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

Given the extant 2003 approval, the case officer assessed the impact of the changes on 3
Reeves Lane and concluded that an extension without a window located in front of an area
of blank wall to the south elevation of Reeves Lane would have less of an impact on the
amenity of the occupiers of that property. The dwelling was approved (on 21.08.2008) 1.5m
at its closest point to the north boundary which was similar to that previously approved under
to the 2003 permission. The dwelling was constructed in late August 2008 and completed in
later August 2009 with the final Building Regulations completion certificate being issued in
February 2010.
A complaint was submitted in January 2011 that the dwelling built on site caused overlooking
and overshadowing to 3 Reeves Lane. The site was assessed by officers and concluded
that whilst the appearance of the dwelling was as previously approved, it was not
constructed in its approved location. The dwelling been constructed 50cm max closer to the
northern boundary than approved under the 2008 permission (08/01603/F).
The change in the location of the dwelling and its impact on neighbour amenity
Notwithstanding the history of the site, an assessment needs to be made of the impact of the
dwelling as built compared to that approved under the 2008 permission.
In 2008, the position of the main part of the dwelling was approx 6.5-7m from the north
boundary (a 2m high wall with trellis on top). The flank wall of the two storey extension
element was shown to be located 1.5m from the boundary wall and 2.5m from the south
elevation of 3 Reeves Lane. These distances were considered acceptable given the extant
2003 permission and the fact that a dwelling could still be built with an extension within 2m of
the boundary with a window at two storey level directly overlooking the private garden area
to 3 Reeves Lane. The removal of the first floor window and the repositioning of the two
storey extension adjacent to an area of blank wall to 3 Reeves Lane meant that there would
be less overlooking (at very close proximity) and overshadowing of the private garden area.
The case officer therefore tried to improve matters for the occupiers of 3 Reeves Lane.
However, the dwelling built on site is closer to the boundary than previously approved by
approx 0.5m. The main building is scaled at being 6m from the boundary the two storey
extension being between 0.95m to 1.14m. The windows at first floor level on the north
elevation of Plot 3 are as previously approved being a window to bedroom 4 and a
bathroom. There is also a window on the west facing elevation of the two storey extension
which overlooks the garden to Plot 3 and over towards Plot 4.
With regard to overlooking of the neighbouring property, no additional windows have been
inserted at first floor level and therefore the same level of overlooking occurs as previously
approved. The building is closer to the boundary but the impact of 0.5m is marginal. 3
Reeves Lane has a ground level slightly higher than Plot 3 but no overlooking occurs from
ground floor windows as a result of the high wall and trellis. Again, it must be remember that
the 2003 permission had a window in the gable wall within 2m of the boundary (which was
an extant permission in 2008) which would have affected the occupiers of 3 Reeves Lane far
more than that approved in 2008.
With regard to overshadowing and whether the property is overbearing, again the distance of
0.5m would have a minimal effect when compared against the previous 2008 approval. The
building is to the south of 3 Reeves Lane and clearly overshadowing will occur at certain
times of the year but the majority of overshadowing during the summer months would be to
Plot 3 and not 3 Reeves Lane.
11/01704/F Development Control Board
25 July 2011
117