such that significant numbers of cars might be generated 

as it stands and the car movements generated by two smaller units would not result in a 

major potential traffic increase over the existing property. 

The current gated main access arrangement would be done away with, with individual gate 

accesses to both properties, thus removing the need for a gate on the boundary from 

swinging across the existing path/road as it does at present. 


6 th July 2009


09/00811/CA – Conversion of house into two dwellings - Conservation Area consent not 

required 

09/00809/F – Construction of new dwelling – refused 

08/02332/CA – - Demolition of existing garage and house facia – approved conditionally 

08/02330/F - Conversion of house into two dwellings following demolition of existing garage 

and house facia - Refused 

08/02328/F - Construction of new dwelling - refused 


Parish Council: OBJECT – overdevelopment of site 

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION - conditionally 

Environmental Health & Housing – Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance: 

Queried surface material of parking area and surface water run-off 

Norfolk Constabulary: made comments regarding crime prevention measures 

Environment Agency: No comment 


Five third party letters received referring to the following:- 

• Brancaster House is already being converted into 3 units and this proposal is 

inappropriate for this area of the village 

• Additional cars will be required in relation to the proposal which will park on a very 

busy and dangerous road. 

• This corner will be overdeveloped if 7 units are proposed, akin to a small estate 

rather than village cottages 

• The size of the units is far too large and will increase both the noise level and the 

number of cars accessing the busy A149 

• Reversing onto the A149 will be very dangerous with fast moving traffic 

• Will exacerbate existing parking problems in the area particularly during holiday and 

school time; cars already park along London Street and this will make matters worse 

• The mains drainage is already overloaded, with raw sewage backing up and entering 

private households 

• Concerns over the encroachment of the northerly dwelling at ground and first floor 

level towards our property increasing overlooking 

• The dwelling would enjoy a reasonable amount of amenity space 

• Concerned that application 09/00809/F assumes that application 09/00810/F will be 

approved 

• The access is obscured by the bus stop. This wonderful bus service and provision of 

a school are vital to the life of the village; don’t let the overdevelopment compromise 

the rural amenities further. 


6 th July 2009

• The site is close to the area where children are being taken to school and collected 

and it is already quite dangerous as it is, this will add to the danger. 







PPS7 - “Sustainable Development in Rural Areas” (2004) aims to promote sustainable 

patterns of development in rural areas and contains specific advice on the consideration of 

applications for agricultural dwellings. 










Policy ENV2: Landscape Conservation - Planning authorities and other agencies should, in 

accordance with statutory requirements, afford the highest level of protection to the East of 

England’s nationally designated landscapes and in particularly in Areas of Outstanding 

Natural Beauty (AONB), priority over other considerations should be given to conserving the 

natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. 










flooding. 


6 th July 2009






locality. 




Parish Plans 


The principle issues for consideration for this application are:- 


• The design, form and character of the development 

• The impact of the development upon the Conservation Area 

• Impact upon the AONB 

• Highway implications 

• Residential amenity 

Principle of development and design, form and character of the development 

The site is within the village of Brancaster and within the Built Environment Type C where, in 

principle, new development will be permitted provided it has regard for and is in harmony 

with the building characteristics of the locality. The site is within the AONB, where 

development which has a significantly detrimental impact upon the natural beauty of the 

landscape will not be permitted. 

The site currently functions as a single dwelling with garden land to the east. Access to the 

site is currently directly onto the main A149 with garaging to the south east corner of the site. 

Cornerways Cottage backs onto the adjoining Brancaster House so that all its windows face 

east over its own site. This adjoining property, Brancaster House to the west is currently 

being converted into three units. 

This proposal shows the reinstatement and extension of the house outwards to the west and 

its conversion into two, 2 bedroom dwellings. 

The proposed extension simplifies the detailing to the east elevation and proposes two 

projecting two storey gables. It is proposed to be constructed of traditional, local materials 

including flint and brick. 

Unit 1 is shown to have a small courtyard providing private amenity space on the northern 

and eastern side of the projecting gable. Unit 2 also has associated garden land to the east 

of the projecting gable. However, a planning application has been submitted to construct a 

dwelling on the most easterly part of this proposed amenity land to Unit 2. This has recently 

been refused planning permission under delegated powers due to the resulting cramped 


6 th July 2009

form of development, being out of keeping with the building characteristics of the locality and 

the detrimental impact upon the character of the Conservation Area. The two applications 

are separate, however, and each must be considered on its individual merits. 

Parking for both units is shown to be in a communal car parking area at the south eastern 

corner of the site. Access to the site has been improved by widening the existing access and 

moving it eastwards which improves visibility along the main road. 

The proposed sub division of the site has been amended since the previous application. 

The amount of private amenity space for each unit is more appropriate to the scale of the 

dwellings and the revised layout has allowed for provision of parking and bin storage 

facilities without resulting in a cramped development. The proposal no longer results in 

parked vehicles directly adjacent to windows serving principal living rooms. 

With this regard the proposal is now considered to accord with the aims and objectives of 

saved Local Plan Policy 4/21 as the proposal is in harmony with the building characteristics 

of the locality. The proposal accords with the fundamental aims and objectives of PPS1 and 

PPS3 with regard to the promotion of good quality [urban and] rural regeneration to improve 

the well being of communities, improve facilities, promote high quality and safe development 

and create new opportunities for the people living in those communities. 

Parish Council and third party concern has been raised regarding overdevelopment of this 

part of Brancaster, particularly given the recent conversion of the adjoining property, 

Brancaster House, into three separate units. As stated above, however, each application is 

considered on its individual merits and this application would result in only one additional 

dwelling. It is not considered that this application would result in overdevelopment of the 

site. 

The impact of the development upon the Conservation Area 

PPG15 seeks to ensure that any proposed building preserves or enhances the character of 

the Conservation Area. 

The dwelling is set behind a boundary wall but mostly visible from the main coastal road. 

The Conservation Officer raised concern regarding the previous planning application for the 

conversion of this building to achieve the two dwellings. However, this revised scheme now 

incorporates an element of articulation with the proposed differing roof heights and 

staggered walls along the eastern elevation. The Conservation Officer welcomes the roof 

articulation but comments that the excessively large windows on the first floor reduce the 

flintwork to narrow strips in places. It is suggested that a render could be used instead, 

which would be in keeping with local building materials. 

Since the submission of these comments, however, and in response to them, the applicant 

has agreed to submit an amended plan which reduces the width of the windows, increasing 

the amount of walling. At the time of writing this report, however, the amended plan had not 

arrived. If this amended plan is not received prior to the meeting it is therefore 

recommended that a condition be imposed seeking full details of the first floor windows and 

their dimensions to be submitted prior to commencement of the development. The applicant 

has also agreed that a mixture of external building materials be used to reflect those found 

locally. A condition is recommended to be imposed allowing for the full details of the external 

materials to be submitted prior to commencement of any development. 

It is considered that the proposal will now preserve the character of the Conservation Area 

and accords with the provisions of PPG15. 


6 th July 2009

Impact upon the AONB 

The site is within the AONB, where development which has a significantly detrimental impact 

upon the natural beauty of the landscape will not be permitted. In terms of the design and 

scale, PPS7 discusses the need for dwellings in the countryside and AONB to be of an 

appropriate design and scale for their location. PPS7 emphasises the importance of 

protecting the appearance of areas designated as AONB and states that great weight should 

be placed on their conservation. 

The proposed works will be visible from beyond the site along the main coastal road. 

However, the site is surrounded by other buildings and as it does not have an open ‘rural’ 

setting it is not considered that the proposal will be detrimental to the appearance of the 

AONB. 

Highway implications 

There is no objection to the proposal in terms of highway safety. Third party objectors have 

raised concerns about the potential dangers of parking on the highway outside the property 

in London Street which they say would not be satisfactory and could be dangerous to 

pedestrians. However, the level of off-street parking provision proposed accords with the 

recently adopted parking standards and the site can provide sufficient parking for its own 

needs. The application would not likely result in additional on-street parking and the 

Highways Authority has raised no concerns over this aspect. 

Residential amenity 

Concern is raised regarding the overlooking of neighbouring property by the occupants of 

proposed Unit 2. The relationship between the proposed development and the existing 

surrounding development to the north has been examined. Although the development will 

be seen from beyond the site, it is not considered there would be a significantly detrimental 

impact upon the amenity of the occupants of adjoining properties through overlooking. 

There will be some overshadowing caused by the two storey extension but this will 

principally be to garden land and not to adjoining properties. Similarly, the increase in noise 

and activity is unlikely to be significant or cause a significantly detrimental impact upon the 

amenity of the occupants of adjoining properties. 

Crime and Disorder Act 1998 

Section 17 of the above act requires Local Authorities to consider the implications for crime 

and disorder in the carrying out of their duties. The application will not have a material 

impact upon crime and disorder. 

Other considerations 

Concern has been raised regarding inadequate sewage and drainage facilities impact of the 

proposal upon the sewage system. There have been previous incidents reported of 

blockages to the system and concern is raised about their increased usage. The application 

states that the proposed dwelling would link into the existing mains drainage system to 

London Road. Connecting into mains drainage is in line with government advice and there 

has been no objection received from the utilities company. It is not considered that an 

increase of one additional dwelling would have any significant impact upon the mains 

drainage system sufficient to warrant refusal of the application. 


6 th July 2009

CONCLUSION 

The application as amended now results in an acceptable proposal in terms of design and 

amenity of occupants and neighbours. The increase in density can be achieved without 

harm to the form and character of this part of Brancaster or the Conservation Area. 

Adequate parking facilities can be provided within the site and there are no outstanding 

highways concerns. 

In the light of National Guidance, saved Development Plan Policies and other material 

considerations it is recommended that planning permission be approved for the development 

as proposed subject for the following conditions. 







2 Condition Notwithstanding the details that accompanied the application hereby 

permitted, the type, colour and texture of all materials to be used for the external 

surfaces of the building(s) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local 

Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development. The development 

shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 










vehicular access shall be constructed in accordance with the Norfolk County Council 

residential access construction specification, and additionally to accord with details to 

be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, for the first 4m into the site as 

measured back from the near edge of the adjacent carriageway. 

4 Reason To ensure satisfactory access into the site 

5 Condition Vehicular and pedestrian access to and egress from the adjoining highway 

shall be limited to the access shown on drawing No 2/275/2F only. Any other access or 

egresses shall be permanently closed, and the footway shall be reinstated in 

accordance the Norfolk County Council Footway construction and additionally to 

accord with details to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, 

concurrently with the bringing into use of the new access. 


6 th July 2009

5 Reason In the interests of highway safety. 

6 Condition Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted a visibility 

splay shall be provided in full accordance with the details indicated on the approved 

plan. The splay shall thereafter be maintained free from any obstruction exceeding 

1.05 metres above the level of the adjacent highway carriageway. 


7 Condition Prior to the first use of the development hereby permitted the proposed 

access / on-site parking and turning areas shall be laid out, in accordance with the 

approved plan and retained thereafter available for that specific use. 



8 Condition Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General 

Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order 

with or without modification), no new windows/dormer windows (other than those 

expressly authorised by this permission), shall be allowed without the granting of 

specific planning permission. 

8 Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may retain control of development 

which might be detrimental to the amenities of the locality if otherwise allowed by the 

mentioned Order. 

9 Condition Prior to the commencement of the development full details of the first floor 

windows shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

The plans shall detail the dimensions, joinery details and opening arrangements. The 

development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. 

9 Reason To ensure that the design and appearance of the development is appropriate 

in accordance with the principles of PPS1. 






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Burnham Overy 

Construction of 6 bedroom detached dwelling 


The Arboretum East Harbour Way Burnham Overy Staithe Norfolk 

Mr J Danziger 



Tel: 01553 616403 


2nd July 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – Parish Council object as the proposal is not in keeping with 

the village. 

Case Summary 

The site is on the northern side of Wells Road, Burnham Overy Staithe. It is vacant land with 

a large number of trees on the southern half of the site. It is surrounded by residential 

properties of a variety of sizes and types, ranging from large, detached traditional houses to 

terraced cottages. The site boundaries are defined by a variety of walls and fences of 

around 2m in height. Access is via a track off East Harbour Way. 

The proposal is to construct a two storey house with accommodation in the roof in the centre 

of the site and a detached one-and-a-half storey garage/boat store on the western boundary. 

The design of the house is traditional for the most part but it will have a more contemporarylooking 

wing to the west. Access will be via the existing track. 

The southern half of the site is BEA and the northern is BEC. The whole is in the 

Conservation Area and the AONB. 

Key Issues 


Impact on form and character, including Conservation Area and AONB 

Flood risk 

Impact on Trees; 

Impact on Residential Amenity; 

Crime & Disorder 

Other Issues 


APPROVE 


This application for full planning permission seeks consent for the construction of a 6 

bedroom detached dwelling. The site already has planning permission for a detached 


6 th July 2009

dwelling and a detached garage/boat store, which expires in May 2010. The principal of a 

large single dwelling on this site has therefore already been established. 

Earlier this year an application for full planning permission was submitted for a dwelling of 

similar design, but was withdrawn to allow further consideration of outstanding flood risk 

issues and to consider officer concerns regarding the lack of local distinctiveness of the 

design of the dwelling. 

This application is for an individually designed, contemporary dwelling set in a ‘T’ shaped 

layout. The dwelling has been specifically designed to respond to the opportunities and 

constraints peculiar to this site, particularly with regard to flood risk issues, trees, 

overlooking, its location in the Conservation Area and the AONB. Since the last application 

the flood risk issues have been addressed. External materials proposed to be used for the 

dwelling have been amended to better reflect those found in the village. This follows a study 

by the applicant of properties in the village and their external material of construction. 

The southern half of the site is denoted as Built Environment Type A where development is 

strictly controlled and the northern is Built Environment Type C where development is 

permitted provided it is in harmony with the building characteristics of the area. 

The site is within the Conservation Area and also within the AONB. 

The site shares a common boundary with Staithe House, a Grade II listed building to the 

west of the main site. 


The application has been supported by a comprehensive Design and Access Statement, 

Planning Statement and a Flood Risk Assessment. 

The Design and Access Statement summarises the key points of the document thus:- 

• The Arboretum site has Planning Consent for a large family house and separate 

garage that occupies a greater footprint on the land, than this proposal. The extant 

planning consent will be built by the Applicant should this application; fail to retain the 

full value of the land. 

• The planning consent dwelling has a ridge height higher than the proposal in this 

application. 

• The Planning consent ridge height is 15.0m AOD. The Application ridge height is 

14.75m AOD. The application design is therefore 250mm (10”) lower. 

• The Arboretum site is the largest ‘single house’ building plot in the village. 

• A survey of the largest houses in the village shows that this proposal is both mid 

range in terms of footprint size, and density/plot ratio. 

• By placing a development in the centre of the site, there will be no overlooking into 

adjacent properties. 

• It will be very difficult to see the new house, except aver a 1 .8m (6’) fence from the 

public footpath. No view will be possible from a public highway once the south 

boundary close-boarded fencing is repaired. These boundary treatments add to the 

overall secluded nature of the site. 

• The properties surrounding the site are all of red brick construction, with the 

exception of a low domestic range of flint masonry, and a large timber clad garage / 

studio. 

• A detailed visual survey has been carried out, accurately logging the actual materials 

that are ‘typical’ to the village. 


6 th July 2009

• The timber cladding and the flint masonry proposed in this application are both 

chosen from the identified generic group of materials used in the village. A large part 

of the proposed building is constructed of flint work in lime mortar. 

• The highest floor of the house in the existing planning consent is at 11 .75m AOD 

and the highest floor of the proposed house in this application is 10.2m AOD. The 

potential overlooking to neighbours is therefore greatly reduced by the fact that the 

living accommodation in this proposal is 1 .55m (52”) lower than the top floor of the 

existing consent. 

• A survey and drawings show that this proposal will not overlook adjacent properties 

or Fishers to the North. The existing consent will overlook Fishers however, since it 

has floors that are higher (as above), and substantially more windows directly facing 

north. 

• There are no objections from the Highways Authority to the use of the existing 

vehicular access from East Harbour Way. 

• The northern half of the site is the only area identified in the local plan for the 

construction of the house, the southern half remains as a ‘green’ space for trees and 

landscaping. 

• The northern half of the site is partly in an area liable to tidal flooding, and the design 

of the building has been prepared in consultation with the Environment Agency, and 

addresses this issue. 

• In order to explain the three-dimensional appearance, both a physical model of the 

house and its site, and a 3D computer model have been prepared. The models show 

that the building sits comfortably within the village built form, is in scale with the 

surrounding buildings, is the right size for the large plot, and is simple in concept and 

siting. 

The Planning Statement concludes the following:- 

The proposed development is considered to provide a high quality form of development 

which will, through its sympathetic design, scale and massing, and through the proposed 

landscaped treatment of the site, preserve and to a certain degree enhance the character 

and appearance of the designated Conservation Area. The proposed development will sit 

comfortably within its landscaped setting and will not adversely affect any of the adjacent 

residential properties. In relation to flood risk, the detailed design ensures that the 

development is not at risk from flooding nor will it increase the risk of flooding elsewhere. 

Indeed that which is proposed will offer significant flood risk benefits in relation to that 

approved in 2007 and would deliver a more sustainable form of development that will be 

protected from flooding for the lifetime of the development. 

The principle of erecting a dwelling on this site has already been established and this 

amended form of development is found to positively respond to all relevant national, regional 

and local planning policies. It is therefore the applicant’s opinion that this revised application 

should be supported. 

The Flood Risk Assessment concludes:- 

The Kings Lynn & West Norfolk Local Plan divides The Arboretum site into two parts across 

the centre of the site. Built development is allowed in the northern “coastal” half of the site 

(Type C allocation) whereas no development is allowed in the southern part of the site up to 

the A149 coast road. (Type A allocation). This single factor limits the application of the 

flooding sequential test approach at a site level. 

The Arboretum site has an extant and implementable planning consent for a large family 

house and separate garage. This planning consent is a material consideration in the flooding 

sequential test undertaken by the Local Planning Authority. Similarly the string of residential 


6 th July 2009

planning consents for four different schemes since 1999 highlights the intention of the local 

planning authority for this site. 

• This planning application proposes a dwelling with improved flood resilience and a 

reduced footprint from that within the extant permission. 

• The minimum finished floor level for habitable accommodation in this location is 

6.6Om AOD. The development proposal has no habitable accommodation below 

7.50m AOD. The lower ground floor, which is set at 5.0Dm AOD, comprises parking 

for boats/cars and a WC only. 

• The design includes a permanent dry access/egress route to Flood Zone 1 land to 

the south. From here the local highway network provides access to potential places 

of refuge and surrounding villages. 

• The design includes a permanent driveway to higher ground within the southern part 

of the site, to provide a dry refuge for cars in the event of a flood. 

• There will be no flood water displaced under the development proposals as the site is 

partly affected by a tidal flood plain as opposed to a fluvial flood plain. 

• Surface water runoff will be managed via infiltration techniques in accordance with 

best practice sustainable drainage systems. 


09/00268/F - Construction of 6 bed dwelling and associated works - Application Withdrawn 

06/02402/F - Construction of one dwelling and detached garage/boat store - Application 

Permitted - 03.05.2007 

2/02/00128/F – Construction of dwelling house at ‘The Arboretum’ – permitted 2002 

2/00/00279/F – Construction of house and garage at ‘The Arboretum’, East Harbour Way, 

Brancaster – permitted April 2000 

CONSULTATIONS 

Town/Parish Council: OBJECT - this proposal is not in keeping with the village 

Local Highway Authority (NCC): NO OBJECTION - subject to conditions 

Environment Agency: NO OBJECTION - subject to conditions 

BCKLWN - Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: NO COMMENT 

on contaminated land perspective 

BCKLWN – Conservation Team: NO OBJECTION whilst this is very different from the 

approved scheme, it provides a striking modern house of some style. Views into the site are 

limited; it makes no impact on the street scene and views from the coastal path are 

restricted. So it must be considered within its own ‘woodland’ setting. The siting, choice of 

timber and flint seem appropriate. The principle of a large house has been accepted and 

this is an unusual site where development will have little impact on the wider Conservation 

Area, but a strong impact on the site itself, creating a pleasant setting for a C21 large house 

within the trees. 

BCKLWN – Landscape Officer: NO OBJECTION provided the preparation of and 

adherence to a scheme of tree protection for those trees and hedges shown to be retained 


6 th July 2009

to the recommended standards of BS5837:2005. Separately under Conservation Area S211 

rules there is no objection to the felling of trees shown on the submitted plan, including the 

laying of the hedge on the eastern boundary, some of which has been done. 


Four representations have been received raising the following issues: - 

• the proposed building will present a frontage both high and wide which will clearly 

change the look of the line of houses from the popular sea walk north of the site 

• No guarantee this will be screened from view by planting 

• It would not matter if part of the dwelling was visible if it was in keeping but this is a 

box shaped design, totally inconsistent with the adjoining properties 

• The large north facing picture window is shown to be partially hidden by trees, but 

this is not guaranteed and the illustration could be misleading 

• A large north facing window to ‘Fishers’ was not permitted and had to be replaced 

• When we sold the site in 2000 we did so with planning consent for a totally different 

design of house which we felt was in keeping with the area; this design bears no 

relation to this approved house 

• Object to the height of the building and it will be a blot on the landscape 

• This view from the north has scarcely changed for decades despite some new 

houses which have fitted in reasonably well. The whole first floor will be visible at a 

height similar to the roof s of neighbouring houses 

• Concerns about drainage which is already subject to occasional overflow and should 

not be used for additional houses 

• The house is directly to the south of ours and needs to ‘dominate’ our southern 

aspect in order to gain a sea view 

• The building has potentially dipped beneath the water table to provide the 

accommodation and keep a low roof height. The roof is copper to gain as much 

height for the new first floor living area. 

• The chimney is industrial looking and will be visible form the sea wall and its 

thousands of visitors 

• There is a 3m high frosted glass panel facing north in an effort to provide privacy 

between our first floor windows and their proposed living area 

• Noise pollution has not been considered 

• The proposal is entirely out of keeping with its neighbours, created in a ‘modern’ 

fashion to circumvent restrictions imposed on its predecessor as to overall height and 

north facing balconies 

• Burnham Overy Staithe is a traditional linear village with ancient port, classed as a 

place of outstanding beauty. The potential set by allowing such a radical departure 

from all other buildings in the village or area is potentially damaging and will change 

the unique character 

• This modern proposal still remains a sophisticated vehicle for gaining unnaturally 

high living space and open terraces/balconies at roof top heights to the detriment of 

its neighbours, their privacy and peaceful enjoyment of their properties 

• The principles of the Conservation Area are compromised by this unique design 

• The materials used do not reflect those found locally; the detailed report into local 

materials does not reflect the percentage of total area coverage. Tar/pitch was used 

locally to seal old brickwork as it was readily available in the port and was a remedy 

not a feature 

• Red brick with flint or chalk relief typifies the village which is what thousands of 

people flock to the village to enjoy its unique historic charm 


6 th July 2009

• The large windows of the open plan living cannot be compared to overlooking from 

the dormer windows of the previously approved scheme 

• The artist’s drawing appears misleading and appears to show the roof height lower in 

comparison to its neighbour, the Granary 

• The desirability of an oxidised bronze metal roof shaped like the keel of a boat is 

dubious 

• The view from the Hard where most people park has not been mentioned 

• Sound and ambient light pollution from open terraces and balconied has not been 

properly addressed; at night you can hear sound at great distances 

• There are no streetlights and the view at night is spectacular and should be 

preserved 

• The site was not called the Arboretum and had half its site protected without reason 







PPS9 - “Biodiversity and Geological Conservation” (2005) aims to promote sustainable 

development, to conserve, enhance and restore the diversity of England’s wildlife and 

geology, and to contribute to rural renewal and urban renaissance. 













Policy H1: Regional Housing Provision 2001 – 2021 - Identifies key principles for the 

facilitation of delivery of targeted additional dwellings over the period. In King’s Lynn and 

West Norfolk, the minimum number of additional dwellings to be built is 12,000. 

Policy ENV2: Landscape Conservation - Planning authorities and other agencies should, in 

accordance with statutory requirements, afford the highest level of protection to the East of 

England’s nationally designated landscapes and in particularly in Areas of Outstanding 

Natural Beauty (AONB), priority over other considerations should be given to conserving the 

natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. 


6 th July 2009








Policy ENV3: Biodiversity and Earth Heritage - Planning authorities and other agencies 

should ensure that internationally and nationally designated sites are given the strongest 

level of protection and that development does not have adverse effects on the integrity of 

sites of European or international importance for nature conservation. 



flooding. 






locality. 


None 


The development plan comprises the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan 1998 and the 

Norfolk Structure Plan 1999. The application must be assessed against the policies of the 

development plan unless other material planning considerations indicate otherwise. 

The issues to be addressed in this instance are: - 

• Principle of development; 

• Impact upon form and character of area, including Conservation Area and AONB; 

• Flood Risk 

• Impact upon trees; and 

• Impact upon residential amenity. 

Principle of Development 

The northern half of the site is within Built Environment Type C whilst the southern half, 

closest to the road is within Built Environment Type A. There is no physical feature on site to 

define the break between the two character areas, which are covered by very different 

policies. Development in Built Environment Type A is strictly controlled, but within Built 


6 th July 2009

Environment Type C development can be permitted provided it is in harmony with the 

building characteristics of the area. 

However, planning permission has already been approved for a dwelling on this site and 

there is an extant consent for a large, detached house in a similar position. The principle of 

development on this site has, therefore, already been established. 

Since the previous consent was granted there have been local plan policy changes, new 

Regional Planning Policies and a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment of the Borough. The 

extant planning permission is, however, a material consideration. 

Impact upon form and character, including Conservation Area and AONB 

At 0.42 ha the site is a large plot. A large detached dwelling has already been approved on 

the site and could still be constructed. 

With regard to national planning guidance, Paragraph 33 of PPS1 states that ‘Good design 

ensures attractive usable, durable and adaptable places and is a key element in achieving 

sustainable development. Good design is indivisible from good planning.’ Paragraph 34 of 

the same document states that design ‘which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to 

take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the 

way it functions, should not be accepted.’ Paragraph 35 states that ‘High quality and 

inclusive design should be the aim of all those involved in the development process. ..This 

requires carefully planned, high quality buildings and spaces that support the efficient use of 

resources.’ Whilst paragraph 38 says ‘It is, however, proper to seek to promote or reinforce 

local distinctiveness’ and states that Local Planning Authorities should not attempt to stifle 

innovation, originality or initiative.’ 

This site is unique within the village due not only to its size but also to the dense planting 

across the southern part of the site and the boundaries. It’s siting, behind other dwellings to 

the north and between other residential properties east and west, combined with the existing 

tree planting mean that the site is secluded and there are no long views of the centre of the 

site. 

The size of the plot means that it can accommodate a dwelling with a large footprint. 

However, the scale and mass of the building and materials for construction are all important 

elements which determine whether the dwelling is suitably in keeping with the characteristics 

of the area. 

This dwelling has been specifically designed to respond to the planning issues of the site. It 

has responded to the flood risk constraints as well as respecting the characteristics of the 

Conservation Area and the existing planting across the site. The result is a bespoke, 

contemporary dwelling. 

This proposed dwelling is a modern, contemporary dwelling proposed to be constructed of a 

mixture of external building materials including timber boarding, bronze metal, galvanised 

steelwork, flintwork walling and large glazed panelling. The roof is proposed to be 

constructed of pre oxidised bronze metal and incorporates solar thermal collectors and 

glazed rooflights. 

Previously officers raised concern over the design of the dwelling particularly regarding the 

lack of local distinctiveness and failure to make sufficient reference to the existing 

characteristics of the village. The applicant has completed a survey of building materials in 

the village which shows there is a range of materials including red brick, render, flint, chalk, 

timber boarding and black painted brickwork. The majority of dwellings in the village are 


6 th July 2009

constructed of either brick or block and flint or chalk. However, there are examples of timber 

cladding and black brickwork throughout the village. As a direct response to these concerns, 

this amended application has introduced traditional, local building material and incorporated 

elements of flint walling with lime mortar to approximately a third of the house. 

The proposed house is large but will sit in a large plot. The size of the dwelling is considered 

to be acceptable. The Council’s Conservation Officer has no objections to the design, 

stating that whilst this is very different from the approved scheme, it provides a striking 

modern house of some style. Views into the site are limited; it makes no impact on the street 

scene and views from the coastal path are restricted. So it must be considered within its own 

‘woodland’ setting. The siting, choice of timber and flint seem appropriate. The principle of a 

large house has been accepted and this is an unusual site where development will have little 

impact on the wider Conservation Area, but a strong impact on the site itself, creating a 

pleasant setting of a C21 large house within the trees. 

The house has been raised out of the ground in response to flood risk constraints. However, 

the applicant has provided detailed levels of this proposal which compare it to the previously 

approved dwelling. These show that the overall ridge height is lower than the approved 

scheme. The applicant has also provided a photo montage and street scene from the 

coastal path to the north showing how the roof of the proposed dwelling will sit amongst 

other existing development. Views from the south will be limited due to the siting and existing 

tree planting. 

Whilst the house is higher than those around it, the distances between the buildings and its 

position set back mean that it will not be unduly out of keeping with the character of the area. 

The bronze metal roof will not be unduly out of keeping with more traditional clay pantile and 

slate roofs as the colour will be within the same palette and will be seen from a distance 

when viewed from the north. 

Overall the impact of the proposed dwelling on the character of the village, the Conservation 

Area and the AONB is not considered to be unduly significant or out of keeping. 

Flood risk 

The application has been supported by a Flood Risk Assessment. All residential 

accommodation on this northern part of the site must be above a minimum level of 6.6m 

AOD. Accordingly the floor levels of the proposed dwelling have been raised to 7.5 AOD 

allowing for the parking of vehicles and boats beneath. This removes the need for a 

separate building on the site for vehicles/storage etc. and also avoids the need for a solid 

mass or plinth on which to raise the building out of the ground. 

The design also incorporates a permanent dry access/egress route linking the dwelling to 

Wells Road which is in Flood Zone 1. From here the local highway network provides access 

to potential places of refuge in the event of a flood. Surface water runoff will be managed by 

infiltration techniques in accordance with best practise sustainable drainage systems. 

The Environment Agency has raised no objection subject to conditions. They confirm that 

the exception test has been adequately passed and the proposed development can be 

considered to be safe. They state, however, that no evidence has been provided that a 

sequential test has been properly carried out. 

The sequential test aims is to steer new development to areas at the lowest probability of 

flooding (Zone 1). In undertaking the test other ‘reasonably available sites’ should be 

compared to the application site in terms of flood risk. In this case the northern part of the 

site only is within Flood Zone 3. 


6 th July 2009

The applicant has identified no other sites which are ‘reasonably available’ to the applicant. 

Although there are sites identified within the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment 

(SHLAA) throughout the Borough, the Local Planning Authority cannot identify other sites 

which would be realistically available to the applicant. 

In this case, however, the planning history is a material consideration. There is an extant 

permission; however, the applicant has demonstrated that in terms of flood resilience this 

new proposal is an improvement on the approved scheme. Also, this current proposal has a 

reduced footprint than the scheme already approved and therefore there is less 

displacement. 

The applicant has demonstrated that within the site itself there are policy constraints which 

prevent the house being re-sited southwards towards Wells Road. In flood risk zone terms 

this might be an improvement, but in terms of impact upon the character of the Conservation 

Area, through the loss of trees, this approach would not be supported. Other policy 

constraints outweigh any need to re-site the dwelling within the plot. 

That said the application has passed the Exception Test and demonstrated that the dwelling 

can be constructed safely without risk to the occupants or the neighbouring population. 

There are, therefore, no outstanding flood risk concerns. 

Impact on Trees 

The southern half of the site was designated as Built Environment Type A because of its well 

treed character which is either visually prominent or forms an essential element of the 

character of the village. Most of these will be retained. 

The Borough Council’s Landscape Officer has been consulted with regard to the application 

and confirms he has no objection subject to the preparation of, and adherence to a scheme 

of tree protection for those trees and hedges shown to be retained, to the recommended 

standards of BS5837:2005. Separately under conservation area rules the landscape officer 

has confirmed there is no objection to the felling of trees shown on the submitted plan, 

including the laying of the hedge on the eastern boundary. Some of this work has already 

been undertaken. 

Impact upon Residential Amenity 

The application proposes a north facing terrace which has the potential for overlooking of 

and noise issues to properties to the north. However, a bronze clad housing for the stairs up 

to the terrace has been placed at the northern end of the terrace preventing direct 

overlooking and glass screens have been introduced to the sides of the terrace which will 

partially enclose the users as well as reduce any associated noise. 

Overlooking from windows facing north, east and west has been assessed and also 

compared to the already approved scheme. The applicant has also provided a diagram 

showing overlooking from north facing windows of the previously approved scheme 

compared to this current application. This indicates that the degree of overlooking from north 

facing windows is less than that of the approved scheme. 

The relationship between the dwelling as proposed and existing dwellings has been 

examined. The distances between windows combined with the mitigating measures 

incorporated by the architect to minimise overlooking mean that there will be no significantly 

detrimental impact upon the amenity of the occupants of neighbouring properties in terms of 

overlooking, being overshadowed or the proposed dwelling being over bearing. Similarly 

noise issues are those associated with the use of a single dwelling and not considered to be 


6 th July 2009

significant enough to warrant refusal of the application. Mitigation measures have been 

incorporated into the design to ensure that the travel of noise is restricted. 



and disorder in the carrying out of their duties. The application before the Board will not 

have a material impact upon crime and disorder. 

Other issues 

Staithe House, a Grade II listed building borders the site to the west although has no 

windows in the flank wall facing it. There are no concerns over harm to the historic setting of 

this Grade II listed building. 

Third party concern has been raised regarding drainage issues in the area. However, the 

applicant proposes to link into the existing main drainage system and no objection to this has 

been raised by the relevant public utility company. 

Third party concern has been raised regarding light pollution and light spillage given there is 

no street lighting in the area and the property has large areas of glazing. However, the site 

has more tree coverage than most sites, so light spillage beyond the site will likely be less on 

this site despite the large windows. The applicant has acknowledged that external lighting 

will be carefully controlled and downward directed to prevent light pollution. 

CONCLUSION 

The proposed dwelling can be constructed with no flood risk concerns, no significant harm to 

the character of the character of the village, the Conservation Area or the AONB. In many 

ways this proposal will have less impact than the dwelling already approved. The building 

materials and design introduce a contemporary characteristic to this part of the village, but 

due to the existing landscaping across the site it will not be conspicuous in its setting. The 

proposed dwelling now makes sufficient reference to its location to accord with the 

requirements of PPS1 to promote local distinctiveness. The quality of the design and 

materials accords with the provisions of PPG15 to preserve or enhance the character of the 

Conservation Area. 

In the light of national and local policies and other material planning considerations, planning 

permission for the proposal may be granted. 







2 Condition No development shall take place on site until a plan has been submitted to 

and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority indicating the positions, 

heights, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected. The 


6 th July 2009

oundary treatment shall be completed before the use hereby permitted is commenced 

or before the building(s) are occupied or in accordance with a timetable to be approved 

in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in 

accordance with the approved details. 

2 Reason To ensure that the development does not adversely affect the visual and 

residential amenities of the locality. 

3 Condition No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft 

landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local 

Planning Authority. These details shall include finished levels or contours, hard 

surface materials, refuse or other storage units, street furniture, structures and other 

minor artefacts. Soft landscape works shall include planting plans, written 

specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and 

grass establishment) schedules of plants noting species, plant sizes and proposed 

numbers and densities where appropriate. 












5 Condition No development or other operations shall commence on site until the 

existing trees and/or hedgerows to be retained have been protected in accordance with 

a scheme that has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning 

Authority. The scheme shall provide for the erection of fencing for the protection of any 

retained tree or hedge before any equipment, machinery, or materials are brought on 

to the site for the purposes of development or other operations. The fencing shall be 

retained intact for the full duration of the development until all equipment, materials and 

surplus materials have been removed from the site. If the fencing is damaged all 

operations shall cease until it is repaired in accordance with the approved details. 

Nothing shall be stored or placed in any fenced area in accordance with this condition 

and the ground levels within those areas shall not be altered, nor shall any excavations 

be made without the written approval of the Local Planning Authority. 

5 Reason To ensure that existing trees and hedgerows are properly protected in 

accordance with Policy 4/7 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan, 1998. 

6 Condition No existing trees, shrubs or hedges within the site that are shown as being 

retained on the approved plans shall be felled, uprooted, willfully damaged or 

destroyed, cut back in any way or removed without the prior written approval of the 

Local Planning Authority. Any trees, shrubs or hedges removed without such approval 

or that die or become severely damaged or seriously diseased within 5 years from the 

completion of the development hereby permitted shall be replaced with trees, shrubs or 

hedge plants of a similar size and species in the next available planting season, unless 

the Local Planning Authority gives written approval to any variation. 


6 th July 2009

6 Reason To ensure that the development does not adversely affect the visual and 

residential amenities of the locality. 

7 Condition No development shall commence on site until a sample panel of the 

materials to be used for the external surfaces of the building(s) and/or extension(s) 

hereby permitted has been erected on site for the inspection and written approval of 

the Local Planning Authority. The sample panel shall measure at least 1 metre x 1 

metre using the proposed materials, mortar type, bond, and pointing technique. The 

development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details. 



8 Condition Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class A of the Town 

and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order 

revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the enlargement, 

improvement or other alteration to the dwelling house shall not be allowed without the 

granting of specific planning permission. 




9 Condition Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class E of the Town 


revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the provision within 

the curtilage of the dwelling house of any building or enclosure, swimming or other pool 

shall not be allowed without the granting of specific planning permission. 




10 Condition Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class F of the Town 


revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the provision within 

the curtilage of the dwelling house of a hard surface for any purpose incidental to the 

enjoyment of the dwelling house, shall not be allowed without the granting of specific 

planning permission. 




11 Condition The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried 

out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), prepared by 

Cowper Griffith Architects & Cannon Consulting Engineers and dated April 2009, and 

the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA: 

a). Finished ground floor levels shall be set no lower than 7.5m above Ordnance 

Datum (AOD). 

b). A raised walkway shall be provided at a minimum level of 7.25mAOD into and out 

of the site to an appropriate safe haven. 


6 th July 2009

c). Flood-proofing measures, as detailed on section 6.4 of the FRA, shall be 

incorporated into the proposed development, in accordance with the 

recommendations of CLG guidance ‘Improving the flood performance of new buildings 

— Flood Resilient Construction’. 

11 Reason a). To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future 

occupants. 

b). To provide safe access/egress during flood events and to reduce reliance on 

emergency services, as set out in paragraph E.3 of PPS25. 

c). To minimise the damage to the development in the event of flooding and to enable 

a faster recovery once floodwaters have subsided, as set out in paragraph G8 of 

PPS25. 

12 Condition Prior to the commencement of any development, a surface water drainage 

scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of 

the hydrological and hydro-geological context of the development, shall be submitted 

to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall ensure 

that there is no increase in off-site flood risk or flooding of buildings in the 1 in 100 year 

rainfall event, including climate change. The scheme shall also include details of how 

the system shall be managed and maintained after completion, in accordance with the 

recommendations of CIRIA guidance C697 ‘The SUDS Manual’. The scheme shall 

subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the 

development is completed. 

12 Reason To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage and disposal of 

surface water from the site, in accordance with paragraph F6 of PPS25, and to prevent 

the pollution of controlled waters. 


proposed on- site parking and turning areas shall be laid out, demarcated, levelled and 

surfaced in accordance with the approved plan and retained thereafter available for 

that specific use. 








6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Castle Acre 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(c) 

Change of use from post office and part residential to residential 

only, refurbishment, alterations and extension on first floor plus 

new garden shed and wall 

50 Stocks Green Castle Acre King's Lynn Norfolk 

Mr & Mrs Moore 


Case Officer: Ms J-A Rasmussen 

Tel: 01553 616226 



Reason for Referral to DCB – The Parish council’s views are at variance with the Officer’s 

recommendation. 

Case Summary 

The site is the Post Office for Castle Acre and is situated in an attractive row of two storey 

flint terraces south east of Stocks Green. It is within the Built Environment Type C and 

within Castle Acre’s Conservation Area. 

Planning permission is being sought for the change of use from a mixed Residential & Post 

Office/Retail use to Residential with associated refurbishment, alterations and two storey 

rear extension. 

The relevant policies in relation to this application are PPS1, PPS3, PPG15, East of England 

Plan Policies ENV6, ENV7, SS1 and King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan Policy 4/21. 

Key Issues 

Principle of change of use; 

Impact upon the character of the Conservation Area; and 

Impact upon residential amenity 


APPROVE 


The application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of the mixed residential 

Post Office/retail use to a residential use with associated refurbishment, alterations and two 

storey rear extension. 

The application site can be found on the south east side of Stocks Green, Castle Acre 

approximately 71 metres south west from its junction with High Street. The site comprises of 

a former Post Office retail unit with a floor area of approximately 30.25sq.m, the remainder of 

the property is used as a residential dwelling located within a terrace of cottages. 


6 th July 2009

Planning permission 07/01337/CU was granted by delegated decision last year for change of 

use of the Post Office/retail to a residential use, therefore, the principle of the change of use 

has already been established. 

This application differs from the previously approved change of use application by virtue of 

the proposed refurbishment, alterations and two storey rear extension. The alterations 

proposed include refurbishment and some aesthetic changes to the ground floor front 

elevation which currently consists of glass panels within a wooden frame which has since 

been painted white. The application also proposes a two storey pitched roof extension to the 

rear elevation which will provide an additional bedroom on the first floor. There will be an 

additional set of French doors on the ground floor and a new flue for a stove. The chimney 

on the existing building ridge will also be re-instated. The rear elevation currently consists of 

a single storey flat roof extension. 


The applicant confirms that the property was until recently, the Post Office for Castle Acre. 

The application seeks to use the whole building as a dwelling and to extend the first floor to 

provide an additional bedroom, thus converting the property in to a three bedroom dwelling. 

The front elevation will be altered by the introduction of traditional wooden sliding sash 

windows in a pattern which would more closely represent the original fenestration. The 

property is at present rendered and painted which is not original this would be removed to 

reveal the original flint if possible without causing damage. 

The rear extension which would provide the additional bedroom on the first floor has been 

designed to minimise any impact on neighbouring properties. Traditional materials will be 

used throughout. There will be alterations and improvements to the rear garden. 

Accessibility will be improved by raising the ground floor level to bring it closer to the level of 

the street level. 


07/01337/CU – Change of use of Post Office to residential – Approved. 


Parish Council: OBJECT – The development does not conform with the guidelines for the 

Conservation Area. The proposed alterations to the front of the property in design terms and 

choice of materials are not sympathetic to nor do they enhance the character of the area. 

The Parish Council would like to see the re-instatement of the flint, removal of the shop front 

and restoration to its original terraced cottage style, by replacing the large (shop) windows, 

with smaller windows and no timber cladding. 

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION 


Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: N/A 

Norfolk Constabulary: N/A 


6 th July 2009

BCKLWN Conservation Officer: NO OBJECTION How best to improve the appearance of 

the front of this building and successfully extend the back was the subject of extensive preapplication 

discussions but this scheme works well and will enhance the character and 

appearance of the conservation area. The front retains a traditional appearance in 

accordance with the other properties around the green. The proposed back extension is 

much more modern in appearance but will be a huge improvement to the existing rear 

elevation which is very unattractive and quite difficult to work with. Details of materials 

joinery will be required. 


ONE letter of correspondence from a neighbouring property objecting to the proposal 

stating:- 

That they are content with the principle of the two-storey extension provided it is kept to a 

minimum, however the proposed roof heights and projection to the rear will have significant 

consequences for the amenity of their neighbouring yard. A shorter projection is preferred. 

There are wheelchair access issues with the existing arrangements which could be resolved 

if the application is amended. 






















6 th July 2009






locality. 


The development plan comprises the saved policies from the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk 

Local Plan 1998 and the Norfolk Structure Plan 1999, and the East of England Plan. The 

application should be determined in accordance with these policies unless there are other 

material planning considerations, particularly Central Government policy that indicates 

otherwise. 

The main issues in relation to the determination of this application are: 

• Principle of change of use; 

• Impact upon conservation area; 

• Impact upon residential amenity; 

Principle of Change of Use 

The principle of the change of use has been established when the Council granted 

permission 07/01337/CU for the change of use of the Post Office/retail to residential in 

January 2008. At that time in considering this issue the Council noted that no evidence had 

been provided as to why the retail unit was no longer economically viable at this location, 

this remains the case. However there were alternative retail uses within the village which 

satisfy the need in the locality therefore it was not considered appropriate to refuse the 

application on these grounds. The situation remains the same in Castle Acre therefore 

Officers see no reason to alter this view and refuse the application on these grounds. 

Impact upon Conservation Area 

PPG15 requires that development within a Conservation Area at least preserves the existing 

character of the area. 

The Council’s Conservation Officer has expressed support for the application and considers 

that the scheme would benefit and enhance the character and appearance of the 

conservation area subject to the selection of suitable materials. Therefore subject to a 

condition requiring approval of materials by the Council prior to commencement Officers 

consider that the proposal would have an acceptable and positive impact upon the 

conservation area. 

Impact upon Residential Amenity 

In terms of national policy, PPS1 states that good design is indivisible from good planning 

and that design that ensures attractive usable, durable and adaptable places is a key 

element in achieving sustainable development. 


6 th July 2009

The site lies within Built Environment Type C and saved Local Plan Policy 4/21 requires 

development to have regard for and be in harmony with the building characteristics of the 

locality. 

The refurbishment, alterations and 2 storey rear extension has been designed with care in 

terms of overlooking and respecting the character of the existing property. The increase in 

height between the existing and proposed is considered acceptable. There are no habitable 

to habitable rooms overlooking between the proposed extension and existing neighbouring 

properties. Overlooking into private amenity space is no more than would be expected from 

a row of terrace houses. 

The proposed amount of amenity space retained for the user is of a level that would be 

reasonably expected in this locality for the size of dwelling proposed. The proposed 

boundary treatment and garden improvements are of benefit and are suitable in terms of 

privacy and material. 

The Parish Council’s concern relates to the impact upon the Conservation Area this is a view 

not shared with the Council’s Conservation Officer. The Parish Council’s concerns relating to 

the choice of materials are re-iterated by the Conservation Officer and as previously stated 

suitable materials can be secured by condition. 

The neighbour’s objections are set out earlier in the report, and are dealt with below. 

The comments relating to the proposed roof heights and projection to the rear have been 

noted and amendments made to the scheme, which have successfully reduced the impact 

upon amenity in Officers opinion to an acceptable level. 

The issue relating to wheelchair access off site do not form part of this application and 

agreement should be reached between the applicant and neighbour. 

Officers therefore conclude that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact upon 

the neighbouring residential amenity. 

CONCLUSION 

The application proposes the change of use, alterations and extension of a Post Office/retail 

use. 

Your officers consider that the proposal is a good quality scheme which accords with the 

main objectives of National Policy, but in coming to its decision the Board needs to consider 

the weight it gives to the reasons for objections raised by the Parish Council and neighbour. 

Officer’s views are that the principle of the change of use has already been established by 

virtue of consent 07/01337/CU, there are no amenity issues warranting a refusal, and the 

scheme is considered to enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 






6 th July 2009



2 Condition Details of the type, colour and texture of all materials to be used for the 

external surfaces of the building(s) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the 

Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development to which this 

permission relates. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the 




3 Condition No development shall commence on site until full details of the window style, 

reveal, cill and header treatment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the 

Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the 



in accordance with the principles of PPS1. 






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 


AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(d) 

Conversion of single first floor flat into 3 flats including extension 

and conversion of ground floor from single retail unit into 3 

separate retail units. 

46-48 Bridge Street Downham Market Norfolk PE38 9DL 

Client of Ian J M Cable 


Case Officer: Ms C Tomkin 

Tel: 01553 616318 


22nd May 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – The Officer recommendation is at variance with the Town 

Council who object to the application. 

Case Summary 

The application is for full planning permission to convert the existing single first floor flat into 

three flats which includes an extension on the East elevation and also the conversion of the 

existing ground floor from a single retail unit into three separate retail units. 

The site is located within the town centre of Downham Market, the conservation area and it 

is also adjacent to some Listed Buildings. The application is not considered to detract from 

the conservation area or the adjacent Listed Buildings and complies with planning policy. 

Key Issues 

The principle of separating the retail space into three units 

The impact of the changes on local amenity 

The impact of the proposal on the conservation area 



APPROVE 


The application site is currently a hardware store (A T Johnson) with one residential three 

bedroom unit of accommodation on the first floor. The site is located to the North of Bridge 

Street within the Town Centre Zone and is of a 1960’s design which includes a flat roof. 

The area is characterised by more traditional buildings incorporating small shop units, with 

some residential accommodation, within the Conservation Area of Downham Market Town 

Centre. The site is also adjacent to a number of Listed Buildings including 42/44 which is 

immediately West and 55 and 51/53 which are immediately opposite, all of which are Grade 

II Listed Buildings. 


6 th July 2009

The application relates to the separation of the ground floor retail unit into three separate 

retail units and the conversion of the single first floor flat into three flats including an 

extension. 

Planning permission for a similar proposal was refused in April 2008 as it did not serve to 

preserve or enhance the conservation area or the adjacent Listed Building (08/00216/F). 


The following supporting case was submitted with the application: 

• The shop frontage has been reviewed following consultation with the Conservation 

Officer to improve the street frontage. 

• The street frontage has been sub-divided to windows of similar width with top lights 

and continuous fascia. The window surrounds have been reviewed to incorporate a 

plinth and stooled pilasters to provide definition and relief in more traditional 

proportions. 

• The site fronts onto Bridge Street and comprises a large single retail unit which has 

industrial type warehousing to the rear (within the ownership of the applicant). On the 

first floor is a large three-bed flat. 

• The site already has a business and residential use and seeks to separate these 

three smaller units of residential accommodation (dividing the building in the best 

locations for division) and three shop units. 

• The residential units have benefit of an existing rear roof terrace. 

• No car parking is available (none available with current use) and the shop units will 

have front access only so deliveries will be from Bridge Street. The shop units are of 

modest size and are likely to be small in nature. The building is within the town centre 

and within walking distance of amenities and public transport. 

• The final design for the shop fronts and associated signage would be subject to 

individual applications by future tenants to reflect their own business image. 

• The extension to the rear reflects the current building and would not have any major 

visible impact to the surrounding area. 


08/00216/F Conversion of single first floor flat into 3 flats including and extension and 

conversion of ground floor from single retail unit into 3 separate retail units – refused April 

2008 


Town Council: OBJECT for the following reasons: 

1. The application was made purposefully with a lack of car parking for any residents. 

The loss of existing parking in this area coupled with an increase in residents 

potentially requiring parking provisions would create off-site parking problems and is 

contrary to the general principles of sustainable development set out in PPS1. 

2. The proposal does not incorporate adequate on-site vehicular parking facilities to the 

standard required by the Local Planning Authority. 

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION This application is submitted with no parking 

allocation. However, as the site is centrally situated within Downham Market and has the 


6 th July 2009

enefit of alternative public parking and access to public transport services it is difficult to 

substantiate an objection on the basis of insufficient parking allocation. Would recommend 

that the applicant seeks to provide covered cycle parking facilities within the site for staff 

members and occupants of the flats. 

Internal Drainage Board: Comment the application indicates that surface water disposal is 

to a positive system and so it will not adversely affect drainage operations. 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: No comment from a 


Environmental Health & Housing – CSNN: NO OBJECTION Bridge Street is a busy road, 

especially during the day and therefore conditions are recommended in order to protect the 

amenity of the three residential flats from potential noise and disturbance from the retail 

units. 

BCKLWN Conservation Officer: NO OBJECTION This is reasonable and it is noted that a 

separate application will be submitted for the shop fronts. 


No letters of representation received. 









proposals. 














6 th July 2009








application: 






locality. 


The application site lies within Built Environment Type C (with the rear of the site which 

would not be affected by this application being located in Built Environment Type D), the 

Conservation Area and the Town Centre Zone as defined by the King’s Lynn and West 

Norfolk Local Plan (1998). The site is also immediately adjacent to a number of Listed 

Buildings. 

The main issues to consider when determining the application are as follows: 

• The principle of separating the retail space into three units 

• The impact of the changes on local amenity 

• The impact of the proposal on the conservation area 


The principle of separating the retail space into three units 

The separation of the existing single retail unit into three separate retail units is acceptable in 

principle; as is the conversion of the single first floor flat into three separate residential units 

including an extension, provided the development serves to preserve or enhance the 

character and appearance of the conservation area and does not adversely affect the setting 

of the adjacent Listed Buildings. 

The existing retail unit measures approximately 216 square metres and it is proposed to 

separate this into three retail units of approximately the same size. Planning Policy 

Statement 6 states it is a key objective to promote the vitality and viability of town centres. It 

is acceptable in principle to separate the existing single unit into three separate units in this 

Town Centre location. There is no policy objection to the separation of the retail space into 

smaller units. 


6 th July 2009

The impact of the changes on local amenity 

The impact of the changes on the amenity of the area would be in relation to parking and the 

possible impact of the first floor extension on the neighbouring property to the East. 

The proposal does not include any parking facilities, neither for the three residential flats, nor 

for the staff within the three proposed retail units. Whilst this would cause additional parking 

problems within the town centre as noted by the Town Council there are no formal objections 

to the proposal from the Highways Officer. 

‘Manual for Streets’ states that provision below demand is acceptable and can work 

successfully when other options are available in the proposal’s location. The application site 

is in the town centre, on a bus route and within walking distance of the railway station, as 

well as close to the town car parks. With these factors taken into consideration the highways 

officer has raised no objection, although would have like to see the inclusion of covered 

cycle parking within the site for staff members and the occupants of the flats. These have not 

been provided as there is limited space within the site. 

The fact that deliveries to the shops would be to the front of the shops served by Bridge 

Street is not ideal, as this is a busy road, however this is the situation that currently exists for 

many of the shops located in Bridge Street and does not create a reason for refusal. 

The proposed first floor extension is located on the East elevation. It would not be visible 

from Bridge Street. It would have a limited impact on the property to the East as it is located 

North-West of the adjacent property which is already overshadowed by the existing two 

storey element of the application site located directly to the West. Notwithstanding this fact 

the windows to the neighbouring property serve an existing financial business and not a 

residential dwelling. 

There is evidence that construction has begun on new dwellings located to the North-East of 

the proposed extension (application reference 07/01964/F). It is considered that the 

orientation of the proposal (South-East) and the fact that there is existing large scale 

development to the rear of the site (including substantial warehousing) mean that the small 

first floor extension would not have a significant impact on this development and would not 

warrant a refusal on the basis of being overlooking or overbearing. 

The impact of the proposal on the conservation area 

The existing building is a 1960’s development and is not of great architectural merit. The 

previous application to separate the existing first floor flat into three residential units 

including an extension and the conversion of the single retail unit into three separate retail 

units (08/00216/F) was refused on the basis that the large expanse of plate glass, elevated 

position of the fascia and lack of stall risers would neither enhance nor preserve the 

character and appearance of the conservation area or the setting of the adjacent Listed 

Buildings. 

Planning Policy Guidance 15 defines a conservation area as “areas of special architectural 

or historic interest the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or 

enhance.” The appearance of town centre shopping streets is shaped by the design and 

quality of the shopfronts and advertisements as much as the variety and style of the 

buildings themselves. A jumble of mixed designs, with low or non existent stall risers, overlarge 

fascias and large expanses of plate glass detract from the character of the 

conservation area. 


6 th July 2009

Planning Policy Statement 1 backs up this argument by stating that high quality design 

should be the aim of all those involved in the development process. Design which is 

inappropriate in its context should not be accepted. 

This application has sought to redress the previous reason for refusal by reducing the 

expanse of unbroken plate glass with the inclusion of vertical mullions and fan lights at the 

top of the windows. In addition the fascia panels have been reduced in size and depth. 

There are no objections from the Conservation Officer as the design marks an improvement 

above the existing frontage. Consequently it is considered that the previous reason for 

refusal has been overcome. 


Environmental Health have requested that conditions be placed no any approval regarding 

sound insulation to protect the future occupiers of the proposed three residential flats from 

noise generated by the proposed three retail units. In addition they have also requested that 

the front entrance doors to the shops have self closing doors to reduce the potential 

emission of noise. 


No crime and disorder issues were raised by this application. 

CONCLUSION 

The division of the existing single retail space into three shop units and the division of the 

single first floor residential flat into three residential flats which include a first floor extension 

on the Eastern elevation is acceptable and complies with planning policy. The proposal is 

not considered to have a detrimental impact on the surrounding conservation area, nor the 

adjacent Listed Buildings. The lack of parking provision in this central town location and 

close to town services and other modes of public transport means that a refusal is not 

warranted on this basis and consequently the application complies with national policies 

PPS1, PPS3, PPS6, PPG13 and PPG15, Policies SS1, ENV6 and ENV7 of the East of 

England Plan 2008 and Policy 4/21 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998). 







2 Condition Prior to the conversion of the existing building into three flats a detailed 

scheme for the protection of the development from noise (traffic and noise caused by 

the three retail units) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local 

Planning Authority. The scheme shall include works which are necessary to ensure 

noise insulation in compliance with Planning Policy Guidance 24. The accommodation 

shall not be occupied until the conversion has been completed in full accordance with 

the approved scheme. 


6 th July 2009

2 Reason In the interests of the amenities of the residential flats in accordance with the 

principles of PPG24. 

3 Condition The front entrance doors to the three retail units shall be made self closing to 

minimise the emission of noise from the premises. 

3 Reason In the interests of the amenities of the locality in accordance with the principles 

of PPG24. 

4 Condition Notwithstanding the submitted details, full and precise details of the 

proposed shop fronts, to include details of all materials, shall be submitted, and 

approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the 

conversion of the retail unit. The proposed conversion of the retail units shall be carried 

out in accordance with the agreed details. 


in accordance with the principles of PPS1 and PPG15. 






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 


Outline Application: construction of dwelling 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(e) 

8 Crow Hall Estate Downham Market Norfolk PE38 0DG 

Mr C Clark 



Tel: 01553 616318 



Reason for Referral to DCB – The Officer recommendation is at variance with the Town 

Council who support the application. 

Case Summary 

The application site can be found on the southern side of Crow Hall Estate, Downham 

Market approximately 92 metres north east from its junction with London Road. The site is 

bounded by domestic boundaries and established foliage. It is open adjacent to the highway. 

The application seeks outline planning permission for the construction of a single dwelling. 

Access is to be the only matter considered at this stage with all other matters reserved for 

future consideration. A previous application under planning reference 08/00882/O was 

refused. 

Key Issues 

Access and Highway Safety; and 



REFUSE 


The application site can be found on the southern side of Crow Hall Estate, Downham 

Market approximately 92 metres north east from its junction with London Road. The site is 

bounded by domestic boundaries and established foliage, it is open adjacent to the highway. 

The application seeks outline planning permission for the construction of a single dwelling. 

Access is to be the only matter considered at this stage with all other matters reserved for 

future consideration. 

The submitted plans show the outline of a previously demolished dwelling. This application is 

not for a replacement dwelling as a replacement for this demolished dwelling was approved 

under planning application 07/01217/F under which this application site was the curtilage. 


6 th July 2009

The previous application (08/00882/O) was refused on the grounds of highway safety as the 

addition of a new dwelling would intensify the use of the junction with London Road which 

has inadequate levels of visibility. 



points: 

The scheme aims to provide a single residential dwelling on a garden plot within an 

established residential area. The application is a re-submission including revised details of 

proposed highways access improvements. The applicant states that he has recognised a 

demand for residential dwellings in the locality and notes that the proposed density would be 

appropriate. 

Although layout, scale landscaping and appearance do not form part of this application these 

points are briefly covered. The applicant also provides basic dimensions for the proposed 

dwelling. 

Vehicular and pedestrian access to Crow Hall Estate is to be provided via London Road. The 

applicant states that the existing junction does not meet current highway standards such as 

those set out in Manual for Streets guidance. However they feel that the lack of width at the 

access is more detrimental than the actual visibility. 

The applicant feels that the proposal presents the opportunity to make improvements to the 

access in terms of width and visibility to benefit all users and reduce congestion. The 

existing access measures 5 metres wide 5 metres from London Road carriageway and 

measures 3.3 metres wide 10 metres from the carriageway. It is proposed to widen the 

access to a minimum of 5.5 metres to the first 10 metres to a minimum of 3.5 metres, with 

markings to the access to define the centre line. 

The applicant feels that the access benefits proposed by the development by far outweigh 

any increased risk by the nominal additional traffic. Any improvements would be 

implemented prior to occupation of the dwelling. 


08/00882/O - Construction of a dwelling at 8 Crow Hall Estate – Refused. 

07/01217/F – Construction of a replacement dwelling at 8 Crow Hall Estate - Approved. 

06/01610/O – Construction of a dwelling at 8 Crow Hall Estate - Approved. 


Parish Council: NO OBJECTION. The Parish Council state that they are content with the 

proposed development. They state that in approving the application the proposal would 

enhance the existing street scene and amenity of the area and in their opinion the wider 

access and enhanced visibility splays will benefit all residents of Crow Hall Estate. 

Highways Authority: OBJECTION. The Highways Authority has grave concerns that the 

existing access would not be appropriate for the proposed development. The Highways 


6 th July 2009

Officer notes that the visibility to the trafficked direction would be marginally improved to 

achieve a splay of approximately 21 metres. Visibility in the non trafficked direction is 

assumed to be similar. 

The Highway’s Officer accepts the view that the increased width proposed would help to aid 

efficiency and flow on London Road. He does not believe that this benefit to highway 

efficiency would be of such weight, that the safety concerns of insufficient visibility to the 

trafficked direction on the Crow Hall access could be overlooked given the site will create 

additional traffic of between 8-10 movements per day, through an access with a splay of just 

49% of the standard required. 

Therefore the Highway’s Officer believes that an approval of the application would result in 

conditions to the detriment of highway safety. 

Internal Drainage Board: NO OBJECTION. If Surface water disposal is to be to soakaways 

the proposed development would not adversely affect drainage operations in the 

District. If the method of surface water disposal is to be changed in anyway the Board must 

be notified. 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: NO OBJECTION. No 

comments to make from a contaminated land perspective. 

Norfolk Constabulary: NO OBJECTION. 


No letters of representation have been received. 











Policy T8: Local Roads - Local Authorities should manage the local road network in 

accordance with their local transport plan objectives to complement the aims of Policies T2 

to T7 and in accordance with set priorities. 





6 th July 2009



application: 






locality. 



• Access and Highway Safety; 

• Other material considerations; and 

• Crime and disorder. 

Access and Highway Safety 

The application site is within Built Environment Type D as specified within the proposals map 

accompanying the Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998). A new dwelling on this 

site is acceptable in principle providing that it is of a high quality design and has regard for 

and is in harmony with the building characteristics of the locality, and subject of course to 

other material considerations. 

This application requires the subdivision of the curtilage of the approved bungalow under 

planning reference 07/01217/F, to provide outline planning permission for a detached 

dwelling. 

The application is for outline permission with the access only integral to the decision. 

Therefore the main consideration with this application is the impact a new dwelling at this 

location would have on highway safety. 

The highways authority has raised an objection. London Road is subject to speed restriction 

of 30mph and for such a limit the Department for Transports Document ‘Manual for Streets’ 

requires visibility splays of 43m to both directions from a 2.4m set back distance to the 

nearside edges of the carriageway. 

At the proposed access, visibility to the trafficked direction is very restricted by a boundary 

wall of an adjacent property to just 21m. In the non critical direction visibility is again severely 

restricted by another boundary wall although it is noted that the applicant has control over 

this land and improvement to achieve the required standard could be achieved. 

The highway’s officer considers that approval of this application would create between 8-10 

additional vehicle trips through an access with substandard levels of visibility. It is 

considered that the proposed development would increase conditions to the detriment of 

highway safety and therefore should be refused. 


6 th July 2009


To achieve the access as proposed by the application the applicant would need to relocate a 

wall, which is a continuation of the wall of a grade II listed building (Crow Hall) and a number 

of trees from land under his control. 

The Council’s Conservation Officer has viewed the proposal and visited site. The wall which 

is proposed for re-siting is not listed as it forms the separate curtilage of Crow Hall Farm and 

not Crow Hall which is to the South. She has verbally stated that she would be reluctant to 

see the wall removed and stressed that care would be needed should the wall be removed. 

She feels that a suitably worded condition could be imposed requiring re-instatement of the 

wall if the application were to be approved. 

The Council’s Tree Officer has also visited the site and whilst considering the loss of any 

trees to be regrettable is satisfied that the trees are not sufficiently significant to warrant 

protection. There are no trees within the curtilage of Crow Hall Farm which have a Tree 

Preservation Order and no trees within the adjacent Crow Hall would be affected by the 

proposal. 

It is noted that the Town Council support the application and the proposed widening of the 

road at the junction with London Road. However, notwithstanding this widening which has 

been considered by the Highways Officer, the inadequate visibility at the junction raises 

issues of highway safety and an objection relating to this still applies. 


The proposed development does not raise any significant issues regarding crime and 

disorder. Norfolk Constabulary Area Liaison Officer has viewed the application and raised 

no objection to the proposal, and indeed has offered advice as to pursuing Secure by Design 

accreditation. 

CONCLUSION 

The application represents an additional dwelling along Crow Hall Estate which would be 

accessed via an inadequate junction with London Road. Notwithstanding the proposed 

widening of this access in proximity to the junction, the visibility is restricted to less than half 

the required distance which is required under the ‘Manual for Streets’ and would create a 

danger and inconvenience to users of the public highway. Therefore the proposal fails to 

accord with PPG13, saved Policy T2 of the Norfolk Structure Plan 1999 and Policy T8 of the 

East of England Plan 2008. 


REFUSE for the following reason(s): 

1 Inadequate visibility splays are provided at the junction of the private access road with 

the county highway and this would cause danger and inconvenience to users of the 

adjoining public highway. Accordingly the proposal fails to comply with Planning Policy 

Guidance note 13, Policy T8 of the East of England Plan 2008 and Policy T2 of the 

Norfolk Structure Plan, 1998. 


6 th July 2009






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Heacham 

New dwelling to replace existing static caravan 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(f) 

Sunset View 55 The South Beach Heacham King's Lynn 

Mr Andrew Finding 


Case Officer: Mr D Parkin 

Tel: 01553 616468 


1st June 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – Parish Council objects to the proposal. 

Case Summary 

The application is to replace a static caravan at 55 The South Beach, Heacham with a 

chalet-style dwelling. 

Key Issues 

Planning history; 

Form and character; 

Neighbour amenity; and 

Flood risk 


APPROVE 


The application relates to a rectangular plot immediately east of the sea defence bank at 

South Beach, Heacham. It is currently occupied by a static caravan to the western end of 

the plot with decking to its seaward end and a shed. Parking is to the west of the caravan 

with additional caravan/chalet plots on the opposite side of the adjacent un-adopted road. 

The area is residential in nature with most of the dwellings and caravans being used as 

holiday accommodation. There is a wide range of different designs and sizes of properties. 

Immediately north of the application site is a dwelling with a similar footprint to that proposed 

with dormer windows in the roof. This property has its ridge running at 90 degrees to the 

sea defence bank and presents gables to the sea and to the road. The dormer windows 

therefore look south towards the application site and north to the neighbouring property. To 

the south of the application site, by contrast, is a single-storey property with decking to the 

seaward end of the plot. 

The site is in flood zone 3. 

The application seeks consent to replace the existing caravan with a larger, two storey 

dwelling. The majority of the accommodation would be on the first floor with the ground floor 


6 th July 2009

eing used for a garage/storage area and wet room. Access to the first floor would be via an 

external staircase on the southern elevation leading on to a balcony terrace. This terraced 

area originally extended 2.7m from the south side of the building but amended plans show 

its width reduced to 1.2m in response to concerns raised during consultation. First floor 

accommodation would consist of 3 bedrooms to the rear (east) and a combined 

dining/lounge/kitchen at the front (west) end facing the sea. 

The dwelling would have a gable at the western and eastern ends, similar to the property to 

the north. There would be 3 dormer windows in the southern elevation, cutting through the 

eaves line; one to a bathroom, one to a bedroom and one to the living area. There would be 

four similar windows on the north elevation, two to bedrooms and two to the living area. The 

site rises from the road towards the sea defences giving the dwelling a maximum ridge 

height of 6.4m at the landward end and a minimum height of 5.9m at the seaward end. The 

bottom of the decked area would be level with the top of the sea defence bank. 


The application is accompanied by a Design and Access Statement (DAS) that concludes 

the proposal is for a two-storey building, which would be one of the more prominent buildings 

along the beach. However, the DAS advises that there are much larger buildings, one 

approximately 500m south of the site that have a larger footprint and are a full two-storey 

high. The neighbour at 56 The Beach has recently constructed a similar structure which 

matches the footprint and general scale of the current application. The building is, according 

to the DAS, designed to reflect the local vernacular with render to the walls and green sheet 

roofing. 


00/0946/F – Retention of caravan – approved 

07/00826/F – Construction of replacement holiday home – refused under delegated powers 

– adverse impact upon sea defences 

08/00260/F – New dwelling – refused under delegated powers – flood risk only 


Parish Council: OBJECT Development is overly large for the plot 

Highways Authority: No response received but no objections to previous submissions. 

Environment Agency: NO OBJECTION subject to seasonal occupancy condition. 

Norfolk Constabulary: NO OBJECTION Comments offered on crime reduction measures. 


TWO letters of OBJECTION received raising the following issues:- 

• Proposal to raise decking would result in loss of privacy to bedroom and decking 

area at 55 The South Beach; and 

• Loss of light to side decking and living area to decking and living area at 56 South 

Beach. 


6 th July 2009








The application raises the following issues:- 

• Planning history; 

• Form and character; 

• Impact on neighbour amenity; and 

• Flood risk. 

Planning history 

Although there is no permission for a replacement dwelling on the site, the previous 

applications and the reasons for which they were refused remain a material consideration in 

determining this application. Permission for a replacement dwelling has been refused on 2 

occasions; in June 2007 and in April 2008. The reasons for refusal related to the impact of 

the development on the sea defence bank in the first case and flood risk generally in the 

second. 

Circular 03/2009 ‘Costs Awards in Appeals and Other Planning Proceedings’ advises at 

paragraph B.29 that like applications should be dealt with in a like manner and that 

introducing additional ‘spurious’ reasons for refusal may result in an award of costs against 

the Local Planning Authority at appeal. 

There were no objections from neighbours on either of the two previous applications for 

replacement dwellings and whilst the Parish Council objected on grounds of form and 

character to the first application no objection was raised on the second. 

Form and Character 

The South Beach is characterized by a wide variety of residential dwellings and caravans, 

many of which are used as holiday accommodation. The setting of the site has already been 

described above in ‘The Application’ and ‘Supporting Statement’. Whilst the Design and 

Access Statement acknowledges that the proposed dwelling would be one of the larger 

properties in the area, it would be by no means the largest. It measures 12m by 6.8m, the 

same as the proposal refused in 2008, and is almost identical to the dimensions of the 

property to the north (no. 56). 

The ridge height of the proposed dwelling (6.4m at the eastern end) would be very slightly 

lower than that of the property to the north, which stands at 6.5m although the eaves of the 

proposed dwelling would be slightly higher as it has a shallower roof pitch. It would also 

make use of dormer windows as does no. 56 although the dormers in the proposed dwelling 

would be set in the eaves line rather than entirely in the roof. 

The scale and mass of the application that is the subject of this application is the same as 

that which was refused (on flood risk grounds) in 2008. The two designs differ in detail, most 


6 th July 2009

noticeably in that the current design lacks an external stair on the eastern elevation and has 

an additional dormer window on the north elevation. The current scheme has a smaller 

decked area than previous designs. 

Impact upon Neighbour Amenity 

Four dormer windows look north towards 56 The South Beach and three look south towards 

no. 54, as described in ‘The Application’ section of this report. There would be some intervisbility 

between the north facing windows in the proposed dwelling and those facing south in 

No. 56 but the approved plans for no. 56 show the two affected windows as being to a 

kitchen area and a hall way. The south facing windows would look out over the roof of no. 

54, which is an older, single storey property, and would not result in a material loss of 

privacy. 

Concerns have been expressed by both neighbours regarding loss of light to no. 56 and loss 

of privacy to both nos. 56 and 54 as a result of the decked area at the western end of the 

proposed dwelling. In terms of loss of light to 56, those windows affected are to nonhabitable 

areas within the dwelling and the decked area at the western end of no. 56 would 

not be materially affected when it is most likely to be used, i.e. in the afternoon and evening, 

when the sun is predominantly in the west. 

Regarding the decked area and loss of privacy, the applicant has reduced the area of the 

deck to the south, which will help reduce any loss of privacy to no. 54 although it will not 

eliminate it entirely. However, any loss of privacy has to be set in the context of the area. 

Key in this consideration is the presence of the sea defence bank to the west and the beach 

beyond. The bank affords public access right up to the edge of all three sites affected and 

the decked area at no. 56 is level with the top of the bank whilst that at no. 54 is actually 

below it. Another consideration is that both the affected neighbours are subject to seasonal 

occupancy conditions. 

Flood Risk 

An amended and up-dated flood risk assessment has been submitted with the application. 

The Environment Agency does not object to the application, subject to a seasonal 

occupancy condition. 


The application has no material implications for criminal and anti-social behaviour issues. 

CONCLUSION 

The reason for refusal of the previous application in 2008 is a material consideration in 

determining this submission. The 2008 application was refused for one reason only, namely 

flood risk. The applicant has addressed this issue and there is no objection to the proposal 

from the Environment Agency. 

With regard to other issues regarding scale, intensity of development and privacy, the 

submission is fundamentally the same as the scheme that was refused in 2008. These 

issues did not form part of the reason for refusal of that application as they were judged to 

be acceptable. It is your officers’ view that the scheme has not changed sufficiently to 

warrant refusal on these grounds now, for the reasons set out above. 


6 th July 2009







2 Condition The dwelling hereby approved shall only be occupied during the period 

between 1st April and 30th September in any calendar year. 

2 Reason To minimise the risk to occupants posed by flooding in accordance with 

PPS25 






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Hunstanton 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(g) 

Refurbishment and subdivision of 3 storey dwelling to 4No flats 

4 Westgate Hunstanton Norfolk PE36 5AL 

Mr Michael Cant 



Tel: 01553 616403 


21st July 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – The Town Council objects as they consider this is overintensive 


Case Summary 

The application seeks full planning permission for the conversion of a 6 bedroom single 

dwelling into 4 flats at 4 Westgate, Hunstanton. A series of minor amendments and 

improvements are proposed to the external appearance of the building and a rearrangement 

of the internal floor layouts is required to achieve the accommodation. 

The property is one of a row of terraced properties along Westgate which provide a mixture 

of uses, including residential, flats, hotel and retail. 

The site is within the town of Hunstanton and within the Built Environment ‘C’ as depicted on 

the Local Plan Proposals Map. It is also within the Conservation Area. 

Key Issues 


Form and layout and Impact on Conservation Area 

Use of building 



APPROVE 


The site comprises a part three storey, part two storey and part single storey terraced 

property. The building fronts onto Westgate and also has an access at the rear onto Chapel 

Lane. The rear of the building is two storeys and single storey in height. 

The property is one of a row of similar terraced properties which run from the south west to 

north east along Westgate. The properties along Westgate are principally residential with 

some retail use at ground floor. The area is generally a mixture of predominantly residential 

with retail and hotel/guest houses. 


6 th July 2009

This application seeks full planning permission for the conversion of the existing 6 bedroom 

dwelling to 2 x 2 bedroom flats and 2 x 1 bedroom flats. Three off street parking spaces are 

provided at the rear of the property. 


The application has been supported by a Design and Access Statement. This states that the 

dwelling has been empty for about 9 months and suffered from previous sub-standard 

workmanship with an attempt to form a number of internal units all of which was carried out 

with out planning permission. The current application proposes to renovate the dwelling 

while creating 4 independently accessed units, three within the main body of the house and 

an Annex accessed from the garden. 

The proposed development is an acceptable use for the property, with neighbouring 

properties having similar types of accommodation; a guesthouse at No 2 and hotel at No 6 - 

8, the latter was awarded planning permission to be converted into 11 residential units on 2 

March 2009, via an appeal to the Secretary of State. There are also other similar properties 

along the length of Westgate. The new property will have dual access via the front, 

Westgate (North-west) and via the unadopted Chapel Lane at the rear (South-east), where 

there is provision for three off street parking spaces, additional on street parking is available 

on Westgate in front of the property or in the public pay and display car park on the opposite 

site of the street. It is worth noting that the previously mentioned approved scheme at No. 6 - 

8 Westgate for 11 units had no provision for off-street parking. 

The existing building is on three floors with 6 bedrooms and a number of partly complete 

bathrooms. Without significant increase in floor area the proposal will provide 4 

independently accessed units; two from the ground floor and one each from the first and 

second floors, with a total of 6 bedrooms. 

The total site area is 0.0254 hectares (254sqm) and does not change with the development. 

The current existing floor area in total is 265.6sqm and the new floor area including the loft 

space above 1500mm height is 274.9sqm an increase of 9.3sqm. The rear ground floor 

porch in the proposal is reduced in size and access is made available through the property 

and an internal window reappears on the outside again. 

The annex has an incongruous flat roofed dormer which is proposed to be replaced with a 

brick faced gabled dormer similar to the existing rear second floor dormer, although taller in 

height than the flat roofed original it is replacing, it is overall 500mm narrower than the 

existing, the gain in space being between the dormer cheek and the external wall of No.6-8 

Westgate. 

The layout of the flats in the main building seeks to utilize the original layout while gaining 

lobbies into each flat. The lounges and kitchen all have North-west sea views; the bedrooms 

have South-east aspect. The Annex, accessed from the garden has a predominantly single 

aspect to the South-west, with the exception of the new dormer window and ground floor 

window facing South-east into Chapel Lane. 

The ground floor units (flat 1 of the Main house and the Annex) will have level entrance 

thresholds with accessible ground floor toilet. 

Cream brickwork quoining and Carstone panelling with gable roof dormers characterise the 

existing stepped terrace of Westgate. The front windows are wood grain effect UPVC and 

the rear windows are white UPVC. The existing front porch is to be removed and the brick 

quoining repaired. 


6 th July 2009

The roof lights proposed for the attic conversion are also a characteristic of the properties of 

Westgate on both North-west and South-east elevations. The new first floor gabled dormer 

to the annex at the rear picks up on the existing dormers when it replaces a wide flat roofed 

dormer; the image with superimposed dormer on the previous page demonstrates the scale 

and proportion in relation to the original dormer and adjacent windows. 

A smaller window at ground floor in new quoining replaces the existing large brown finished 

wood window unequally positioned within the brick quoining. The pitch of the roof over the 

single storey section has been raised to 17.5 degrees; the minimum that concrete tiles will 

accommodate, the new abutment with the external wail to No.6-8 Westgate accordingly will 

be raised, while still being significantly below the existing windows, approximately 750mm. 

New doors will be white finished UPVC or Wood, new or replacement windows will also be 

white UPVC. 

Due to the dual front/ rear access all units will have access and use of the rear-enclosed 

garden with hard and soft landscaping containing planted beds, with low-level shrubs and 

climbing plants. The garden is accessed from the rear via from the hard paved parking area 

sufficient for 3 off-street car spaces. The parking to the rear is accessible via the un-adopted 

road, Chapel Lane. 

All entrance doors would have level thresholds with ramped approach greater than 1:20. 

It is felt that the proposal development is in character with the existing uses and that the 

minor modifications proposed would enhance the appearance of the existing building and 

add to the local amenity. The density and scale are the same as already established in the 

area. 


None. 


Town Council: OBJECT – over intensive development of the site 

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION – Conditionally 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: no response received 

Norfolk Constabulary: no comments, but gave crime prevention advice 

B.C.K.L.W.N. Conservation Officer: NO OBJECTION 


No third party comments received 


6 th July 2009


























locality. 


The main issues for consideration are:- 


• Form and layout and Impact on Conservation Area 

• Use of building 



The site is located within the town of Hunstanton and within the Built Environment Type C as 

depicted on the Local Plan Proposals Map and also within the Conservation Area. In 

principle new development will be permitted provided it has regard for and is in harmony with 

the building characteristics of the locality and preserves or enhances the Conservation Area. 


6 th July 2009

Form and layout and Impact on Conservation Area 

The application proposes a series of amendments and improvements to the building to 

achieve the development of four flats. The proposed modifications represent relatively minor 

amendments to the appearance of the building from Westgate and make improvements to 

the rear of the building which has previously been extended in an unsympathetic manner. 

The Borough Council’s Conservation Team has raised no objection to the proposal other 

than to suggest the roof light to the front elevation be removed as it will be prominent in its 

setting. However, the applicant has confirmed that the rooflight is required for building 

regulation purposes as it provides a secondary means of escape from the second floor flat. 

The applicant also states that the roof light can be of a slim profile suitable for conservation 

areas and comments that being north-west in orientation there should not be any issues of 

reflection from the sun on the street scene below. The applicant also claims that the roof 

light in the roof space of the second floor would also be desirable to enjoy the sea views 

from the second bedroom. 

Overall the scheme will improve the visual appearance of the building. Currently the 

extensions to the rear of the building are of poor quality design and build. This application 

sees the introduction of more appropriate roof pitches and the removal of inappropriate 

extensions. 

In terms of the physical changes to the building the scheme is considered acceptable and 

will be in harmony with the building characteristics of the locality and will enhance the 

character of the Conservation Area. 

In terms of form and layout the proposal is now considered acceptable and in harmony with 

the character of the area. It will not now have a harmful effect upon this part of the 

Conservation Area. With this regard the proposal now accords with the principles of Local 

Plan Policy 4/21 and national policy in the form of PPS1 PPS3 and PPG15. 

Use of building 

The Town Council has objected to the over intensive use of the site for four residential units. 

Members may recall a recent planning application for the conversion of 12 hotel units into 7 

flats at Richmond House Hotel at the adjoining site at 6-8 Westgate (08/02137/F). There 

were also four existing self contained flats which were proposed to be upgraded, resulting in 

a total of 11 units on the site. This planning application was refused planning permission as it 

was considered the number of units proposed represented an over-intensive use of the 

building that would lead to an adverse impact upon occupants of adjoining buildings in terms 

of noise and disturbance caused by the occupants of the proposed development. The 

proposal was therefore considered contrary to central government policies expressed in 

PPS1 and PPS3. 

However, the application was subsequently allowed following an appeal. The Appeal 

Inspector did not consider that this proposal represented an intensification of use of the 

property and had no reason to believe that permanent residents would cause more noise or 

disturbance than hotel guests. 

He concluded that the proposal would not have a material, harmful effect on the living 

conditions of neighbours. He also considered that the proposal represented an appropriate 

use of the property in planning terms and found no conflict with either Planning Policy 

Statement 1 Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1) or Planning Policy Statement 3 

Housing (PPS3). 


6 th July 2009

Although the circumstances are slightly different in this case as the building was already in 

use as a hotel with restaurant and bar, the appeal decision has established that the use of 

the building for flats is appropriate in this location in terms of national policy. This view is 

further supported by a second appeal for conversion of a disused retail store/store unit 

(Local Planning Authority Reference 08/00549/F) adjacent to Elm Cottage to 2 flats on the 

opposite side of Chapel Lane. This too was refused on over-development but was allowed 

at appeal. Copies of both decision letters are appended. 

Planning permission has also been granted for other conversion schemes along Westgate in 

recent years, including a change of use from shop with flat over to 10 residential apartments 

at No. 24 (LPA ref: 07/00174/FM) and change of use of a single dwelling to 5 self contained 

flats and alterations at No.16 (LPA ref: 06/00350/CU). 

This proposal is therefore compatible with other uses in the terrace. 


The relationship between the building as proposed to be altered and existing dwellings has 

been examined and there will be no significantly detrimental impact upon the amenity of the 

occupants of neighbouring properties in terms of overlooking as a result of this proposal. The 

number of windows and rooflights will increase, but will not result in a significant degree of 

overlooking of neighbouring properties. The proposed dormer window to the rear of the 

property is in line with a window of No 6 – 8 Westgate but will not block a significant amount 

of light as it is set off the boundary. 





CONCLUSION 

This application for the refurbishment of the building and its conversion into four flats can be 

achieved without harm to the character of the area or the Conservation Area. There will be 

visual improvements to the rear of the building as a result of the application. There are no 

significant amenity issues. 

Given the above, a recommendation of approval is made. 








6 th July 2009

2 Condition The rooflights shown on the approved plans shall be Conservation style, low 

profile. The development shall be implemented as approved and thereafter maintained 

as such. 


accordance with the principles of PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development and 

PPG15 - Planning and the Historic Environment. 

3 Condition Notwithstanding the provision of Class A of Schedule 2, Part 2 

of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, (or 

any Order revoking, amending or re-enacting that Order) no gates shall be erected 

across the approved vehicular access unless details have first been submitted to and 

approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 


4 Condition Prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted the proposed onsite 

car parking shall be laid out, demarcated, levelled, surfaced and drained in 

accordance with the approved plan and retained thereafter available for that specific 

use. 








6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

King's Lynn 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(h) 

Sub-division of existing shop with hot food take-away facilities into 

two separate units, grocery and news agency (A1) at the front and a 

hot food takeaway (A5) premises at the rear 

31 Tennyson Avenue King's Lynn Norfolk PE30 2QG 

Tennyson Avenue Stores 

09/00601/CU (Change of Use Application) 


Tel: 01553 616457 


1st June 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – Referred to the Board at the request of Councillor D Murphy. 

Case Summary 

The site is located on the eastern side of Tennyson Avenue, King’s Lynn. The unit is 

currently used for A1 (retail) and former Use Class A3 (now A5- hot food takeaway). The site 

is located within Built Environment type ‘C’. Consent is sought for the sub-division of existing 

shop with hot food take-away facilities into two separate units; grocery and news agency at 

the front and hot food takeaway premises at the rear. 

Key Issues 



Noise and Odour; 

Highway Implications; 

Other Material Considerations; and 

Crime and Disorder Act 1998. 


APPROVE 


The application site is located in Tennyson Avenue, King's Lynn and is currently used as a 

general convenience store (Use Class A1 with hot food premises at the rear (Use Class A5). 

The building is two storey; at first floor level is residential accommodation. The building is 

located amongst residential properties, although it is within close distance to the College 

site. 

Planning consent is sought to sub-divide the existing unit into two, retail in the front portion 

and the rear section being used for a hot food take-away. 

09/00601/CU Development Control Board 

6 th July 2009


A Design and Access Statement has been submitted with this application. It is confirmed 

within this document that the building is to remain as its current size and footprint. In terms of 

access the retail element will be accessed via the existing entrance off Tennyson Avenue 

and the hot food takeaway will be accessed via an existing doorway from the adjacent side 

road. 


05/01026/A 2 non-illuminated shop signs. Permitted 22/07/05 

05/01025/F Installation of a flue. Permitted 07/10/05 

04/02558/A Shop signs. Permitted 20/01/05 

04/01224/LDE Use of premises for A1 and A3 use - for hot and cold food takeaway- 

newsagents-shop-post office and off-licence. Lawful 03/08/04 


Parish Council: N/A 

Highways Authority: The ground floor area would not alter and the uses of the site would 

essentially remain the same. Therefore it is not anticipated that new traffic movements will 

be generated in respect of this application. 


Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: The proposal is located in a 

predominantly residential area and therefore it is believed that the proposal has the potential 

to cause disturbance and dis-amenity to the closest residents. The use of the side door as 

the main entrance to the takeaway will result in noise and odour break out which will have a 

direct impact on the closest residents. For this reason conditions are requested in relation to 

self-closing doors and hours of use. 

A planning application for a flue was submitted and approved in 2005, it is understood that 

the flue was not installed. The residents have raised objections based on odour from the 

takeaway. It is therefore requested that a condition be placed upon any permission in order 

to protect he closest residents from any disturbance or disseminate in relation to details of a 

ventilation system. 

Norfolk Constabulary: Verbally confirmed that as the use is there, no comment to make. 


Twelve letters of representation have been received. Concerns raised relate to the following: 

• Criminal activity, congregation of youths and anti social behaviour; 

• Poor standard of hygiene- litter and general appearance; 

• Where would bins be sited? 

• Shop element is poorly stocked; 

• Potential for increased traffic; 

• Proximity of unit in relation to educational establishments; 

• Noise associated with late night opening and car movements; 


6 th July 2009

• Concern that roadway to the side is owned by 4 properties but properties on the 

eastern side of Tennyson Avenue and the west side of King George V Avenue have 

a legal right of way. The road way has to be kept clear at all times and no one had 

the right to park; 

• Concern in relation to advertisements; and 

• Reference is made to premises in Leytonstone that was closed down due to its 

proximity to schools. 

Henry Bellingham MP, requests that when making a decision the objectors concerns are 

fully considered. 







proposals. 







Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention (2004) ODPM provides guidance 

on the way in which good quality design can contribute to making places safer and secure. 







application: 






locality. 


6 th July 2009


The key planning considerations relevant to the determination of this application are: 

• Principle of Development 

• Planning History; 

• Noise and Odour; 

• Highway Implications; 

• Crime and Disorder; and 

• Other Material Considerations 


The site is located within the urban area and in a predominately residential area and within 

the Built Environment Type C as depicted on the Local Plan Proposals Map. In principle new 

development will be permitted subject to other material considerations. 

The application is for the sub division of the unit into two separate planning units at ground 

floor. The uses currently exist together (lawfully) but in the same planning unit. The proposal 

would therefore not be introducing a new use. The history of the premises use is discussed 

below. 


Of particular relevance to this current application are applications 04/01224/LDE and 

05/01025/F. Firstly with regard to the use, this was considered under a certificate of lawful 

use. These applications are a legal determination as to whether a particular use is lawful. 

Evidence was submitted proving the use over the 10 year period in this case and accordingly 

a certificate was issued on the 3rd August 2004 for the use of the premises for A1 and A3 

use- for hot food and cold food takeaway, newsagents, shop, post office and off-licence. The 

principle of the uses has therefore already been established and it is the subdivision that is 

the key difference in this instance. 

Subsequent to this application, Members approved an application in October 2005 for the 

installation of a flue at the premises. However it appears that this was never installed. 

Noise and Odour 

As stated above, whilst details of a flue were submitted to and approved in 2005, the flue 

was not installed. Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance (CSNN) have received 

complaints based on odours from the takeaway. The applicant has not provided details of a 

proposed extraction duct to establish whether the noise and odour from the system will have 

a detrimental impact on neighbour amenity, and it is assumed that the existing ventilation will 

continue to be used. 

The hours of operation have not been indicated on the application form. CSNN have 

recommended that a condition be imposed relating to hours of use in relation to the 

takeaway element restricting use between 11am and 10pm Monday to Thursdays, 11am and 

10.30 pm Fridays and Saturdays. Bearing in mind the use of hot food takeaway exists 

currently, and there is no control over hours of operation it is not considered reasonable to 

impose such a condition. 


6 th July 2009

Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance have enforcement powers under the 

Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part 3 Section 79. 1D (odour) and Section 79. 1G (noise) 

under their statutory nuisance legislation, if these matters become an issue of complaint. 

Highway Implications 

Norfolk County Council commented on this application and has no objection to the proposal. 


The nature of a hot food takeaway may potentially cause activity outside of normal business 

hours and act as a collection point for youth leading to disturbance, littering and anti-social 

behaviour. 

It is noted that an Anti-Social Behaviour Order is current at the site and concerns have been 

raised regarding the potential for the proposal to exacerbate this issue. Despite this, 

planning permission cannot be restricted because of an existing problem at the site, 

especially as; this application is unlikely to create more opportunities for crime than existing 

at present given the lawful existing use of the site. Further, the issue of anti-social behaviour 

is outside the planning remit and is covered by separate legislation. 


Litter and refuse associated with the nature of a takeaway shop is a material planning issue 

and it is considered that the existing bin, located on the shop forecourt area is adequate to 

cater for litter associated with the take-away. 

Reference has been made to a take-away in Leytonstone, which was given three days to 

cease trading. The Waltham Forest Local Authority banned new fast food outlets from 

opening within 400 metres of schools, parks and leisure centres. However in this instance 

the takeaway was operating without planning permission and it was stated that planning 

permission would not be granted under the new guidelines. It is confirmed that the Borough 

Council does not have such a policy, and therefore would not seek to preclude A5 uses 

within a set distance of schools, parks or leisure centres. 

If advertisements were erected and displayed in connection with the uses these would be 

dealt with under separate submission. 

The road to the side is a private road and occupants enjoy rights of way over this. However it 

is to be kept clear and this is a civil issue and not a matter for the Local Planning Authority. 

CONCLUSION 

The application to separate the existing mixed-use to two separate units is recommended for 

approval. A Certificate of Existing Lawful use was deemed lawful in 2004 and therefore the 

issue of separating the unit into two separate planning units is a technical issue and weight 

must be placed on the fact that the uses of retail and hot food take-away are lawful, and can 

be continued even without this sub-division. It is not considered reasonable for a condition to 

be imposed to restrict hours of use bearing in mind the business currently can operate with 

unrestricted hours of operation. Taking into account the above it is recommended that this 

application is approved subject to condition relating to the use of self closing doors to the 

entrance and egress doors of the hot food take-away. 


6 th July 2009







2 Condition The entrance doors to the hot food take-away shall be self-closing to 

minimise the emission of odours and/or noise from the premises. 

2 Reason In the interests of the amenities of the locality in accordance with PPG24. 


Application file reference: 09/00601/CU 




6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Methwold 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(i) 

Outline Application: construction of bungalow with garage 

Land Adjacent To 10 Eldens Lane Methwold Norfolk 

Mr Colin Neville 



Tel: 01553 616318 



Reason for Referral to DCB – Councillor Mick Peake requested that the application be 

determined by the Development Control Board, the Parish support the application although 

no planning reasons were given. 

Case Summary 

The application is for outline planning permission for the construction of a bungalow. The 

application site lies within the conservation area of Methwold, the countryside and an area of 

important landscape quality. New dwellings in the countryside are only permitted in 

exceptional circumstances as outlined within PPS7, and no such justification has been 

provided. 

In addition, the application raises highway safety concerns, adversely affects the 

conservation area and impacts upon archaeological remains. 

The application remains in essence the same as that refused under planning permission 

reference 08/02433/O. Officers consider that the proposal does not accord with a number of 

aspects of planning policy. 

Key Issue 

The principle of development 


Impact upon the conservation area and important area of landscape quality 

Highway Safety and Public Rights of Way 

Other Material considerations 


REFUSE 


The application site lies within the countryside, an important area of landscape quality and 

the Methwold conservation area. It is approximately 100m north of Hythe Road and on the 

Eastern side of Eldens Lane. The site is grassed with an established hedgerow on the 

western boundary. The southern boundary separating number 10 from the site is a close 


6 th July 2009

oard 1.5m fence with trellis work. There is no formal boundary to the north or to the east. 

These open aspects extend across open fields and the church to the east. 

The site is adjacent to a public footpath to the North (shown on plan reference 9224-1A) and 

the site also dissects a public footpath which heads East towards the Primary School 

between 14 and 18 Hythe Road. 

The character of the adjacent built up area consists of traditional two storey semi detached 

properties on the Western side of the road with narrow and deep private amenity spaces. 

These properties appear to be constructed during an earlier time period compared to the 

bungalows on the Eastern side of the road. Their amenity spaces are slightly larger at the 

rear compared to the front. The bungalows are stepped back from the road incrementally. 

The application proposes outline planning permission, with some matters reserved, for a 

detached bungalow with detached garage to its North and adjacent to one of the footpaths. 

The indicative layout shows the bungalow is stepped back from the highway by 10m and 

would be parallel to the road, with a detached garage to the North. Access is considered as 

an integral part of this Outline application. 

Although full details have not been provided, enough detail is considered to be provided with 

the application to allow an assessment of its impact on the conservation area. 


The case put forward in support of this application is as follows: 

• The site is at the end of a row of residential bungalows, opposite existing houses and 

is within the conservation area. 

• The adjacent footpath would preclude further development and is a natural boundary. 

• The site is allegedly on earthwork remains but there has been two houses and one 

bungalow built within 200 yards of the site within the last seven years. The applicants 

are happy to accept a condition stating that prior to commencement an 

archaeological assessment, desk top study and excavation be carried out in 

accordance with Council requirements. 

• The application would enhance the character and form of the area and provide an 

additional dwelling of a size and design appropriate to the locality. 

• Has been sited to maintain the spatial qualities and not to disturb or cause nuisance 

to neighbour amenity. 

• The plot is an unusual shape so is difficult to farm. 

• The dwelling would be constructed from red brick, clay pantiles and timber windows. 

• The access from Elden’s Lane to Hythe Road is used by 10 residential dwellings and 

a sewage treatment plant which necessitates the use of heavy goods vehicles. 

• It is considered that the traffic generated by an additional new dwelling would be 

inconsequential and visibility is the same for other road users. 

• It is proposed to retain the existing hedgerow to the front of the dwelling other than 

where the access is required. 

• The Parish Council have no objections to the proposal as they do not wish to see 

parishioners moving out of the village to find retirement dwellings. 

The bungalow indicative size is as follows:- 

• Width: - 12.2m 

• Depth: - 7.5m – 11.0m 

• Eaves Height: - 2.45m 


6 th July 2009

• Ridge Height: - 5.5m 


08/02433/O Erection of bungalow and garage – refused December 2008 


Parish Council: NO OBJECTION 

Highways Authority: OBJECT 

Eldens Lane is a private road however its junction with the C871 (Hythe Road) has been 

considered. The existing junction of the private access road (Eldens Lane) with Hythe Road 

would not be appropriate to serve the additional traffic that this application would generate. 

Hythe Road is restricted to 30mph and for such a limit visibility splays of 59m are required to 

both directions, from a 2.4m setback distance. 

At the junction, visibility to the trafficked direction is restricted by a boundary wall providing 

just 13m visibility when setback 2.5m. To the non-trafficked direction visibility is again 

restricted by a boundary wall, providing 15m of visibility. These levels of visibility are only 

22% and 25% of the recommended standard. 

Approval of this application will intensify the use of an existing private access with dangerous 

levels of visibility, by an anticipated 8-10 movement per day (based on TRICS database 

information). I therefore recommend the application be refused in the interests of highway 

safety. 

NCC Public Rights of Way: OBJECT This application obstructs Footpath No.7 Methwold, 

which crosses through the application site. Please see the previous letter of objection dated 

18th November 2008, detailing this fact. This revised application has not taken any of this 

into consideration, so we have no option but to maintain our objection. 

Internal Drainage Board: No comment as will not adversely affect drainage operations. 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: No comment from a 


Environmental Health & Housing – CSNN: NO OBJECTION soakaways may not be 

suitable and percolation tests would be required. The applicant states that foul water will be 

disposed of in the mains sewer, no mains sewer is available in Methwold and this has been 

checked with Anglian Water data on sewers. Therefore a condition requesting further detail 

of foul and surface water drainage is requested. 

Norfolk Landscape Archaeology: OBJECT 

The proposed site lies directly on earthwork remains relating to medieval settlement 

remains. These extant earthworks form part of a larger group and merit preservation in situ. 

Our recommendation remains the same as for the previous application at this site. In view of 

this we would recommend the present application is refused planning permission. 

BCKLWN – Building Control: Comment Due to the relatively small plot, it may be difficult 

to locate soakaways for the storm drainage system. This will need to be determined 

following percolation tests. 

BCKLWN – Conservation Team: OBJECT another bungalow along Eldens Lane will not 

enhance the character of the conservation area, the boundary of which was carefully drawn 


6 th July 2009

to exclude the existing bungalows but include the meadow because of its contribution to the 

setting of the Hall Farm complex (all Listed) and to preserve views of the Church. 


THREE letters of OBJECTION: 

• Will obscure views of meadow and church. 

• Impact upon value and selling feature of objectors dwelling. 

• Lane is small and will cause disruption and a hazard. 

• Eldens Lane is peaceful and quiet and this will change the character of the Lane. 

• If approved this will cause ‘creeping’ development over the whole meadow. 

• The meadowland is part of the conservation area and not brownfield land which 

should be considered first. 

• The garage has been moved to the other side of the dwelling and the proposed 

bungalow is nearer the neighbouring dwelling. This will cause disturbance which 

does not currently exist as there is nothing there. 

• The neighbouring bungalow was built 38 years ago and not 20 years ago as 

mentioned within the design and access statement, nor was the other recent 

development in the same field, nor in close proximity to the site. 

• The footpath should preclude further development. 

• The site is too small. 

• Objector was told years ago the meadow will never be built upon because of its 

archaeological and historic importance. 

• There would be no turning head at the end of Eldens Lane which is currently in front 

of the site and this will result in residents’ driveways being used for turning, which is 

unacceptable. 

• Eldens Lane has problems with its entry and exit and there has already been one 

serious road traffic accident this year. 

• The application mentions the dwelling is for retirement, does this mean no one under 

65 could live there? 

• The second application does not differ from the first so why should it be approved? 
















6 th July 2009

PPG16 - “Archaeology and Planning” (1990) sets out how archaeological remains should be 

preserved or recorded when determining planning applications. 








application: 






The main considerations to consider when determining this application are as follows:- 

• The principle of development 

• Impact upon Neighbour Amenity 

• Impact upon the conservation area and important area of landscape quality 

• Highway Safety and Public Rights of Way 

• Other Material considerations 


The application site is located within the Conservation Area of Methwold but outside the 

development boundary and within the Countryside and an Area of Important Landscape 

Quality as defined by the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan 1998. Only new dwellings 

which meet the criteria set out in Planning Policy Statement 7, including those associated 

with established agricultural or forestry activities, should be allowed within the countryside. 

There is no justification for this proposal and consequently there is an in principle policy 

objection to this proposal. 


The proposal does not materially affect neighbour amenity, the dwelling is single storey in 

height and located to the north of 10 Eldens Lane sited behind 1.8m close boarded fencing 

on their northern boundary. Whilst an objection has been received from this neighbour 

relating to the disturbance a new dwelling would create, the proposed dwelling is not 

considered to have a detrimental effect on amenity to the degree that it would warrant a 

refusal on this basis. 


6 th July 2009

The nearest neighbour to the north of the site is some 70m away, with a 2m brick wall on 

their southern boundary. 

The neighbours opposite the application site would not be materially affected by the 

development. There are objections from these neighbours that the proposed dwelling would 

interrupt their view. Whilst the impact of a development on a public view is material to a 

planning decision, the impact on a private view is not a material consideration. 

Impact upon the conservation area and important area of landscape quality 

The proposal seeks to retain the existing hedgerow on the western boundary and only 

remove this in order to create an access. The proposal (indicatively) would be 5.5m to the 

pitch, but only 2.45m to eaves height and so it is likely that the roof would be the 

predominant construction which would be visible from Eldens Lane. 

Notwithstanding this fact the erection of a dwelling on this site would be highly visible from 

the area behind the application site (Public Footpaths), which is open across the meadow. 

The Conservation Officer has objected to the proposal on the basis that an additional 

bungalow along Eldens Lane would not serve to preserve or enhance the Conservation 

Area. Indeed the boundary of the Conservation Area was carefully drawn to exclude the 

existing bungalows but to include the meadow because of its contribution to the setting of 

the Hall Farm complex (all of which is Listed) and to preserve the views of the Church to the 

North-East of the site. 

Any development here would erode the special, open character of this part of the 

conservation area and therefore an objection is raised. 

Highway Safety and Public Rights of Way 

An objection has been received by the Highways Officer. The additional volume of traffic 

which the application would generate cannot safely emerge from Eldens lane to Hythe Road 

because at the junction visibility is restricted by boundary walls providing just 13m and 15m 

of visibility; these levels of visibility are only 22% and 25% of the recommended standard. By 

having another property on Eldens Lane this would intensify the use of this access, causing 

a highway danger. 

There are two public rights of way in the vicinity of the application site. One public right of 

way runs along the north-western boundary of the site and the other dissects the application 

site, from west to east. An objection has been received by NCC Public Rights of Way Officer 

to the proposal as it does not accommodate the footpath running east from Eldens lane. In 

order for the objection not to stand the Local Planning Authority would have to make a 

diversion order for Public Footpath No. 7 under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 

OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 

Archaeology 

Norfolk Landscape Archaeology objects to the proposal as the development site lies directly 

on earthwork remains relating to medieval settlement remains; these extant earthworks form 

part of a larger group and merit preservation in situ. 

Drainage 

Following consultation with the Environmental Health Officer and Building Control concerns 

were lodged in regards to the appropriate drainage from the site. However this issue can be 


6 th July 2009

dealt with by the imposition of a condition requesting further drainage details prior to 

commencement. 


No crime and disorder issues were raised by this application. 

CONCLUSION 

The application site lies within an area designated as being within the countryside. Planning 

Policy Statement 7 states that new dwellings in the countryside are only permitted in 

exceptional circumstances. This application details no such justification in its purpose. In 

addition, the application raises highway safety concerns, adversely affects the conservation 

area and impacts upon archaeological remains and an existing Public Right of Way. 

Therefore the proposal does not accord with National Policies PPS7, PPG13, PPG15 and 

PPG16, Policy T2 of the Norfolk Structure Plan 1999, Policy ENV2 and ENV6 of the East of 

England Plan 2008 or Policy 4/6 of the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan 1998. 

There are no material considerations that would overcome these fundamental objections. 



1 Inadequate visibility splays are provided at the junction of Eldens Lane with the County 

Highway (Hythe Road) and this would cause danger and inconvenience to users of the 

adjoining public highway, contrary to saved Norfolk Structure Policy T2 and Planning 

Policy Guidance 13. 

2 The proposal is contrary to Planning Policy Statement 7 as the site lies within a 

designated area of countryside where new house building (including single dwellings) 

will be strictly controlled. No special justification for a dwelling as set out in Planning 

Policy Statement 7 is provided and no other material circumstances exist that would 

allow the development. 

3 The site lies directly on earthwork remains relating to medieval settlement remains, 

which form part of a larger group and merit preservation in situ. As such the 

development of the site would damage the historical importance of the site contrary to 

Planning Policy Guidance 16. 

4 The site lies within the Methwold conservation area where any new development must 

preserve or enhance the area. The introduction of development into this open 

undeveloped area will erode the characteristics of this part of the conservation area, 

contrary to PPG15. 






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

North Runcton 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(j) 

Permanent change of use from domestic dwelling to place of 

worship 

Jacaranda 65 New Road North Runcton Norfolk 

Southgate Gospel Hall Trust 

09/00874/CU (Change of Use Application) 

Case Officer: Mrs H Wood-Handy 

Tel: 01553 616734 


23rd July 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – The application raises issues of wider concern. 

Case Summary 

The site is a rectangular shaped plot which is situated to the west of New Road in the village 

of North Runcton. The site contains a detached bungalow and accompanying garage. 

Vehicular access to the site is provided via the adjacent New Road. 

The application is for the change of use of a domestic dwelling to a place of worship. 

The relevant policies in relation to this application are PPS1, PPG13, PPG24, Policy T2 of 

the Norfolk Structure Plan 1999 and Policies 4/7 and 4/21 of the King’s Lynn and West 

Norfolk Local Plan 

Key Issues 


Impact on neighbour amenity 

Impact on highway safety 



APPROVE 


Introduction 

Members will recall that a similar application was heard at the Development Control Board of 

6th April 2009. Members considered the application and refused the proposal on the basis 

of highway concerns regarding inadequate parking/manoeuvring areas which would lead to 

parking on New Road. This application, although almost identical, seeks to resolve the 

outstanding highways concerns. 

Following the refusal of planning permission, an Enforcement Notice was served requiring 

the use of the dwelling as a place of worship to cease. A subsequent appeal has been 

lodged with the Planning Inspectorate. 


6 th July 2009

The Application 

Temporary planning permission was granted for an 18 month period in February 2007 for the 

change of use of the dwelling, Jacaranda, to a place of worship. Permission was granted for 

a temporary period to assess the effect of the proposal on neighbour amenity and highway 

safety. The application was granted with a condition limiting the time of use from between 

0530 and 2200 on any day which allowed for the celebration of Holy Communion at 0600 on 

Sundays. 

The current application seeks planning permission to retain the use of the dwelling as a 

place of worship on a permanent basis. 

The hours of use would be as follows: 

Mondays (inc Bank Holidays): Prayer and Bible Study 1800 – 2000 

Sundays: Holy Communion 0545 – 0715 

The applicant has confirmed that the building will not be used for occasional meetings and 

that the maximum number of people attending the site would be 40. 

There would be minimal alteration to the building; the changes include the panelling of 

windows and internal alterations. 

The applicant would provide 11 general parking spaces and 2 disabled parking spaces and 

surfaced in tarmac and block weave. The access would be via an “in” and “out” 

arrangement. A new entrance would be located to the south east of the site onto New Road 

with the “out” to the north, utilising the existing entrance. A dropping off area is proposed to 

within the site between the two access points. 


The applicant has supplied supporting information in the form of a Design and Access 

Statement (although not required in change of uses cases), Noise data, Traffic data and 

Tree Report. 

Design 

The proposal relates to a change of use from existing place of worship that was formerly a 

single storey dwelling. 

The layout of the associated car parking has changed from that contained within the original 

permission (06/02440/CU) and application 08/02615/CU, now showing two access points to 

New Road. 

The boundary features on the southern boundary remain unchanged, including the close 

boarded 2 metre fence. 

The enclosed tree report shows the extent of landscaping all to be retained within the site. 

One blue pine tree would be removed which is located in the area of the new access. 

The changed parking layout is presented as further improvement to the previous parking 

layout and incorporates the provision of disabled spaces, all parking remaining fully 

screened so as to be invisible from outside the site (even with the new entrance). 


6 th July 2009

By retaining the existing built structure on site, and making no external changes, and 

retaining all screening and boundary features, the development does not alter the street 

scene. 

The site remains fully accessible for visitors to the site, who predominantly are locally based, 

arriving on foot. 

Assessment 

The approval granted by the local planning authority allowing an initial 18 months use, has 

allowed the assessment of the site by the applicants, users, neighbours and local planning 

authority. 

The application seeks to reiterate issues of the previous application and addresses the 

highways concerns. 

The purpose of Condition 1 of the planning permission granted, was, as the “reason” makes 

clear, to allow the monitoring, by the local planning authority of traffic movements associated 

with the site, in the interests of Highway safety. It must be noted that the use itself is an 

acceptable use and all considerations relating to hours of use were fully considered in 

Condition 5 of the existing consent. 

The applicants have taken account of the concerns that have been raised by objectors to the 

proposals and have restricted the use of the building to two occasions per week only. Other 

areas that have been addressed are: 

1. Excessive parking on New Road. 

2. Noise and disturbance early on Sunday mornings from vehicle users to the premises. 

3. Breach of existing planning conditions. 

4. Availability of alternative worship premises at West Winch. 

5. No. of worshippers 

The applicants have of course taken note of these expressed concerns, and have where 

appropriate and possible, sought to take account of these concerns, without at the same 

time losing sight of the support for the proposal, and the reason for the temporary nature of 

the earlier consent. 

Parking on New Road: 

The applicants have revised the on site parking layout, which now provides for 11 parking 

spaces plus 2 additional disabled spaces as well as providing the circulation space to enable 

any car entering or leaving the site to do so in forward gear. 

The applicants have committed to a travel plan which requires their membership to avoid the 

use of cars where possible, reserving the parking spaces for those requiring disabled car 

parking spaces and those members of the congregation travelling furthest to the Hall. 

The applicants have set out clear guidance to all vehicular users of the Hall to enter and 

leave the site as quietly as possible via the designated entry and exit routes. 

Breach of conditions: 

The applicants have considered the concerns expressed about “breach of planning 

conditions”. They would reiterate at this stage as is made clear by all communication with 


6 th July 2009

local planning authority officers, that no concerns have been raised other than the response 

of the Environmental Health and Housing Team to complaints from local residents. 

Availability of alternative Place of Worship: 

The suggestion made by some of the representations that the applicants should use other 

facilities elsewhere does not reflect the requirements of planning legislation where each 

planning application must be considered on its merits. The availability of locally based 

community facilities is firmly in accordance with the Government’s adopted sustainability 

approach to planning and this is clear in PPS1 and reinforced in PPS7 which seeks the 

retention and enhancement of community facilities in villages and rural settlements. 

Number of Worshippers: 

It has been confirmed that the number of Worshippers will be limited to 40 people. 

The Environmental Health Department’s letter of lst August seeks to suggest that the 

assessment of this planning application relates to the balance between respect for religious 

belief and alleged dis-amenity to neighbouring residents. With due respect however, the EH 

suggestion of the required assessment for planning purposes is incorrect. Reason 1 of 

application 06/02440/CU makes clear that the local planning authority’s reason for the 

temporary use was to assess issues of Highway safety. Matters of amenity were of course 

fully considered when the development was approved, and addressed by the hours of use 

condition - which has not been the subject of any allegations of breach from the local 

planning authority. 

The travel plan, guidance to vehicular users of the premises, the creation of a hard surface 

accessway and the undertaking of traffic surveys have all showed the careful consideration 

given by the applicants to the apparent concerns of objectors. 

Within the application bundle is the summary of vehicle movements for the week 31st July to 

6th August 2008. The survey shows vehicle movements along New Road between the 

hour’s of4am and 7am. The very limited traffic on Sunday morning must be noted which 

cannot on any reasonable basis give rise to concerns of Highway safety bearing in mind the 

level of uses at all other times of the week. 

No concerns have been raised by the County Council’s Highway Authority over the period of 

use of the facilities pursuant to the existing consent. 

CONCLUSION 

The applicants have taken a positive approach to the temporary permission granted and 

have through the revised parking layout, surfacing, travel plan, criteria to members of the 

congregation, and all other aspects, shown that there are no planning reasons why 

permanent use of the premises should not now be granted. 


08/02615/CU – Change of use from domestic dwelling to place of worship – Refused – 6th 

April 2009 – Committee decision. 

08/01928/CU – Continued change of use to place of worship – Application withdrawn 19th 

September 2008. 


6 th July 2009

06/02440/CU - Temporary planning permission was granted on 5th February 2007 for the 

change of use from domestic dwelling to place of worship (18 month permission) (Committee 

decision 05.02.07) 


Parish Council: NO RESPONSE to date. 

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions regarding provision of 

accesses, on site parking and turning areas and Travel Plan. 

The application seeks to address concerns raised on the previous applications by providing 

two points of access, a dropping off area and increased levels of parking on site. 

Environmental Health & Housing – CSNN: Conducted noise recordings on 15th March 

2009 during the consideration of the previous application 08/02615/CU. When using PPG24 

to provide guidance, the noise levels calculated fell into Noise Exposure Category (NEC) B 

for night time noise (2300 hrs to 0700 hrs) based on mixed sources which advises noise 

should be taken into account and where appropriate, conditions imposed to ensure an 

adequate level of protection against noise. For this reason, recommend that a condition be 

imposed regarding a scheme for noise protection to be submitted within 3 months. 

Development Services – Landscape Officer: NO OBJECTION: subject to a condition 

requiring no-dig construction for the parking area around the cedar tree on the south 

boundary. Does not consider that the loss of the conifer (blue pine) on the road frontage will 

have a serious impact on visual amenity because of the tree cover remaining on the site and 

the surrounding land to the south and west. 


72 letters of OBJECTION regarding: 

• Restricted width of highway and therefore difficult to pass cars parked on road; 

• Acceptable as temporary use only whilst church at West Winch/Setchey was 

constructed 

• Unacceptable noise and disturbance early in the morning and late at night (as a 

result of traffic noise and car doors banging) in a quiet residential area 

• Additional entrance will cause hazard to other road users. 

• Increased traffic to site – 13 parking spaces and bus drop off point 

• No objections to original application as times proposed were 8am – 10pm. NO 

consultation on amended hours (5.30am – 10pm) 

• Building is not suitable for purpose – unsightly with further removal of hedge 

• Suitable alternative place of worship at Setchey/West Winch 

• Set a precedent for further changes of use to commercial properties 

• Should utilise existing facilities in North Runcton (3 other venues) 

• Enforcement Notice – why is the building still being used? 


6 th July 2009
















application: 





woodlands. 



locality. 


The Development Plan comprises the East of England Plan 2008, and the saved policies of 

the Norfolk Structure Plan 1999 and the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan 1998. 

Decisions should be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material 

considerations indicate otherwise. 

In this case the main issues are: 


• Impact upon neighbour amenity 

• Impact upon highway safety 



In policy terms, a change of use of a dwelling in a village location to a place of worship is 

acceptable. At the time of the previous application (February 2007), supporting 


6 th July 2009

documentation stated that the site would serve between 4 – 5 families with 6 parking spaces 

provided. The full impact of the proposal was unknown at that time and despite being a 

relatively low key use, it was considered appropriate to grant a temporary consent for an 18 

month period to assess the full impact of the proposal on the highway network in the locality. 

In the latter part of the 18 month period, a complaint was made to the Enforcement Service 

that hours of use were not being adhered to; the complainant did not know that the hours of 

use had been amended to allow for Holy Communion at 0600 and therefore was informed 

that no breach had occurred and the case closed. Further complaints were made to the 

Environmental Health Service on noise and disturbance grounds. 

An application for the permanent use of the dwelling as a place of worship was made in 

August 2008 just prior to the expiration of the temporary consent. This application attracted 

considerable objection from local residents on highway safety and residential amenity 

grounds (noise and disturbance). The application however was withdrawn in September 

2008 on the basis that there was insufficient information on file to be able to assess the 

impact of the development on both the highway network and neighbour amenity. The 

applicant was given until 14th November 2008 to submit an application for the development 

and during that period the dwelling continued to be used as a place of worship. A further 

application was then submitted but refused on highway safety grounds at the Development 

Control Board of 6th April 2009. 

Whilst the permanent use of the building as a place of worship would be acceptable in 

principle, there has been a material change in circumstances in terms of the increase in 

numbers of church members visiting the site and the number of vehicles present. Further, a 

significant number of complaints from local residents have been received with regard to 

noise and disturbance and traffic generation which will be addressed below. 


PPG 24 is the relevant guidance for planning and noise and it states that ‘Local planning 

authorities must ensure that development does not cause an un-acceptable degree of 

disturbance.’ It also states that ‘Sudden impulses, irregular noise or noise which contains a 

distinguishable continuous tone will require special consideration’ and if noise levels exceed 

82dB several times in any one hour should be considered as Noise Exposure Category C. 

PPG 24 also refers to night time as 23.00 to 07.00. In this case, the noisy activity would be 

taking place between 05.45 and 07.00 on Sunday mornings and is therefore night time 

noise. 

Planning permission 06/02440/CU was granted subject to a condition regarding hours of 

use. The officer report suggested the hours 0800 to 2200 however representation was 

made at Development Control Board that Church members practise Holy Communion at 

0600 on Sunday mornings and the aforementioned hours would not allow for worship to take 

place. As a result, the condition was amended to allow the use of the building on any day 

between the hours of 0530 and 2200. There was no condition attached to the permission 

limiting the number of people attending meetings. 

In the following 18 months, the applicant states that the building has been used on Sunday 

mornings for Holy Communion and on Monday evenings for prayer and bible study even 

though the aforementioned condition allows for meetings to be held on any day between 

0530 and 2200. The room has been regularly used by 30 – 40 people (Holy Communion and 

meetings for prayer) and for occasional meetings (gospel preachings and bible readings) 

where there would be an increased number of people present. Even though the number of 

meetings per week is limited in number, a significant level of objection has arisen from local 


6 th July 2009

esidents regarding noise and disturbance from car doors banging and cars being driven off 

early in the morning and late at night. 

At the DCB of 2nd February 2009 to consider application 08/02615/CU, Members requested 

that an independent noise survey was undertaken prior to a decision being made on the 

application. The applicant made available the raw data from the original survey and CSNN 

undertook its own survey. 

The applicant’s survey (also submitted with the current application) showed a difference of 

5dB between background noise and noise emanating from the site and CSNN’s survey 

showed a difference of 14.7dB. BS4142 (methodology used for assessing noise) states that 

a difference in excess of 10dB is more likely to cause complaint. The applicants have 

stated that they intend to surface the car park with tarmac which would further reduce noise 

from vehicular movements and a condition could be imposed limiting the building to the 

prescribed times of use. CSNN considered that whilst the difference exceeds the threshold, 

given the limited use (on two occasions per week) a scheme for noise protection could be 

put in place which would reduce the impact of the development for the adjacent residents. 

With regard to this proposal, the applicant states that the building will be used on Sunday 

mornings and Monday evenings only and will not be used for occasional meetings. The 

applicant has also confirmed that the maximum number of people attending the site would 

be 40. There has been a material change in circumstances with regard to the provision of 

an additional 3 parking spaces. However, CSNN consider that the aforementioned 

comments still stand and that no objection is raised subject to a condition regarding a 

scheme for noise protection to be submitted within 3 months. 


Parking is currently located to the south of the dwelling on a gravel car park and there is 

currently provision for 6 cars on site. The applicant has increased the provision for parking 

from 8 (as proposed under application 08/02615/CU) to 13 (inc two disabled parking spaces) 

spaces. A dropping off space would be provided along with the addition of a new access to 

the south east of the site onto New Road creating an “entry” and “exit” arrangement. The 

car park would be hard surfaced to minimise noise and disturbance. The applicant has 

confirmed that the “dropping off” area would not be used for minibuses (as objectors assert) 

and that it is purely for dropping off people to the site. The applicant has produced a traffic 

survey showing vehicle movements between 4am and 7am on the week of 31st July 2008 – 

6th August 2008 which concludes that there is very limited traffic on a Sunday morning and 

therefore no basis for a highway objection to this proposal. A travel plan has also been 

produced which requires members of the congregation to avoid using cars as much as 

possible, reserve parking spaces for those people with disabilities and those travelling from 

further afield, to enter and leave the site as quietly as possible and minimise parking on New 

Road. 

The Local Highway Authority considers that the two access points along with the provision of 

additional parking and dropping off area would resolve the previous highways concerns of 

inadequate on-site parking leading to parking on New Road (and the reason for refusal of 

08/02615/CU). Therefore, it raises no objection to the scheme subject to conditions 

(parking/turning, access details and Travel Plan). The Local Highway Authority still 

considers that a more robust Travel Plan is required and hence the condition. 


6 th July 2009


The applicant has submitted a tree survey due to the established trees within and 

surrounding the site. The Landscape Officer states that excavation for the proposed hard 

surfacing of the car park would be likely to harm the root systems of the Cedar tree and 

therefore recommends conditions are imposed with regard to a method of no dig 

construction around the tree. No objection is raised to the removal of the road frontage 

conifer which is located in the area of the proposed access. Further, substantial screening 

(hedge and planting to road frontage) would remain limiting the impact of the development 

on the visual amenities of the locality. 

Objectors assert that the dwelling is not fit for purpose and that church members should 

attend meetings at the facility at West Winch/Setchey. It is also stated that there are 3 

further venues within North Runcton that would be open for the applicant to use. Clearly, 

there is a place of worship nearby and possible other venues, however the applicant is 

entitled to apply for this development and to practise religious beliefs in places other than a 

purpose built church such as that at West Winch/Setchey. In this case, the principle of a 

place of worship is acceptable but it is the noise and disturbance created by car movements 

and the impact on highway safety as a result of on-road parking that requires consideration. 

Objectors have commented that the building is still being used despite an Enforcement 

Notice being issued. This notice, which is the subject of an appeal, does not preclude the 

applicant from using the building; neither does it preclude the applicant from submitting a 

further planning application. 


The application does not raise any crime and disorder issues. 

CONCLUSION 

Whilst this proposal involves a relatively low key use and the Members of the Plymouth 

Brethren are entitled to practise their beliefs, the right to religious freedom has to be 

balanced against amenity issues. The noise and disturbance issue clearly relates to the use 

of the building on Sunday mornings only and the service that takes place at this time is 

critical to the beliefs of the Plymouth Brethren. However, CSNN believe that residents can 

be protected against noise and disturbance at these times through a suitably worded 

condition. The only outstanding matter relates to highway safety issues and the Local 

Highway Authority considers that the amended access arrangements, dropping off area and 

additional parking satisfies its requirements and therefore the proposal would not be 

detrimental to highway safety. On this basis, the application is recommended for approval. 



1 Condition Within 1 month of the date of this permission, a scheme to protect 

neighbours from noise emanating from the site shall be submitted to and agreed in 

writing with the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in 

accordance with agreed details within 2 months of the date of the approval of those 

details. 


6 th July 2009

1 Reason To ensure that the amenities of the occupants of neighbouring properties are 

safeguarded in accordance with PPG24. 


vehicular accesses shall be constructed in accordance with the Norfolk County Council 

residential access construction specification over the highway verge shown within the 

application site. 



3 Condition Prior to the first occupation or use of the development hereby permitted any 

access gate or gates, shall be hung to open inwards and shall be set back a minimum 

distance of 5 metres from the near edge of the adjoining highway carriageway. 

3 Reason In the interests of highway safety in accordance with the principles of PPG13. 


proposed access, on-site parking and turning area shall be laid out, demarcated, 

leveled, surfaced and drained in accordance with the approved plans and retained 

thereafter available for that specific use. 

4 Reason To ensure that parking and servicing facilities will be available to serve the 

development in accordance with the principles of PPG13. 

5 Condition No development shall commence on site until a Travel Plan has been 

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan 

shall be prepared in accordance with the ‘Guidance Notes for the Submission of Travel 

Plans’ produced by Norfolk County Council and include a timetable for implementation 

upon the first occupation or use of the development hereby approved. 

5 Reason To ensure that the development is sustainable in accordance with the 

principles of PPS1 and PPG15. 

6 Condition The Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved 

timetable and monitored in accordance with details to be agreed in writing by the Local 

Planning Authority so long as any part of the development is occupied. 

6 Reason To ensure that the development is sustainable in accordance with the 

principles of PPS1 and PPG15. 

7 Condition Notwithstanding details shown on the approved plans, within 1 month of the 

date of this permission, full details of the construction of the parking area shall be 

submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The details shall 

include a no-dig method of construction in proximity to the cedar tree located on the 

south boundary on of the site. The parking area shall be constructed in accordance 

with the agreed details within 2 months of the date of the approval of those details. 

7 Reason To ensure that the existing cedar tree is protected in accordance with Policy 

4/7 of the Local Plan 1998. 

8 Condition The premises shall only be used on Sundays between the hours of 0545 and 

0715 and on Mondays (inc Bank Holidays) between the hours of 1800 and 2000 and at 

no other time unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 


6 th July 2009

8 Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may retain control over the 

development in the interests of protecting the amenities of the locality. 

9 Condition The premises shall be used for a place of worship and no other purpose, 

including any use within Class D1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) 

1987, as amended, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory 

instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification. 

9 Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may retain control over the use of 

the premises where an alternative use otherwise permitted by the above mentioned 

Order would be detrimental to the amenities of the locality. 

10 Condition No sound reproduction equipment or address systems shall be installed that 

are audible outside the boundaries of the site. 

10 Reason In the interests of the amenities of the locality in accordance with the principles 

of PPG24. 


Application file reference: 09/00874/CU 




6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Northwold 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(k) 

Proposed amended design only to Unit 21 for the conversion of 

existing office to dwelling Approved scheme ref - 2/02/1752/CU for 

22 Dwellings 

The Old Mill Whittington Hill Whittington King's Lynn 

Mr A White 



Tel: 01553 616794 



Reason for Referral to DCB – The applicant is Councillor Tony White. 

Case Summary 

The former mill site lies within the defined village of Whittington and fronts onto the southern 

side of the A134 approximately 300m east of the roundabout junction with the 

B1106/Methwold Road. The front half of the site lies within Built Environment Type C and the 

rear in Type D. 

Planning permission was granted in January 2005 under planning reference: 2/02/1752/CU 

for the conversion of the former mill and associated buildings to form 14 No residential units 

and construction of 8 No terraced houses at Whittington Mill. The permission was granted 

subject to a Section 106 agreement to provide financial contributions towards education, 

library and playing field facilities. 

The original application remains valid and this current application seeks an amendment to 

the design of Unit 21 of the aforementioned permission, which involves the conversion of an 

existing office into a dwelling. 

Key Issues 


Design and visual impact 

Impact upon amenities of adjoining properties 




APPROVE 


The former mill site lies within the defined village of Whittington and fronts onto the southern 

side of the A134 approximately 300m east of the roundabout junction with the 

B1106/Methwold Road. The front half of the site lies within Built Environment Type C and the 

rear in Type D. 


6 th July 2009

Planning permission was granted in January 2005 under planning reference: 2/02/1752/CU 

for the conversion of the former mill and associated buildings to form 14 No residential units 

and construction of 8 No terraced houses at Whittington Mill. The permission was granted 

subject to a Section 106 agreement to provide financial contributions towards education, 

library and playing field facilities. 

The original application remains valid and this current application seeks an amendment to 

the design of Unit 21 of the aforementioned permission, which involves the conversion of an 

existing office into a 2 bed dwelling. 


A Design and Access Statement accompanies the application and raises the following 

matters: 

The proposed scheme differs only slightly from that originally approved because we have 

now corrected actual ground levels following a more detailed measured survey. These actual 

ground levels have been used on both drawings. 

The proposed scheme shows the omission of the staircase gable window and its 

replacement with a rooflight in the front roof slope; and the staircase gable has been 

reduced in mass and height simply because it was not required to be as large as originally 

shown. 


2/02/1752/F - Conversion of the former mill and associated buildings to form 14 No 

residential units and construction of 8 No terraced houses – Approved 11.01.2005 


Parish Council:Awaited at the time of writing this report 

Highways Authority: Awaited at the time of writing this report 

Internal Drainage Board: Awaited at the time of writing this report 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality: Awaited at the time of writing 

this report 

Norfolk Constabulary: Awaited at the time of writing this report 


None received at the time of writing this report 


6 th July 2009























locality. 


The key issues to be considered in determination of this application are considered to be: 


• Design and visual impact 

• Impact upon amenities of adjoining properties 




The principle of the development has already been established by the earlier approval. The 

site lies within the defined village in Built Environment Types C and D. The extant approval 

had permission for a total number of 22 dwellings in a mix of conversion and new-build. This 

is a brownfield site that is surrounded by residential development. The proposal remains in 

accordance with PPS1 and PPS3. 


6 th July 2009

Design and visual impact 

This application seeks to only amend the appearance of Unit 21, which is a former office 

building situated in the south-western corner of the yard/site. These changes have come 

about following detailed survey work undertaken in preparation of a Building Regulations 

submission. 

All elevations of the building as extended are to be slightly altered. The stairwell addition to 

the west has been reduced in scale and appears more subservient than that approved. A 

landing window has been removed from the side elevation and replaced by a velux rooflight 

above the stairs. A window serving the main bedroom is now placed in the northern 

elevation, which is more simplistic in style and more domestic rather than industrial. The 

appearance is more sympathetic to the adjoining terraced housing. 

There are also changes to the fenestration at first floor level in the rear and east elevations 

serving bedroom 2. This will be expanded upon below. 

Impact upon amenities of adjoining properties 

This application has also presented an opportunity to review the original approval; as stated 

above, a window to the main bedroom has been repositioned into the northern gable to 

negate potential overlooking to the west. 

There is an existing window on the rear/south elevation which was approved to serve 

bedroom 2. This elevation lies on the common boundary to the adjoining dwelling Lancaster 

House. It has been negotiated to block up this window and replace it with a new opening in 

the eastern elevation which would not directly overlook adjoining units. 

The relationship with adjoining properties is improved by these changes. 


There are no crime and disorder issues raised by this amended scheme. 


As mentioned earlier in this report, the approved scheme for 22 dwellings was subjected to a 

Section 106 agreement. This application seeks small changes to the appearance of only one 

of the units and its approval would not affect the triggers for financial contributions to be 

made. 

CONCLUSION 

The principle of the development has been established by the earlier permission and the 

proposal continues to be in accordance with national guidance and development plan policy. 

This is a minor change to the original consent that remains extant and all the associated 

conditions and Section 106 requirements still apply on that original approval. The application 

is recommended for approval subject to conditions outlined below. 




6 th July 2009





2 Condition This permission relates solely to the change in design of the dwelling 

referred to as Unit 21 approved under planning permission ref: 2/02/1752/CU and in all 

other respects shall be subject to the conditions imposed under that permission and 

associated Section 106 agreement. 

2 Reason In order to define the terms of this permission in association with an earlier 

permission for comprehensive development. 






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Outwell 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(l) 

Outline Application: 5 detached bungalows with attached single 

garages. 

34 Isle Bridge Road Outwell Wisbech PE14 8RB 

Mr D Cuckow 



Tel: 01553 616794 


3rd September 2008 

Reason for Referral to DCB – The Parish Council’s views are at variance to the Officer 

recommendation and referred to the DCB at the request of Councillor Chris Crofts. 

Case Summary 

The application site is an area of 0.29Ha of extensive garden land belonging to ‘Woodhall’, 

Robbs Chase, Outwell. It lies to the rear of existing frontage development on the northern 

side of Isle Bridge Road and western side of Rectory/Isle Road and Sutton Close. 

The site is effectively surrounded by residential development in a variety of dwelling types, 

although single storey dwellings are the principal form. There is a mixture of materials found 

in the locality; buff and red brick with a variety of concrete roof tiles. 

This application seeks outline planning permission for 5 bungalows with associated garages. 

Only access is to be considered as part of this application (a private drive off Isle Bridge 

Road); all other matters are to be reserved for future consideration. 

Key Issues 



Relationships with adjoining properties 

Access and highway issues 

Drainage and flood risk 

Archaeology 



REFUSE 


The application site can be found on the northern side of Isle Bridge Road, Outwell 

approximately 65 metres north-west from its junction with Rectory Road. 


6 th July 2009

The site (0.29Ha) comprises extensive garden land to ‘Woodhall’, Robbs Chase (a grade 2 

listed building) and is bounded by a variety of domestic boundary treatments to the 

surrounding dwellings. 

The site is effectively surrounded by residential development in a variety of dwelling types, 

although single storey dwellings are the principal form. There is a mixture of materials found 

in the locality; buff and red brick with a variety of concrete roof tiles. 

This application seeks outline planning permission for 5 bungalows with associated garages. 

Only access is to be considered as part of this application all other matters are to be 

reserved for future consideration. An indicative layout, flood risk assessment and a design 

and access statement accompany the application. 



issues: 

The reason for refusing the earlier application ref: 07/02051/O was on highways grounds – 

this has now been resolved through negotiation with County Highways and acquiring 

additional land. 

The proposed dwellings are to be single storey bungalows of vernacular design, 

incorporating details from surrounding buildings to provide a development that is 

sympathetic and with minimal detrimental affect upon its surroundings. The materials will be 

sympathetic to those of the surrounding buildings. 

5 No. 2/3 bedroomed bungalows are expected and illustrated on the indicative layout plan. 

The layout has been carefully considered to ensure that minimal impact is made to 

surrounding buildings and character of the area. The gardens and recreation areas are large 

and more than adequate to serve the dwellings. 

The site will be landscaped but details will be agreed at the reserved matters stage. 

A flood risk assessment has been prepared and submitted with the application. 


07/02051/O – Outline application refused for 5 detached bungalows with attached single 

garages. 

04/01963/F – application withdrawn for the construction of 4 pairs of bungalows, associated 

garages and the construction of a new access. 

94/0061/O – outline planning application refused for the construction of 6 dwellings. 

94/0061/0 - outline planning application refused for the construction of 6 dwellings. 


6 th July 2009

CONSULTATIONS 

Town/Parish Council:SUPPORT – site falls within village building envelope and all 

previous objections have been remedied. Applicant has gone to great lengths to appease 

highways. 

Local Highway Authority (NCC):NO OBJECTION subject to conditions and informative. 

Environment Agency:NO OBJECTION subject to condition relating to ground floor level. 

Middle Level Commissioners:OBJECTION on the grounds of insufficient detail regarding 

surface water disposal in the flood risk assessment. 

Norfolk Landscape Archaeology:NO OBJECTION subject to condition regarding 

archaeological investigations. 

Norfolk Constabulary:NO OBJECTIONS 

Conservation Officer:NO OBJECTION given the other buildings in the vicinity it will not 

adversely affect the setting of the listed building. 

Cllr Chris Crofts: Requests that the application is referred to the DC Board for 

determination. 


A total of 5 letters received objecting on the following grounds: 

• Applicant is a member of the Parish Council 

• Increase in traffic on Isle Bridge Road which is already congested with parked 

vehicles and limited visibility 

• Agree with NLA requirement for dig 

• Request that trees rear of 10 Isle Bridge Road are retained 

• What will happen to the tree on Isle Bridge Road at the access point? 

• Agree with concerns of Middle Level Commissioners regarding surface water No.10 

Isle Bridge Road has suffered from subsidence in the past. 













6 th July 2009

PPG16 - “Archaeology and Planning” (1990) sets out how archaeological remains should be 

preserved or recorded when determining planning applications. 











flooding. 






locality. 






• Impact upon form and character 

• Relationships with adjoining properties 

• Access and highway issues 

• Drainage and flood risk 

• Archaeology 



The application site is within Built Environment Type D as specified within the proposals map 

accompanying the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (1998). New residential 

development on this site is acceptable in principle providing that it is of a high quality design 

and has regard for and is in harmony with the building characteristics of the locality. 

This application seeks outline planning permission for the construction of 5 bungalows with 

garages; all matters except for access are reserved for future consideration. 


6 th July 2009

PPS3 encourages the development of sites within villages to appropriate densities that also 

respect the locality. 5 dwellings on an area of.29Ha equates to a density of 17 dph, which is 

relatively low, but is compatible to this locality. 


It is considered that development on this site would not be to the detriment of the existing 

form and character or indeed the setting of the listed building (Woodhall). There has been 

similar development within the locality where land has been utilised forming cul-de-sac 

development, for example Sutton Close and Outwell Villas. 

Relationships with adjoining properties 

An indicative layout plan, whilst not part of the application, shows that the site is sufficiently 

large enough to enable the development of 5 detached bungalows with integral garages with 

suitable separation distances from existing surrounding dwellings. The relationships between 

existing and proposed dwellings in terms of separation distances, window orientation and 

boundary treatment would however be defined at the reserved matters or detailed stage. 

Access and highways issues 

Access to the site forms part of the application for consideration at this stage. Plans show a 

5m wide driveway between bungalows connecting to Isle Bridge Road with visibility splays of 

2.5m x 90m. This incorporates land required by the applicant from the borough council to 

provide pedestrian visibility to the west along Isle Bridge Road. County Highways now have 

no objection to the proposal subject to conditions. 

Drainage and flood risk 

A flood risk assessment accompanies the application as the site falls within Flood Zone 2 as 

defined in the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment adopted by the Council. The Environment 

Agency raises no objection to the proposal subject to a condition regarding floor levels of the 

dwellings being 300mm above the surrounding ground level. 

The Middle Level Commissioners (MLC) have objected to the proposal. The flood risk 

assessment initially submitted with the application was reviewed by the MLC who considered 

that it did not meet the board’s requirements or the minimum requirements of PPS25 

(Annexe E). Subsequent negotiations have been held between the applicants’ agents and 

the MLC and additional details have been submitted by a consultant engineer detailing a 

route of drainage connection to a drain to the rear of dwellings on the southern side of Isle 

Bridge Road. The MLC maintain their concerns regarding the suitability of the FRA and there 

is no certainty that flooding would not occur. It was suggested that the application be 

withdrawn or deferred until such time as the outstanding issues have been resolved and an 

impasse was reached between the parties involved. 

Over recent months the applicant has sought alternative routes for disposing of surface 

water without success. An instruction has been received from the agent to determine the 

application in its current format and requests that the drainage issue is dealt with by 

condition. 

The advice contained in PPS25 is quite specific in terms of the minimum requirements for a 

FRA (Annexe E) and in the absence of a proper FRA there can be no certainty that flooding 

would not occur. This constitutes a reason for refusal. Advice on the use of conditions is 

contained in Circular 11/95 – conditions should not be used if there is reasonable doubt that 

the issue may not be resolved, as in this case. 


6 th July 2009

Archaeology 

‘Woodhall’ to the north of the site is a grade 2 listed building, which dates back to the 16th 

Century; Norfolk Landscape Archaeology have indicated the possibility of an outer precinct 

of a manorial complex being present on site and request that a programme of archaeological 

work is undertaken in accordance with PPG16. This requirement could be covered by a 

condition attached to any approval. 


A tree would be lost in creating the new access onto Isle Bridge Road and a row of leylandii 

trees forming a hedge along the southern site boundary have already been removed. The 

trees are of little amenity value and replacements could be sought within a landscaping 

scheme if the application was to be approved. 

CONCLUSION 

Overall, the proposal meets the majority of the relevant issues raised but it does however fail 

to comply with PPS25 and Policy WAT4 of the East of England Plan 2008. This lack of a 

suitable drainage scheme is a material consideration given particular weight, and the 

imposition of a condition should not be proposed because of the doubt over the likelihood of 

a suitable scheme being possible. In the circumstances, a refusal of permission is 

recommended. 



1 The proposal fails to adequately address the flood risk from surface water disposal in 

that an appropriate risk assessment has not been submitted to accompany the 

application, and there is doubt over the provision of a suitable drainage scheme. The 

proposal therefore fails to accord with the provisions of PPS25 and Policy WAT4 of the 

East of England Plan 2008. 






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Snettisham 

Installation of mobile home for carer use 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(m) 

40 Common Road Snettisham King's Lynn PE31 7PF 

Mr Michael Parnell 



Tel: 01553 616403 


2nd July 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – The Parish Council objects to the proposal on grounds of 

highways concerns, drainage and sewage and the precedent it would set. 

Case Summary 

The application site is currently part of the existing residential garden land of 40 Common 

Road, a detached bungalow to the north of the site accessed from Common Road to the 

west. It has been fences off to form a building plot. 

This application seeks permission for siting of a detached, single storey mobile home with 

vehicle access onto an existing private access road to the south which links through to 

Common Road to the west. 

The site is bounded east and west by existing businesses relating to car sales. To the north 

is the detached bungalow, No 40 Common Road and to the south, on the opposite side of 

the access track, is open grassed land. 

The site is within the Built Environment Type D. 

Key Issues 

The determining issues are:- 


Visual impact and form and character 



APPROVE 


The application is for the installation of a mobile home for carer use in connection with the 

property No 40 Common Road, Snettisham. The mobile home has an independent access 

and its own amenity space. Vehicular access is onto a private track to the south. The only 

indication that there is a connection with No 40 is a pedestrian and vehicle access link 

through the gardens. 


6 th July 2009

For all intents and purposes this application is for a separate, independent residential unit 

and the application has been considered on that basis. 

The mobile home is a single storey unit of colour wash render and tiled effect roof set on a 

brick plinth. 

The site is on the northern side of the private access track which links into Common Road to 

the west. This part of Common Road has a mixture of uses. To the east and west are car 

sales businesses, to the north is residential and to the south on the opposite side of the 

access track is an open grassed area. 

The car sales business to the west incorporates a mobile unit with flat roofs and some 

temporary looking structures adjacent to the brick built building. To the east are grey metal 

profile industrial buildings. Both sites to the east and west have cars across the frontages in 

relation to the car sales businesses. 


The application has been supported by a Design and Access Statement. 

This states that Mr Parnell and his partner have been carer’s for Mrs Brittain [40 Common 

Road West] for almost 14 years and the time has now come for closer living, hence the 

application for the Bungalow / Mobile Home. 

The site is not highly visible although from the A 149 [Snettisham / Dersingham by - pass] it 

is visible through high hedging/ gorse bushes. However vehicles travelling at 40mph will not 

see much and the eye is automatically drawn to the Car Sales area’s, especially to the light 

blue plastic of the wash bay area to the west. 

The temporary or permanent nature of the application cannot be commented upon due to 

the fact that the question of how long is a carer required cannot be answered. 

Tapping House Hospice [NORTH] has for several years had a mobile unit used as an office. 

The proposal blends in rather well with the existing residential properties in the area. 

The proposal is for carer use and is to install and erect a detached double bedroom unit 

mobile home. The bungalow/ unit mobile home will be on a site adjacent to No 40 Common 

Road West so access will be easier. 

The proposal will greatly improve / increase facilities and will be positioned to the SOUTH of 

an existing Bungalow at 40 Common Road West. 

The site is rhomboid in shape approx 33M x 15M and will house the mobile home, fenced 

off/ screened from an existing access road on the South side. The submitted drawings must 

be referred to for layout shape of site and for design of unit [rectangular]. 

The proposal is single storey with a maximum ridge height of approx 4. 0 M. The overall 

building footprint is approx 7. 60M x 6. 80M, but drawings must be referred to for layout 

shape. The landscaping of the site is not affected. Existing established landscaping will be 

retained. 

The appearance is greatly improved with the new mobile unit/ bungalow positioned to the 

South of No 40 Common Road and between car sales areas to the East and West. Colour 

wash to the walls can be changed to whatever colour is appropriate. 


6 th July 2009

The access is as existing. 


None. 


Parish Council: OBJECT – this will likely set a precedent for others in the area; concerns 

over the access and traffic issues because this is only a small road with more and more 

properties being built in the area; concern over drainage and especially sewage; if 

permission is granted would like to recommend temporary permission only. 

Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION 


None received. 






















flooding. 


6 th July 2009






locality. 




None relevant 


The key issues to be determined in this case are:- 


• Visual impact and form and character 


Acceptability of the principle of development 

The proposed two bedroom mobile home is single storey in height. Access is to the south of 

the site onto a private road linking into Common Road to the west. The plans show this 

vehicle access running across the application site and linking onto the garden of No 40 

Common Road. The proposal shows private amenity space around the mobile home. 

The application refers to the need of the mobile home for the carers of the occupant of No 40 

Common Road to the north. However, this has not been supported by information to claim 

special circumstances and no reference has been made for a temporary use. The only 

physical link between the properties is the vehicle and pedestrian access through the 

gardens. Accordingly, the application is considered as a new, independent residential unit. 

The site is within the village settlement and within the Built Environment Type D as defined 

on the Proposals Map of the King's Lynn and West Norfolk Adopted Local Plan 1998. In 

principle new development will be permitted provided it has regard for and is in harmony with 

the building characteristics of the locality. 

The principal of a residential use in this part of Snettisham is acceptable as it adjoins other 

residential uses. 

Visual impact and form and character 

This part of Common Road has a mixture of uses. To the east and west are car sales 

businesses, to the north is residential and to the south on the opposite side of the access 

track is an open grassed area. 

The car sales business to the west incorporates a mobile unit with flat roofs and some 

temporary looking structures adjacent to the brick built building. To the east are grey metal 


6 th July 2009

profile industrial buildings. Both sites to the east and west have cars across the frontages in 

relation to the car sales businesses. 

This application is for a mobile home. By its nature a mobile home is a moveable structure. 

Aesthetically, mobile homes do not offer a degree of permanency and do not have the 

longevity of traditional building materials such as brick or block. 

However, the surrounding development of business use and their structures have elements 

of a temporary nature in terms of the materials (corrugated cladding etc.) and it would be 

difficult to state that a mobile home would not be in harmony with the building characteristics 

of the locality. 


Objection has been received from the Parish Council to the proposal likely to set a precedent 

for other similar development in the area. However, each planning application is considered 

on its individual merits as each case is different. 

The Parish Council has also objected to the impact on the road network. However, the 

Highways Authority has raised no objection to the proposal and no concerns about the 

impact upon the local highway network. 

The Parish Council has also raised concern over drainage and sewage. The application 

refers to the use of mains drainage for sewage and soakaways for disposal of surface water. 

However a condition can be imposed to ensure that details of the sewage and drainage 

system be submitted prior to commencement of the development. 

The Parish Council has also requested that if planning permission is approved this should be 

for a temporary period of time only. Although mobile homes generally have a shorter 

lifespan than buildings of more traditional materials of construction, it is unlikely to create 

problems in terms of visual appearance for many years. Although the application makes 

reference to the occupants being carers for the neighbouring occupant at No 40 Common 

Road, it is not considered necessary to limit the use of the site for a particular purpose and 

not necessary to condition the use for a temporary period of time only. For this reason it is 

not considered necessary to impose a temporary use condition. 

The relationship between the mobile home as proposed and the existing dwelling to the 

north has been examined and there will be no significantly detrimental impact upon the 

amenity of the occupants of this neighbouring property in terms of overlooking, being 

overshadowed or being over bearing. There are no outstanding amenity issues. 





CONCLUSION 

The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of form and character and accords with 

relevant national and local policy for this site in Snettisham. There are no outstanding 

highways concerns and there will be no significantly detrimental impact upon the amenity of 

the occupants of neighbouring properties. 


6 th July 2009

In the light of National Guidance, Development Plan Policies and other material 

considerations it is recommended that planning permission be approved subject to the 

following conditions. 







2 Condition No development shall commence until full details of the foul and surface 

water drainage arrangements for the site have been submitted to and approved in 

writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage details shall be constructed as 

approved before any part of the development hereby permitted is brought into use. 

2 Reason To ensure that there is a satisfactory means of drainage serving the site. 






6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Snettisham 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(n) 

Retention of a cut down shipping container for storage of boats and 

sailboards 

58 The Beach Snettisham King's Lynn Norfolk 

Mr Bruce Riches 


Case Officer: Mr C Fry 

Tel: 01553 616232 


21st July 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – Called in by Executive Director of Development Services. 

Case Summary 

This is a full application relating to the siting of a cut down shipping container for storage of 

boats and sailboards at 58 The Beach Snettisham which is a pitched roof timber constructed 

dwelling, with a grassed parking area to the side of site. The site is open on all aspects and 

is in a holiday development consolidation zone. 

The site area is approximately 0.01cres. 

Key Issues 


Impact upon Visual Amenity 


Other material issues 


REFUSE 


The application is for full planning permission for the siting of a shipping container adjacent 

to 58 The Beach Snettisham. Access to the site is served via Beach Road. 

The shipping container is already on site, constructed from steel, painted in cream measured 

(4.6m (length) x 2.46m (width)). The container is used is for the storage of windsurf boards, 

masts, sails and dinghies in association with 58 and 59 The Beach. 


The application is supported by a design and access statement: 

• The shipping container is needed for the urgent storage of bicycles and dinghies 


6 th July 2009

• There are other steel shipping containers in the vicinity 

• The steel shipping container would be of low maintenance. 

• It is a more secure form of storage 

• The storage is for 3 sailing dinghies, their masts, rudders, sails etc. Windsurf boards 

and their masts/sails, 6 Bicycles and during winter outside tables and chairs, and a 

small generator. 

• Not cause any neighbour amenity issue in this position 

• Painted in Cream, enables it to be accommodated with the existing hut and adjoining 

property. 

• By its own weight, it would move in the eventuality of a flood. 

• It will fit into the environment of chalets and caravans easily. 


09/00039/F – Siting of a cut down shipping container for storage of boats and sailboards – 

refused under delegated powers 17.03.09 


Parish Council: Objection on grounds of visual amenity 

Highways Authority: No response received at time of writing but no objection to the 

previous application. 

Environment Agency: No objection subject to conditions 


None Received 













6 th July 2009





7/5 - states that the Holiday Development Zones shown on the Proposals Map are reserved 

for holiday development. New and improved holiday uses and buildings will be permitted in 

the Holiday Development Expansion Zone. The improvement and replacement of existing 

accommodation and facilities will be permitted in the Holiday Development Consolidation 

Zone. 


The main planning considerations with this application are:- 

• Planning History 

• Impact upon Visual Amenity 

• Impact upon Neighbour Amenity 

• Other material issues 


The siting of a cut down shipping container was subject to a previous application, which was 

refused in March 2009 on the basis of its industrial appearance and material used causing 

an incongruous appearance in a residential street scene, and an adverse impact upon an 

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

Contrary to the reasons above, The container is not in the Norfolk Coast Area of Outstanding 

Natural Beauty. However it is sandwiched between two areas of important landscape quality 

with the lake to the east classified as Area of Important Landscape Quality (confined) and 

the beach and seascape to the west classified as AILQ (open). The words “confined” and 

“open” are a reference to the different qualities of the landscape. 

The AILQ designation is material in that saved local plan 4/6 seeks to preserve the character 

of the landscape. However, these local landscape designations do not carry the same weight 

as the AONB does. 

Impact upon Visual Amenity 

The shipping container is constructed from steel, 4.6m in length x 2.46m wide chained down 

into the ground. The shipping container has an industrial character by virtue of its form, scale 

and materials, which is not appropriate in a residential street scene. 58 The Beach is visible 

from across the lake to the east of the property. With no screening along the boundary to the 

waterfront, the steel container is very prominent. Snettisham Parish Council, object to the 

retention of the shipping container on the basis that the container looks unsightly and would 

set a precedent for other shipping containers to be sited. 

The neighbour to the north has a similar shipping container to the front of their caravan, but 

this does not have planning permission, and will be pursued through the enforcement team. 


6 th July 2009

The sailing club located to the south west of the site and closer to the beach, has permission 

for the siting of two shipping containers, but these are not apparent within the street scene 

and sited in front of the sailing club. 


The container is positioned to the north of 58/59 The Beach. 

Number 57 (as shown on the submitted plans) is located immediately north of the container 

is a static caravan with a conservatory and decking on its southern elevation. The container 

will have no impact upon privacy, or light to this property. 

Number 60 (as shown on the submitted plans) is located immediately south of the container 

and is a similar static caravan to 57. This neighbour is not materially affected by the 

container, as the container is screened from this neighbour by 58/59 the beach. 

Flood Risk 

The site is located within coastal flood zone 2 and 3. The Environment Agency has no 

objection subject to conditions restricting the length of time the container can be sited (10 

years) and that the container shall be anchored by secure chains to reinforced concrete 

ground beams. 


Snettisham Parish Council queries a land ownership dispute, in terms of how much of the 

site is owned by the applicant. However this is a civil issue and not a planning material 

matter. 

CONCLUSION 

The previous application for the siting of a shipping container on this site was refused by its 

detrimental impact on the street scene and its impact upon an area of outstanding natural 

beauty. 

Whilst the site is not in the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty it is still considered that the 

container represents an industrial feature in a residential area, albeit one that has a varied 

character. It is also a material consideration that the site is between two locally designated 

areas of important landscape quality. 



1 The container, by virtue of its industrial appearance and the material from which it is 

made, represents an incongruous feature in a predominantly residential street scene. 

The proposal is therefore contrary to PPS1. 






6 th July 2009


6 th July 2009

Parish: 

Proposal: 

Location: 

Applicant: 

Case No: 

Southery 

New Store Building 

AGENDA ITEM NO: 8/3(o) 

2 Westgate Street Southery Downham Market Norfolk 

Mr J Hilton 



Tel: 01553 616318 


6th July 2009 

Reason for Referral to DCB – Councillor Mick Peake has requested that the planning 

application be determined by the Development Control Board. The Officer recommendation 

is at variance with the Parish who support the application, although give no planning 

reasons. 

Case Summary 

The application is for full planning permission to construct a store building to materials 

associated with the existing business use. The application is materially the same as that 

which was refused under planning application 08/00787/F. The application is contrary to 

planning policy on the grounds of highway safety. 

Key Issues 

Design of the proposed storage building 





REFUSE 


The application site is an existing steel fabrication business and associated yard. The 

existing workshop and offices are constructed from red multi-brick, wooden doors, roof-lights 

and flat profile tiles. 

The site is bounded to the front (East) by a brick wall which extends around the curtilage of 

the neighbouring site on which stands the applicants’ dwelling. Within the site the proposed 

development would be screened to the West by the existing workshop and to the North by a 

substantial building on the neighbouring depot. The site is higher than road level and is 

visible from the street. 

The area is characterised by a mix of residential development and business use. 


6 th July 2009

The application relates to the construction of a store building for the secure storage of 

materials away from the main workshop and is the same as a previous application which 

was refused planning permission under planning permission reference 08/00787/F. There 

are no material differences between this application and that which was previously refused. 


The following supporting case has been submitted with the application: 

• The previous planning application (08/00787/F) was refused due to the new structure 

preventing the ability for the site to accommodate the turning head for heavy goods 

vehicles and that such vehicles would have to reverse off the site. 

• Heavy goods vehicles do not attend the site and the business does not require them 

to do so. 

• The area designated for the proposed store does not form part of the existing turning 

arrangement. 

• Whilst it is appreciated that the above information may change for future occupants, it 

is felt unreasonable to burden the current business with this future proofing. 

• A condition to restrict the access to heavy goods vehicles would be a preferred 

option. 

• The proposed storage building is required for the secure storage of materials away 

from the main workshop. 

• The proposed building will single storey, constructed to match the main building and 

have no adverse impact on landscaping or neighbouring properties. 


2/02/0026/F Construction of workshops after substantial demolition of existing buildings - 

approved March 2002 

04/02486/F Construction of office and workshops - approved January 2005 

08/00787/F Construction of store building – refused June 2008 


Parish Council: NO OBJECTION 

Highways Authority:OBJECT The principle of a store is acceptable however the position of 

the proposed store would severely restrict the ability of larger delivery vehicles to turn on 

site. This could ultimately lead to reversing of such vehicles onto the public highway. This 

would create conditions of detriment to highway safety and therefore the application is 

recommended for refusal. 

Internal Drainage Board: NO COMMENT as surface water to soakaway so will not 

adversely affect drainage operations 

Environmental Health & Housing – Environmental Quality:NO COMMENT from a 

contaminated land perspective 

Environmental Health & Housing - CSNN: NO COMMENT 


6 th July 2009


No letters of representation received at the time of writing the report. 





PPG4 - “Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms” (1992) provides advice 

on helping small firms through the planning process, mixed use development, the imposition 

of conditions and the enforcement of planning control. 














application: 






locality. 


The application site is within Built Environment Type D as defined by the King’s Lynn and 

West Norfolk Local Plan (1998). The construction of a storage building within the yard of an 

existing business is acceptable in principle provided it is of a good design and has regard for 

the building characteristics of the locality. 

The main issues to consider when determining this application are as follows: 


6 th July 2009

• Design of the proposed storage building 

• Impact on neighbour amenity 

• Impact on highway safety 


Design of the proposed storage building 

The proposed store building is of an acceptable scale and design and the proposed 

materials would be to match the existing main workshop. Therefore it would not have a 

detrimental impact on the character of the surrounding area. 


There would be no impact on neighbour amenity in terms of overlooking, overshadowing or 

any overbearing impact. The proposed store is not located near any residential dwellings 

and is well screened by existing buildings to the West and North. The adjacent business site 

to the North has a blank wall adjacent to the proposed building and consequently it would 

not have any impact. The hours of business are limited to between 7.30am and 6pm Monday 

to Friday and between 8.00am and 4.00pm on Saturday and Environmental Health has no 

objections to the proposal. 


The highways officer recommends refusal due to the location of the proposed store building. 

Condition 4 for planning permission for the workshop (2/02/0020/F) and Condition 4 of 

subsequent planning permission for the workshop and offices (04/02486/F) state that the 

parking/turning and access shall be retained at all times for its designated use. 

Although within the supporting statement the agent has stated that the land designated to 

accommodate the store does not form part of the existing turning arrangement, the area 

where the proposed store is sited does form part of the turning area identified within planning 

permission 04/02486/F and shown on plan reference 095-09. 

Notwithstanding this condition the location of the proposed store on the 

parking/turning/manoeuvring area would severely restrict the ability of larger vehicles to 

manoeuvre on site. It is the opinion of the highways officer that this could create conditions 

to the detriment of highway safety as larger vehicles would have to reverse onto the public 

highway. 

The agent has stated that heavy goods vehicles have never attended the site and that a 

condition to restrict the access of heavy goods vehicles would be acceptable to the 

applicant. This is not a condition which could be enforced or controlled by the Local Planning 

Authority and so it would fail to meet the tests applied to conditions within Circular 11/95 and 

therefore it should not be applied. 

Should the site be sold to a third party who wishes to utilise the existing use, and therefore 

would not require further planning permission, then there would be no way to control the size 

of the vehicular traffic to the site, nor would this be enforceable. 


There are no other material considerations which are pertinent to this application. 


6 th July 2009


There are no crime and disorder issues raised by this application. 

CONCLUSION 

The proposed store building by virtue of its location within the existing vehicular 

manoeuvring area would create conditions to the detriment of highway safety. The proposed 

development is therefore contrary to Planning Policy Guidance 13 and saved Policy T2 of 

the Norfolk Structure Plan 1999 and should be refused. 



1 The proposal, if permitted, would result in the loss of existing on-site turning facilities 

which would lead to the reversing of vehicles onto the highway which would give rise to 

conditions detrimental to highway safety. The proposal would therefore be contrary to 

Planning Policy Guidance 13 and Policy T2 of the Norfolk Structure Plan 1999. 






6 th July 2009

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL BOARD - 

APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS 

PURPOSE OF REPORT 

AGENDA ITEM: 9 

(1) To inform Members of the number of decisions issued between the production of the June DCB agenda and July agenda. 106 

decisions issued, 90 decisions issued under delegated powers with 16 decided by the Development Control Board. 

(2) To inform Members of those applications which have been determined under the officer delegation scheme since your last meeting. 

These decisions are made in accordance with the Authority’s powers contained in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and have no 

financial implications. 

RECOMMENDATION 

That the reports be noted. 

Number of decisions issued from 27/05/09 – 25/06/09 

Total Approved Refused Under 8 

weeks 

Under 13 

weeks 

Performance 

% 

National 

target % 

DCB decision 

Approved Refused 

Major 0 0 0 0 0 n/a 60 0 0 

Minor 49 42 7 34 7 69 65 12 3 

Other 57 53 4 53 1 93 80 1 0 

Total 106 95 11 87 8 13 3 

DCB made 16 of the 106 decisions, 15%

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL BOARD - 

APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED POWERS 

PURPOSE OF REPORT 

To inform Members of those applications which have been determined under the officer delegation scheme since your last meeting. 

These decisions are made in accordance with the Authority’s powers contained in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and 

have no financial implications. 

RECOMMENDATION 

That the report be noted. 

DETAILS OF DECISIONS 

DATE 

RECEIVED 

DATE 

DETERMINED/ 

DECISION 

23.04.2009 17.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

13.03.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

REF NUMBER APPLICANT 

PROPOSED DEV 

09/00681/F Mrs Ruth Page 

3 Roman Way Brancaster King's 

Lynn Norfolk 

Erection of single storey rear 

extension and extension at first 

floor level 

09/00467/CU Ms Alexandra Ferguson 

Fishes Restaurant Market Place 

Burnham Market King's Lynn 

Change of use from Sui Generis to 

retail 

PARISH/AREA 

Brancaster 

Burnham Market

02.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

23.04.2009 12.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

23.04.2009 18.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

14.01.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Refused 

13.05.2009 19.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

03.04.2009 09.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00580/F Mr And Mrs R Stimpson 

Woodview Creake Road Burnham 

Market Norfolk 

Proposed garage, wall, fence and 

new access 

09/00682/F Client Of R C F Waite 

Hall Farm Cottage Herrings Lane 

Burnham Market King's Lynn 

Alterations and two storey 

extension to dwelling 

09/00684/F Mr D Brown 

5 Mill Green Burnham Market 

King's Lynn Norfolk 

Construction of flat roof enclosed 

porch to front entrance 

09/00065/F Mr And Mrs Dixon-Smith 

West Harbour House Wells Road 

Burnham Overy Staithe King's 

Lynn 

Move position of entrance 

driveway 

09/00798/LB Mr And Mrs Middleditch 

Mill House Mill Road Burnham 

Overy Town King's Lynn 

Single storey ground floor 

extension with incorporation of 

existing outbuilding into house, 

internal alterations and new front 

door 

09/00588/F Mr John Ely 

4 Baileygate Cottages Stocks 

Green Castle Acre King's Lynn 

Extend and renovate existing 

single storey rear extension 

Burnham Market 



Burnham Overy 

Burnham Overy 

Castle Acre

06.04.2009 01.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

20.04.2009 15.06.2009 

Application 

Refused 

01.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

02.04.2009 28.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

24.04.2009 19.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

23.04.2009 22.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00599/F Mr & Mrs J Redcar 

67 Ryston Road Denver Downham 

Market PE38 0DP 

Extension to dwelling 

09/00659/F Clients Of John Stephenson 

15 Sandy Lane Denver Downham 

Market Norfolk 

Replacement roof in connection 

with loft conversion 

09/00569/F Mrs L Reynolds 

28 Post Office Road Dersingham 

King's Lynn PE31 6HS 

Conversion and Extension to 

Garage to Form Residential 

Annexe 

09/00579/F Mr And Mrs John Yates 

Marsh Cottage 18 Brook Road 

Dersingham King's Lynn 

Single and two storey extension to 

form bedroom, study and dayroom 

with enlargement of bathroom 

09/00702/F Mr Alan Chapman 

Moss Pharmacy Jubilee Court 

Hunstanton Road Dersingham 


Internal shopfit inclusive of new air 

conditioning and associated 

condenser 

09/00683/F Mr J Raslan 

1 Grove Farm Barns High Street 

Docking King's Lynn 

Alterations to convert garage to 

residential, construct enclosed 

porch and detached car shelter 

Denver 

Denver 

Dersingham 

Dersingham 

Dersingham 

Docking

30.04.2009 24.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

18.03.2009 27.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

02.04.2009 15.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

14.04.2009 16.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

23.04.2009 19.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00731/F Mr Goold 

4 Grove Farm Barns High Street 

Docking King's Lynn 

Erection of single storey 

conservatory 

09/00501/F W M Morrison Supermarkets PLC 

W M Morrison Supermarket 

Maltings Mall Bridge Street 


Erection of service yard gates to 

Morrisons's store 

09/00592/F Mr Peter Fiddling 

34 Wingfields Downham Market 

Norfolk PE38 9AR 

Extension to boundary fences 

using trellis to extend fence height 

to 1.83 metres 

09/00632/F Freebridge Community Housing 

Land At 25 And 27 Elizabeth 

Avenue Downham Market Norfolk 

PE38 9EQ 

Construction of 4 affordable 

dwellings with associated parking 

09/00693/F Mr P Cross 

22 Wingfields Downham Market 

Norfolk PE38 9AR 

Extension to dwelling, decking and 

paved area to garden 

Docking 




Downham Market

01.05.2009 28.05.2009 

NO OBJECTION 

TO NCC APP 

08.04.2009 17.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

01.04.2009 01.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

06.04.2009 22.06.2009 

Application 

Refused 

27.03.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00738/CM Norfolk County Council - Director 

Of Childrens Services 

Clackclose C P School Nursery 

Road Downham Market Norfolk 

Re-siting of 2 double mobile 

classrooms to facilitate building 

project 

09/00616/LB Flying Kiwi Inns 

The Crown The Green East 

Rudham King's Lynn 

Adapt existing 2 metal flues, 

remove one and cover the other 

one with brick enclosure 

09/00567/RM Fenland Construction 

129 Church Road Emneth 

Wisbech Norfolk 

Reserved Matters Application - 

construction of two dwellings 

(amended design) 

09/00597/O Mr Chris Matthews 

Land North East Of 7 Outwell 

Road Emneth Wisbech King's 

Lynn 

Outline Application- Construction 

of dwelling 

09/00549/F Mr Charlie Smith 

The Brambles Vong Lane Pott 

Row King's Lynn 

Two storey side extension and 

single storey rear extension 

replacing existing conservatory 


East Rudham 

Emneth 

Emneth 

Grimston

14.04.2009 19.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

24.04.2009 19.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

08.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

16.03.2009 24.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

03.04.2009 09.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

23.03.2009 17.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00630/RM Williamson Development 

41 Lynn Road Grimston King's 

Lynn Norfolk 

Construction of dwelling 

09/00690/F Mr & Mrs H Rahn 

The Old Barn Gayton Road 

Grimston King's Lynn 

Alterations to garage block 

including raising rear roof and 

constructing external staircase and 

terrace 

09/00614/F Mr William Radford 

Manor Farm House Cross Street 

Harpley King's Lynn 

Installation of solar panels and 

minor works to existing dwelling 

09/00466/F Mr Michael Coleman 

Foam Crest 41 The South Beach 

Heacham King's Lynn 

Erection of new timber framed 

garage 

09/00587/F Mr Arthur Massen 

16 Hall Close Heacham Norfolk 

PE31 7JT 

Construction of detached 

bungalow 

09/00528/F Waldersey Farms Ltd 

Land At Martins Farm Station 

Road Ten Mile Bank Downham 

Market 

Demolition of two semi-detached 

cottages and construction of two 

replacement semi-detached 

cottages on alternative site 

Grimston 

Grimston 

Harpley 

Heacham 

Heacham 

Hilgay

17.04.2009 12.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

08.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

27.04.2009 18.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

14.03.2009 23.06.2009 

Application 

Refused 

18.03.2009 15.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

24.03.2009 01.06.2009 

Split Decision - 

Part 

approve_refuse 

09/00655/F Hunstanton Golf Club 

Hunstanton Golf Club Old 

Hunstanton Norfolk PE36 6LQ 

Erection of netting at 8th fairway 

on golf course 

09/00608/CU L And J Leisure Ltd 

2 To 4 Northgate Precinct 

Northgate Hunstanton 

Proposed change of use from A2 

to B1 

09/00703/F Mr R Lincoln 

10 Sandy Way Ingoldisthorpe 


Rear extension to dwelling 

09/00457/F Mr T George 

Land Adjacent To 29 Church 

Street King's Lynn Norfolk 

Construction of two bedroom 

dwelling 

09/00493/F Mr Chris Munnelly 

44 Balmoral Road Gaywood King's 

Lynn Norfolk 

Construction of conservatory 

(retrospective) 

09/00511/A McDonald's Restaurant Ltd 

Mc Donalds Hamburgers Ltd 

Campbells Meadow Hardwick 

Road King's Lynn Norfolk 

Advertisement Consent - 6 roof 

fascias, 4 freestanding signs,1 

height restrictor,2 banners,2 

informative/dot signs 

Holme next the Sea 

Hunstanton 

Ingoldisthorpe 



King's Lynn

25.03.2009 28.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

31.03.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

03.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

04.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

05.04.2009 19.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00532/A Mr Simon Holt 

Central Tyres Paxman Road King's 

Lynn Norfolk 

Advert Consent - One freestanding 

sign on roof of office and one 

freestanding sign on posts 

09/00563/F Germains Technology Group 

55 Oldmedow Road King's Lynn 

Norfolk PE30 4JJ 

Erection of dust separation system 

09/00586/F Home Retail Group 

H R G Ltd Hardwick Road King's 

Lynn Norfolk 

Installation of 3No. air conditioning 

condensers and 3 new louvres 

09/00603/F Smiths The Bakers 

50 London Road King's Lynn 

Norfolk PE30 5QH 

Removal of one window and 

brickwork below and insertion of 

door frame and stable type door 

09/00604/F Broadland Housing Association 

St James Lodge (Warden's Flat) 

Old Hospital Mews Hospital Walk 


Change of use from office (B1) to 

day centre/ training facility (D1), 

with two storey extension to gable 

wall in location of existing 

courtyard between main building 

and retained outbuildings. 

Alterations to reconfigure fall to 

outbuilding roof 






09.04.2009 10.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

15.04.2009 10.06.2009 

Application 

Refused 

20.04.2009 12.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

20.04.2009 12.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

20.04.2009 15.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00617/F Jamie Stevens 

48 Loke Road King's Lynn Norfolk 

PE30 2AB 

The conversion of shop with living 

accomodation into two individual 

flats 

09/00636/F Client 

Park View Hotel Blackfriars Road 


Extension of boundary wall along 

Waterloo Street to close off 

existing vehicular access, leaving 

a secured gated pedestrian access 

09/00658/F Mr R King 

52 Russett Close Gaywood King's 

Lynn Norfolk 

Garage extension 

09/00661/A Mr Roger Duggan 

The Crown & Mitre Ferry Street 


Advertisement Consent - Erection 

of externally illuminated hanging 

sign 

09/00662/F UBS Global Asset Management 

(UK) Ltd 

Units B & B1 Hardwick Retail 

ParkHardwick Road King's Lynn 

Norfolk 

External alterations to elevations 

and internal alterations to create 

three new retail units, and 

associated works 






24.04.2009 15.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

29.04.2009 23.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

30.04.2009 24.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

07.05.2009 23.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

06.04.2009 09.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

06.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00692/F Mr A Powley 

46 Langley Road South Wootton 

King's Lynn PE30 3UB 

Proposed loft conversion, including 

a dormer window on the front 

elevation and a velux rooflight on 

the rear elevation 

09/00720/A Mr D Auker 

125 Norfolk Street King's Lynn 

Norfolk PE30 1AP 

Advertisement Consent - 1No 

fascia sign 

09/00743/LB Mr Simon Bax 

The Body Shop 52 High Street 


Listed Building Consent - 

Alterations and renewal of roof 

09/00776/F Mrs Joanne Russell 

58 Vancouver Avenue King's Lynn 

Norfolk PE30 5RD 

Single storey side/rear extension 

09/00600/F Mrs Janet Etherington 

408 Smeeth Road Marshland St 

James Wisbech PE14 8EP 

Erection of sectional timber framed 

and clad stables/storage barn 

09/00602/F Mrs Janet Etherington 

408 Smeeth Road Marshland St 

James Wisbech PE14 8EP 

Chalet extentsion to existing 

bungalow 





Marshland St James 

Marshland St James

08.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09.04.2009 23.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

01.04.2009 17.06.2009 

Application 

Withdrawn 

08.04.2009 12.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09.04.2009 12.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

27.04.2009 18.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00627/F Miss Nadine Aldis 

Land West Of St Peters Farm 

Middle Drove Marshland St James 

Norfolk 

Construction of Manege 

09/00624/F Mr And Mrs David McGuffog 

The Vicarage Church Bank 

Marshland St James Wisbech 

Proposed sunlounge and utility 

extension 

09/00574/CU Wootton Park Bowls Club 

Wootton Park Bowls Club West Of 

Cranmer Avenue North Wootton 

Norfolk 

Change of use from park land to 

bowling green, two classrooms to 

changing room/toilet and club 

house and erection of fence 

09/00613/F Mr William Swallow 

31 Wesley Road North Wootton 


Proposed new kitchen/sun lounge 

and wash room extensions to 

existing dwelling house 

09/00625/F Mr Simon Hunter 

3 Sandringham Crescent North 

Wootton King's Lynn Norfolk 

Proposed dining room extension 

09/00704/F Mr I Winston 

The Spinney Marsh Road North 

Wootton King's Lynn 




North Wootton 

North Wootton 

North Wootton 

North Wootton

13.05.2009 23.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

02.04.2009 01.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

14.04.2009 09.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

27.03.2009 01.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

16.04.2009 09.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

30.04.2009 23.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00797/F Mr Christian Manning 

31 Tyndale North Wootton King's 

Lynn Norfolk 

Single storey rear extension to 

dwelling 

09/00585/F Mr And Mrs M Mamo 

1 Little London Road Northwold 

Thetford Norfolk 

Extensions to dwelling 

09/00631/F Mr P Morris 

Mandarin Golf Course Road Old 

Hunstanton Hunstanton 

Extension to garage and internal 

alterations 

09/00548/F Mr Vahap Tursucu 

St Cyprien The Cottons Outwell 

Wisbech 

Extension to bungalow and 

replacement garage following 

demolition of existing 

09/00642/LB Dr G Cowley 

The Old Rectory Rectory Road 

Outwell Wisbech 

Conversion of existing outbuilding 

to new dwelling 

09/00735/F Mr Colin Duke 

Bramley House Langhorns Lane 

Outwell Wisbech 

Extension to dwelling including 

corridor to existing stable block. 

Conversion of existing stable block 

to residential accommodation, 

construction of new stable block 

and extension to barn 

North Wootton 

Northwold 

Old Hunstanton 

Outwell 

Outwell 

Outwell

01.04.2009 01.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

07.04.2009 02.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

17.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

16.04.2009 17.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

02.04.2009 02.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

02.04.2009 29.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

23.04.2009 18.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00565/F Mr Richard King 

90 Pentney Lakes Common Road 

Pentney Norfolk 

Construction of log cabin 

09/00607/LB Mr P Bingham 

Walnut Tree Cottage 16 Docking 

Road Ringstead Hunstanton 

Replace existing door with window 

09/00652/F Mr P A Edwards 

19 Ffolkes Place Runcton Holme 

King's Lynn PE33 0AH 

Proposed Extensions and internal 

alterations 

09/00643/F Mr T Forecast 

Cart Lodges 1 West Hall Farm 

Barns Church Lane Sedgeford 

Erect a single storey, timber 

framed, glazed conservatory. 

09/00578/F Mr Edward Stanton 

Park Farm Bircham Road 

Snettisham King's Lynn 

Variation of condition 3 of 

application 05/02131/FM 

09/00581/RM G H Owen Property Ltd 

Land West Of 42 The Willows 

Common Road Snettisham Norfolk 

Reserved Matters:- Construction of 

two dwellings 

09/00680/F Dr A J Norman 

Brickfields 46 Park Lane 

Snettisham King's Lynn 

Single storey extension to dwelling 

Pentney 

Ringstead 

Runcton Holme 

Sedgeford 

Snettisham 

Snettisham 

Snettisham

23.03.2009 18.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

24.04.2009 17.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

29.04.2009 24.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

24.02.2009 15.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

12.03.2009 28.05.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09.04.2009 22.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00504/F Mr David Lake 

Land Adjacent To 4 Blickling 

Close South Wootton King's Lynn 

Erection of new chalet bungalow 

and garage (fully wheelchair 

compliant) 

09/00691/F Mr P Hunter 

19 Nursery Lane South Wootton 


Domestic Extension 

09/00722/F Mr Michael Whiting 

9 The Birches South Wootton 


Kitchen extension to dwelling 

including balcony over flat roof 

area 

09/00347/F Mr John S Means 

Land NE Of Laurels Farm Ongar 

Hill Road Terrington St Clement 


Construction of farm store 

09/00438/F Mr C Prior 

Land East Of 6 Lynn Road 

Terrington St Clement King's Lynn 

Norfolk 

Construction of detached two 

storey dwelling and garage 

09/00626/F Mr J Harrod 

257 Lynn Road Terrington St 

Clement King's Lynn Norfolk 

Demolition of existing garage and 

construction of detached annexe 

South Wootton 

South Wootton 

South Wootton 

Terrington St Clement 

Terrington St Clement 

Terrington St Clement

14.04.2009 10.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

12.02.2009 19.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

23.04.2009 23.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

15.04.2009 15.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

16.04.2009 15.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

29.04.2009 22.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

09/00628/F Mr Peter Mills 

Ivy Cottage High Street Thornham 

Hunstanton 

Erection of garden room, 

demolition of modern porch, 

replacement of flat roof with 

pitched/tiled, replacement of 

windows 

09/00292/F Lordsbridge Development Co Ltd 

Land At Lords Bridge Farm 11 

High Road Tilney Cum Islington 


Conversion of barns to 4 dwellings 

09/00677/F Mr S Crowson 

80 School Road Tilney St 

Lawrence King's Lynn Norfolk 

Construction of two storey 

extension and detached garage 

block 

09/00635/F Mr Terry Symonds 

Churchfields Green Lane 

Christchurch Wisbech 

Continued use of store building as 

workshop 

09/00646/F Mr And Mrs S Racey 

63 St Peters Road Upwell Wisbech 

Norfolk 

Construction of dwelling and 

garage 

09/00716/F Mr P K Chapman 

The Old Telephone Exchange Kirk 

Road Walpole St Andrew Wisbech 

Extension and conversion of 

building into one dwelling 

Thornham 

Tilney St Lawrence 

Tilney St Lawrence 

Upwell 

Upwell 

Walpole

29.04.2009 22.06.2009 

Application 

Permitted 

17.02.2009 16.06.2009 

Application 

Refused 

09/00721/F Mr J Leach 

5 Broad End Road Walsoken 

Wisbech Norfolk 


09/00310/F Mr Garry Durrant 

Sunnyside Brooks Lane West 

Dereham King's Lynn 

Removal of existing tin barn and 

erection of a new tin barn 

Walsoken 

West Dereham

development control board agenda - Borough Council of King's ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?