Two four-bedroom homes at 136 Norwich Road, Tacolneston
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by South Norfolk Broadland South Norfolk Development Management (Planning) Committee on 13 May 2026.
What was proposed
The application proposed converting a seven-bed guesthouse and two-bed owners’ accommodation into two four-bedroom private homes with parking and landscaping.
“Applicant’s Name: [name withheld] Address 136 Norwich Road Tacolneston Norfolk NR16 1AL Proposal Subdivision and change of use from 7 bed guesthouse with 2 bed owners accommodation to create 2no 4 bed private residential units with associated parking and landscaping…”
Officer report
The site
The site is a Grade II listed former public house in a conservation area, outside the settlement boundary, with neighbouring homes and flood zone 1 status.
“The application seeks full planning permission and listed building consent for the subdivision and change of use of a 7-bed guesthouse and 2-bed owner’s accommodation into 2 no. 4 bed semi-detached dwellinghouses with associated on-site parking and private amenity space.”
“The site consists of the former Pelican Public House (grade II listed building), which is located within a generous plot with on-site parking to the front and garden space to the rear. It is located on the northern edge of the village of Tacolneston within a Conservation Area, but outside of the defined settlement boundary, and accessed via Norwich Road to the north-west of the site. There are neighbouring dwellings to the south-west and east of the site.”
Officer report
Earlier planning history
Earlier permissions covered alterations, guesthouse accommodation and business remodelling; an application for one dwelling was refused on appeal, and two self-build homes were refused.
“2018/0043 Change of use of part of public house to create single dwelling and alteration to rear elevation Refused Appeal dismissed…”
“2025/0153 Outline planning permission for the erection of 2 no. new self-build dwellings Refused…”
Officer report
Officers’ recommendation
Officers recommended approval because marketing had not found a viable employment use and the proposal was acceptable in principle and across the assessed planning matters.
“Criterion (d) is not relevant as the proposal relates to a proposed residential use. In respect of criterion (e) and also Policy DM 2.2 criterion (2, a), it is noted that the current application has derived from declining occupancy rates, increased local competition and spiralling utility costs at the premises. The Council is advised that the property has been marketed as a going concern and for employment use since January 2024.”
“In light of the above and given that the marketing exercise has not identified any viable employment use, officers consider that the principle of the development is acceptable, having regard to the requirements of Policies DM 2.10 and DM2.2 of the SNLP.”
Officer report
Design and heritage
The limited works were considered sympathetic, with removal of the fire escape and reinstatement of a window helping conserve the listed building and conservation area.
“Following a site visit, the Council’s Heritage Officer has raised no objection to the proposed works. It is accepted that the building is already existing and the works proposed to change it to residential are minimal in nature. The removal of the external fire escape staircase and first floor fire escape door and reinstatement of a window in keeping with the existing windows would be more sympathetic to the significance of the designated heritage asset.”
“In addition, consideration has been given to the significance of the heritage asset affected by the proposal in line with the requirements of paragraph 215 of the NPPF, with primary importance attached to the external architectural fabric, form and appearance of the building and its relationship with the surrounding conservation area.”
Officer report
Consultation responses
The parish council and several consultees raised no objection, with some responses subject to conditions, and no representation letters were received.
“No objection, subject to consultation with Natural England.”
“No letters of representation have been received.”
Officer report
The committee decision
Members unanimously approved the application subject to conditions covering plans, boundaries, ecology, parking, heating, lighting and water efficiency.
“Members voted unanimously for approval subject to conditions:”
“Time Limit 2 In accordance with the approved plans 3 Boundary Treatment 4 Ecology Mitigation Measures 5 On-site car parking and turning area 6 Air Source Heat Pump 7 Ecology Enhancement Measures 8 External lighting 9 Water efficiency…”
Minutes
Sources
- South Norfolk Broadland South Norfolk Development Management (Planning) Committee minutes, 13 May 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of South Norfolk Broadland's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- South Norfolk Broadland
- Date
- Wednesday 13 May 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Vote
- Unanimous
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- South Norfolk Broadland committee decisions →
This committee's year
27 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 1 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.