Replacement dwelling and garage at Ran Revir, Castle Acre, King's Lynn

The site

The site was residential garden land at the southern edge of Castle Acre, within the development boundary and Conservation Area, with access from Bailey Street.

“The site is approximately 0.11ha in size comprising residential garden land with the remains of a recently demolished detached bungalow and foundations of the replacement dwelling to the north of the plot.”

“The site is within Castle Acre's Neighbourhood Plan area (adopted in February 2022), development boundary identified within the Local Plan 2021-2040, and Conservation Area. The site is last dwelling of the southern edge of Castle Acre along Bailey Street. The vehicular access to the site is opposite the junction of Blind Lane with Bailey Street.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier permissions covered alterations and extensions, while a later replacement-dwelling application was refused over flood-risk information and floodplain storage.

“Planning permission under reference 24/00256/F was refused in December 2024 for the same development due to an inadequate flood risk assessment which did not comply with the requirements for a site-specific flood risk assessment set out in paragraph 20 and 21 of the PPG and impact of the proposal to the loss of the flood plain storage. This application seeks to address the reason for refusal for a new dwelling on this site.”

“The current application follows a recently refused planning application, reference 24/00256/F, which was refused due to an inadequate flood risk assessment that did not comply with the requirements for a site-specific flood risk assessment set out in paragraph 20 and 21 of the PPG and impact of the proposal to the loss of the flood plain storage. This application seeks permission to regularise the development on the site, which is for a replacement dwelling.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers considered the replacement dwelling acceptable because it was within the development boundary, suitably designed, safe from flooding and supported by compensatory storage.

“The principle of development, for the retention of a replacement dwelling, is considered acceptable. The footprint of the dwelling would fall within the development boundary of Castle Acre. The design and impact of the dwellinghouse and garage to neighbours were considered acceptable by Planning Committee in 2023 under planning reference 23/01006/F.”

“The Applicant has addressed the previous reason of refusal under reference 24/00256/F, which related to an inadequate flood risk assessment and justification for the loss of a flood plain storage by providing approximately 46.5 square metre of compensatory flood storage to the southern portion of the site.”

Officer report

What consultees said

The Environment Agency and Highways Authority had no objection subject to conditions, while conservation, archaeology and ecology consultees also raised no objection subject to safeguards.

“Highways Authority: NO OBJECTION in principle, subject to conditions.”

“Environment Agency: NO OBJECTION subject to conditions.”

Officer report

Objections raised

The parish council and a neighbour objected over demolition, flooding, the larger footprint, the river setting, protected species and biodiversity.

“This is a particularly sensitive site. It sits on the south-western approach to the historic conservation village (alongside the Peddars way) and is in the foreground of the conservation area and views of the Castle SM. Being adjacent to the entrance of the village, this location has both historic and archaeological significance. The River Nar with its SSSI habitats and designated protected species are to the eastern boundary of the development site.”

“The Council notes the proposed eastern extension to the former building's footprint extends to within approx. 4.5 metres of the riverbank which is in the heart of the sensitive riparian zone. The proposed extension is located within the 10 metres development boundary which is in place to protect the River Nar SSSI.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector addressed the committee, followed by a councillor speaking under the committee’s standing order.

Members’ discussion

Members sought reassurance about protecting neighbouring properties and the road, and agreed that flood storage should be installed before further development.

“Committee Members asked for reassurance that the measures would adequately protect neighbouring properties and the road. The case officer advised that the Environment Agency considered the proposal acceptable and that it would be betterment for the site and surrounding neighbours.”

“Councillor Lintern proposed the need for pre-commencement implementation of mitigation measures, and the potential for ongoing monitoring. This was seconded by Councillor Spikings and agreed by the Committee to strengthen condition 6 to require flood storage to be in place before any further development.”

Minutes

The vote

The recommendation to approve, subject to strengthening the flood-storage condition, passed with seven votes for, three against and three abstentions.

“The Democratic Services Officer then carried out a roll call on the recommendation to approve the application subject to Condition 6 being amended to require flood storage to be in place before further development and, after having been put to the vote was carried (7 votes for, 3 votes against and 3 abstentions).”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the application subject to requiring flood storage to be in place before any further development took place.

“RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to the amendment of condition 6 to require flood storage be in place before any further development took place.”

Minutes