11/00713/F - Borough Council of King's Lynn & West Norfolk

Is there still a need to control occupancy of the development?
The permission granted in 2007 allowed for the creation of 33 residential units. One of these
was in an existing single-storey block to the rear of Manor Farm House and seven were in
the large barn fronting on to Hunstanton Road. As mentioned earlier in this report, the large
barn is in built environment type C. The balance of the residential units (25) was to be in
open countryside. Ten of these new-build units have been constructed as well as the single
unit in the existing single-storey block behind the farm house, now the hotel and restaurant.
At the time the application was submitted, the applicant made the case that the development
was needed to extend and diversify the holiday offer in the Borough generally and in and
around Hunstanton specifically. The point was made that the applicant was an existing
operator that already made a strong contribution to the local economy and that the proposals
would strengthen their position, bringing in additional holiday income and providing
employment.
However, there were concerns that the bulk of the development was in open countryside
where residential accommodation would not normally be permitted. Balancing the potential
conflict between the desire to promote economic development against the need to protect
the landscape, the application was considered as a package and a condition attached
restricting all the residential units to holiday occupation.
Had separate applications been received for the conversion of the large barn and the singlestorey
building, it is unlikely that they would have been subject to a holiday occupancy
restriction. The units in the large barn would not have been in the countryside whilst the unit
in the single-storey building would have involved re-use of an existing building in a relatively
sustainable countryside location. Consequently, it can be legitimately argued that there is no
need to restrict the 8 units provided in the existing buildings to holiday use.
Notwithstanding this, it remains a fact that the ten new-build units that have been
constructed and the 15 that can still be built are in the countryside and would not have been
recommended for approval without some form of occupancy restriction. Whilst the specific
policies may have changed (Local Plan policies have been superseded and parts of PPS7
have now been superseded by PPS4), the general thrust of both national and local policy is
that residential development in the countryside should not normally be allowed. The
exception at the time was that they were for economic development (holiday
accommodation), and is not the case for open market housing.
Do the changes proposed by the applicant allow sufficient control over occupancy to
be retained?
The document that guided the imposition of the original condition and still remains relevant
today is the DCLG publication ‘Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism’. Annex B of
the guide deals specifically with seasonal and holiday occupancy conditions and suggests
that there are three main reasons why a planning authority may wish to impose such
conditions:-
� In order that national or local policies on development of the countryside are not
compromised. Often the conversion of redundant rural buildings to holiday
accommodation provides a means to retain those buildings without introducing a
level of activity that would occur with permanent households;
11/00302/F Development Control Board
25 July 2011
104