8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 19 May 2025 by G Bayliss BA (Hons) MA MA MRTPI IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 16 June 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/V2635/W/24/3340315 8 Kirkgate, Holme PE36 6LH • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Paul Gibbon against the decision of King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council. • The application Ref is 23/01265/F. • The development proposed is removal of existing sheds and erection of 1no agricultural storage shed in paddock. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. Since the determination of the application, the Council has adopted the King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan (27 March 2025) (KLWNLP). The Council has provided updated policies, and the appellant has had the opportunity to make comments on the revised policy position. I have also taken account of the revised National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) published in December 2024. I am satisfied that the revised policy position does not fundamentally change the issues relating to this appeal. 3.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision The Council’s Officer Report refers to harm to the Holme Next The Sea Conservation Area and to the setting of the Church of St Mary (Ref.1171431), a Grade I listed building. Although this is not referred to in the decision notice, as a decision-maker, I must consider the statutory duties placed upon me under sections 66(1) and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act). These require that special regard shall be had to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses, and special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area. The Framework sets out that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. I have reflected this in the main issue below. 4. The site lies within the Norfolk Coast National Landscape (previously known as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty). The statutory purpose of National Landscapes is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the area.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (as amended) now includes the duty on relevant authorities that they must seek to further this purpose when exercising or performing any functions in relation to, or so as to affect, land in an area of outstanding natural beauty (National Landscape). The Framework requires https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (as amended) now includes the duty on relevant authorities that they must seek to further this purpose when exercising or performing any functions in relation to, or so as to affect, land in an area of outstanding natural beauty (National Landscape). The Framework requires https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/V2635/W/24/3340315 that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Landscapes, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. The Framework also explains that the conservation and enhancement of wildlife and cultural heritage are also important considerations in National Landscapes. 5. Although the description of development refers to the removal of existing sheds, the Council advises that these were removed some time ago and no sheds were present when I visited the site. I have considered this appeal accordingly. Main Issue 6. The main issue is whether or not the proposal would constitute an acceptable form of development in this countryside location having regard to local and national policy and its effect on the National Landscape and designated heritage assets. Reasons Designated heritage assets 7. The proposed building is described as an agricultural-style storage shed and would be a corrugated tin structure with a pitched roof which would be re-used from another site. It would be painted dark brown with wooden doors and windows.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision The appellant states that the building is required to store equipment to manage the land and would include a dry store, tools section and ride on lawnmower. 8. The boundary of the conservation area follows the lanes through the settlement incorporating its historic buildings and rural hinterland. The area’s character and appearance is mainly drawn from the range of historic built development within it, the relationship of the buildings to each other and the spaces and land around them. The arrangement of buildings and the surrounding landscape which flows into the settlement contributes greatly to the area’s character and shapes attractive views into and out of this picturesque settlement. 9. The appeal site is located to the north of Kirkgate beyond a terrace of historic cottages which sits at right-angles to the road. It is accessed via a track in front of the terrace and is a small paddock mainly bounded by hedges and trees, with more open fields beyond to the north. Immediately to the west is the churchyard and a small caravan site lies to the east. The open, grassy appeal site forms an attractive part of the rural hinterland of the village allowing views into and out of the settlement.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision It also has a visually close association with the churchyard alongside. As such the appeal site makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area. 10. The list description for the Grade I listed Church of St Mary mentions the age and form of the building together with its materials, architectural detailing and its historic associations. In relation to this appeal, the building’s special interest derives from its age, form, architectural details, and its function. The church stands within a churchyard, dotted with trees and is viewed alongside the dwellings on Kirkgate. Its rear faces the open fields beyond reflecting the rural character of the community. From many points within the churchyard, rural views can be afforded out into the surrounding countryside, including views across the appeal site. The relationship of the building to its surrounding grounds and agricultural landscape is an intrinsic part of its special interest and significance. The appeal site is part of https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/V2635/W/24/3340315 this wider landscape and makes a small but nevertheless positive contribution to the way that the church is experienced and appreciated. 11. The proposed building would be relatively large and occupy a prominent, central position within the appeal site such that it would dominate the land around it and be of considerable size compared to the parcel of land itself. Furthermore, the design of the building with its openings of domestic form and arrangement is more suggestive of a chalet or domestic workshop rather than an agricultural storage building. This is especially the case when considering the image of the proposed building provided in the appellant’s statement of case. The building would appear noticeable and incongruous within the paddock and its presence would significantly erode the open, agricultural character of the site. 12. Metal buildings may well be appropriate in some rural areas but there is little to suggest that this structure would be appropriate here.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision Despite some trees and shrubs along the boundary with the church, the proposed building in such a central position would be clearly seen from within the churchyard, and from some locations it would be seen alongside the church, including from some points along Kirkgate. Its presence would be more noticeable in the winter months when the trees are not in leaf. Although additional screening could be secured by attaching an appropriate landscaping condition to any approval, this may also have the effect of limiting open, rural views across the site which in itself would be harmful. 13. The proposal would therefore have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the conservation area and on the setting of the Grade I listed building, and their significance as designated heritage assets would not be preserved. Therefore, the expectations of the Act are not met. The Framework advises that when considering the impact of proposals on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. It goes on to advise that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of those assets and any such harm should have a clear and convincing justification.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision I find the harm in the context of the significance of the heritage assets, in the language of the Framework, to be less than substantial in this instance. This commands considerable importance and weight and is not to be treated as a less than substantial objection. The Framework advises that this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, a matter which I shall consider later. Location 14. Both parties accept that the proposed development would be outside the settlement boundary and would therefore be classed as lying within the countryside. Under Policy 5 of the Home Next The Sea Neighbourhood Plan (2021) (NP), the proposal would fall within a Countryside Zone, a purpose of which is to protect and enhance the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. Its aims include safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, check the extension of the developed area, preserve the National Landscape and heritage of the area, and avoid new development that is a visual distraction or impacts negatively on the landscape. The policy states that proposals should demonstrate a need that is clearly related to agricultural activities and linked to a specific location that satisfies the particular need.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision The policy also states that where possible a development should re-use or replace an existing building. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision The policy also states that where possible a development should re-use or replace an existing building. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/V2635/W/24/3340315 15. Whilst an agricultural storage shed may be appropriate in the countryside, its location, size, design and purpose would need to be justified. The Council may have no policies or criteria to guide the size of a shed to manage a plot and this is a matter of judgement based on the circumstances of each site. In this case, the building would be divided into three areas and the submitted documentation identifies the equipment to mow the grass and maintain boundaries. The specified equipment would appear to condense into a much smaller area than that proposed, and it is unclear why the building requires separate areas or to have such a design. It may be that it is proposed to recycle a building from elsewhere, but its design and size must still be appropriate for its context and its purpose. Furthermore, siting the building centrally in the plot would not appear conducive to land management, dissecting the land awkwardly. 16. The size, design and location of the building is therefore not justified, and it would look large and out of place in its agricultural setting. It would therefore represent a harmful, incremental spread of development out into the open countryside.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision The proposed building may be smaller than a nearby caravan, but that is of little relevance given the criteria by which to assess this proposal. The building may also be similar in footprint to the sheds removed but those sheds are no longer present and therefore provide little justification. In any event, the evidence indicates that their smaller individual form and siting alongside a boundary gave them a more discrete presence. The appellant refers to other Council decisions where approval has been given for agricultural storage sheds. However, I have few details of these approvals, and I am not sure as to how circumstances are similar. The Council may well allow storage sheds in association with paddocks but the circumstances before me indicate that this proposal is clearly not acceptable. 17. Although the Council has provided little information in relation to the National Landscape, I have found harm to designated heritage assets and harm to the agricultural character of the open countryside. It therefore follows that the proposal would not further the purpose of conserving and enhancing the landscape and scenic beauty of the National Landscape. A matter attracting great weight. 18.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision Regarding heritage harm and public benefits, the proposed building would be beneficial to the owner, providing space to store items and to maximise use of the outdoor space. However, I regard these as private rather than public benefits. The building would be recycled from elsewhere, but this does not justify the proposed harm. I therefore conclude that the public benefits identified are of insufficient weight to outweigh the great weight to be given to the harm to the designated heritage assets. As such, the development would not comply with the Framework and there is no clear and convincing justification for the harm. 19. Drawing all these matters together, due to the location, size and proposed use of the building, I find that the proposal would not constitute an acceptable form of development in this countryside location having regard to local and national policy and it would have a harmful effect on the National Landscape and designated heritage assets. It would fail to comply with KLWNLP Policies LP04, LP15, LP18 and LP20, and NP Policy HNTS5. It would also not further the purpose of the National Landscape.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — Appeal Decision There would be conflict with a core planning principle of the Framework to protect and enhance our natural and built environment. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4 Appeal Decision APP/V2635/W/24/3340315 Conclusion 20. For the reasons given above and having considered the development plan as a whole along with all other relevant material considerations, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

8 Kirkgate, Holme next the Sea, Holme, PE36 6LH — King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council — G Bayliss INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5