Five custom-build homes at Braemore, Lynn Road, East Winch, King's Lynn

What was proposed

Outline permission was sought for five custom and self-build homes, with access, layout and scale considered now and appearance and landscaping reserved.

“The application seeks outline planning consent with access, layout and scale. The appearance and landscaping would be determined as part of a reserved matters application.”

“The proposed development is for five custom and self-build dwellings with associated detached garages and driveways, and private gardens. Access is proposed via a shared single access onto the A47. The site is currently in the form of grassland.”

Officer report

The site

The approximately 0.4-hectare grassland site lies north of the A47 in East Winch, outside the village development boundary.

“The application site is approximately 0.4ha in size and lies to the north of the A47, in the village of East Winch. East Winch is categorised as a Rural Village in the adopted Local Plan. The site lies outside of the development boundary as designated on the Planning Policies Map.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

An earlier outline application for five energy-efficient homes was withdrawn in 2023, while two earlier applications at Braemore were permitted.

“23/00666/O: Application Withdrawn: 25/07/23 - Outline application for five two storey energy efficient homes – Braemore, Lynn Road, East Winch, King's Lynn PE32 1NP”

“16/01102/F: Application Permitted (Planning Committee determination): 04/08/16 - Change of use from business premises into residential annexe (retrospective) – Braemore, Lynn Road, East Winch, King's Lynn PE32 1NP”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the proposal conflicted with development and highway policies and raised unresolved concerns about amenity, layout, noise and trees.

“The proposed location of the development, fronting onto the A47, raises concerns regarding the residential amenity of the proposed residents. In the absence of a noise survey to assess this impact, the Council cannot be satisfied that the proposal would give rise to a quality form of development for potential residents with an appropriate level of residential amenity. As such the scheme is contrary to the NPPF, National Design Guide and Local Plan Policy LP21.”

“While the applicant has submitted an Arboricultural Report, the Arboricultural Officer remains concerned that the development as proposed is within too close a proximity to the existing trees and hedgerows. Not only may the development directly cause damage to the retained trees but would also likely result in future pressure for the removal of trees and hedgerows and an unsatisfactory living environment for future occupants.”

Officer report

What consultees said

National Highways objected to the proposed A47 access, while the parish council and arboricultural officer also objected; several other consultees raised no objection subject to requirements.

“In addition, the application has not addressed previous comments regarding the design of the access. Most notably, the visibility splay crosses the bus layby, contrary to CD129 paragraph 3.7 stating ‘the separation between a lay-by and an at-grade junction or access (excluding field accesses) on the same side of the road, both upstream and downstream, shall be at least 3.75V metres where V is the design speed in kph’.”

“Further to this, National Highways Safety colleagues have raised concerns about the location of the access in terms of it being unexpected. The proposed development is located outside of the ‘built up’ area, in particular when travelling along the A47 west bound. As a…”

Officer report

What residents said

Three objections raised concerns about road safety, access, flooding, wildlife, construction noise, privacy, local services and the effect on traffic and the bus stop.

“THREE OBJECTIONS received, and these are summarised below.”

“Vehicular access proposed will reduce safety for drivers using Station Road, Common Road and Walton Road. Already a difficult and slow area of traffic and the proposed access will intensify these problems. • Queries regarding the land ownership/ access of proposed track. Proposed fencing blocks off access for neighbour. Footpath needs to be rerouted away from the neighbours land. • Pond does contain fish and toads.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A supporting speaker addressed the Committee, and Councillor de Whalley also spoke in support without taking part in the debate or decision.

What members debated

Members considered whether the problems could be overcome, with some saying the application was incomplete and needed further work.

“Members debated whether the issues were insurmountable, with some suggesting the application was incomplete and required further work.”

“Councillor de Winton proposed that the application should be deferred for three months to allow the applicant additional time to address highways and noise concerns. The proposal to defer the application was seconded by Councillor Everett.”

Minutes

The vote

The proposal to defer the application for three months was carried by eight votes to four.

“The Democratic Services Officer carried out a roll call on the proposal to defer the application and, after having been put to the vote, was carried (8 votes for and 4 votes against).”

Minutes

What was decided

The Committee deferred the application for three months to allow more time to address highways and noise concerns.

“RESOLVED: That the application be deferred for three months.”

Minutes