Case 3365424

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH

South Norfolk District Council — appeal dismissed

Outcome
Dismissed
Decision date
18 August 2025
Authority
South Norfolk District Council
Inspector
Marriott H
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Full
Development type
Other Major Developments
Appellant
Lovell Partnerships
LPA reference
2024/3576
ONS LPA code
E07000149
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
3 June 2025

Summary AI

The appeal was dismissed due to the lack of evidence demonstrating a material change in circumstances that would render condition 9 unnecessary. The condition remains necessary to ensure the satisfactory implementation of the site in accordance with JCS Policy 20.

Generated from the decision letter — check against the original before relying on it.

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 by H Marriott MPlan MRTPI

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — by H Marriott MPlan MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 18 August 2025

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Norfolk

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — Norfolk • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for the development of land without complying with conditions subject to which a previous planning permission was granted. • The appeal is made by Lovell Partnerships against the decision of South Norfolk District Council. • The application Ref is 2024/3576. • The application sought outline planning permission for up to 335 dwellings and associated infrastructure, new cemetery and 1.2ha of land for neighbourhood centre comprising A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 and/or B1 and/or D1 uses, without complying with a condition attached to planning permission Ref 2019/1022, dated 29 July 2019. • The condition in dispute is No 9 which states that: There shall be no occupation of any phase of the development hereby approved until a scheme for the off-site highway improvement works identified on drawing reference 10210-HL-04 Rev B has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Page 1 · Chunk 2 Norfolk

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — Norfolk No more than 250 of the dwellings hereby approved may be occupied prior to the satisfactory completion of the approved highway improvement works. • The reason given for the condition is: In the interest of highway safety and to ensure the satisfactory implementation of the site in accordance with JCS Policy 20.

Page 1 · Chunk 3 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. 1 Appeal ref: APP/l2630/W/15/3136321 2 Council ref: 2018/2758. 3 Council ref: 2019/1804. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 1 · Chunk 4 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. 1 Appeal ref: APP/l2630/W/15/3136321 2 Council ref: 2018/2758. 3 Council ref: 2019/1804. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 2 · Chunk 5 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. Appeal Decision APP/L2630/W/25/3365424 Background and Main Issue 5. In determining the original outline permission, that Inspector stated that condition 9 was required to secure the delivery of specified off-site junction improvements, to mitigate the development’s impact on the highway network. 6. An application seeking approval of details pursuant to condition 9 of the original outline permission was dismissed at appeal in June 20234 (the dismissed appeal). In that decision, the Inspector found that the submitted drawings were insufficient to secure the delivery of the required off-site junction improvements. That Inspector was not required to assess the reasonableness or necessity of the condition itself in reaching their decision. 7. Condition 9 was re-imposed in the varied outline permission. The appellant now seeks to vary this condition, to remove the restriction on the number of dwellings that can be occupied prior to the completion of the off-site highway improvement works. The appellant contends that there has been a change of circumstances since the original outline permission was granted, such that condition 9 is no longer reasonable or necessary. 8.

Page 2 · Chunk 6 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. The main issue is the effect of varying condition 9 on the transport network, highway safety and the delivery of the off-site junction improvement works. Reasons 9. The London Road/Station Road junction located approximately 1km to the east of the appeal site comprises a four-arm, signal-controlled crossroads (the junction). 10. In addition to the development subject of this appeal, two other residential schemes elsewhere in Wymondham by Pelham5 and Endurance6 also require improvement works to the junction. The delivery of works in relation to these developments was secured through a S106 agreement dated 6 February 20147. 11. The Transport Assessment submitted with the original outline permission indicated that when considered in combination with the Pelham and Endurance schemes, the junction would exceed capacity. Junction improvements were therefore deemed necessary to cater for the additional development traffic generated by these developments. The imposition of condition 9 was examined at Inquiry and agreed by the main parties. That Inspector was also fully aware that the same junction improvements had already been planned in connection with the other committed developments. 12.

Page 2 · Chunk 7 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. The appellant has submitted a King’s Council (KC) opinion with the appeal, asserting that the trigger point is no longer necessary. The KC refers to the evidence presented in the accompanying Transport Note. While the appeal site might be located further from the junction than the Pelham and Endurance sites, the 335 dwellings associated with this appeal, would nonetheless generate a 4 Appeal ref: APP/L2630/W/22/3309497. 5 Council ref: 2011/0505 - Proposed development to include up to 500 dwellings, Community facilities, site infrastructure including new access roads, public rights of way and drainage, green infrastructure including public open spaces and structural landscape planting. 6 Council ref: 2012/0371 - Mixed use development of up to 730 dwellings, up to 128 bed care home / homes (in one or two buildings), up to 250 square metres of retail / commercial floor space, a new primary school together with all other associated temporary and permanent infrastructure and green infrastructure, including new access arrangements, sports pitches, allotments and community orchard. 7 Ref: SR-SNDC/41169. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Page 3 · Chunk 8 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. Appeal Decision APP/L2630/W/25/3365424 significant number of additional trips that would utilise the junction. Crucially, there is no substantive evidence, such an updated transport assessment with detailed traffic movement/trip data to demonstrate a material change in circumstances since the original outline permission was granted. Furthermore, the Highways Authority maintains that the mitigation measures required by condition 9 remain necessary. Accordingly, not delivering the required junction improvements, in combination with trips generated by other committed developments, has the potential to adversely effect the transport network and compromise highway safety. 13. The evidence before me indicates both the Pelham and Endurance schemes are now in breach of their respective S106 trigger points. Indeed, one of the schemes had already exceeded its trigger point for delivering the junction improvements prior to the determination of the dismissed appeal in June 2023. It is also common ground between the main parties that the appeal proposal has now also exceeded the trigger point for the completion of the works required by condition 98.

Page 3 · Chunk 9 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. Whilst no enforcement action has yet been taken, the Council has confirmed that it reserves the right to do so. 14. A detailed scheme for the junction improvements has been approved pursuant to condition 99. It is acknowledged that the appellant sought this approval primarily to demonstrate initial compliance, rather than to signify agreement to being party to its delivery. 15. Even so, the Council has confirmed that progress is being made towards the completion of a legal agreement10 for the delivery of the junction improvements and indicates that the appellant is required to be a signatory to this agreement. The appellant disputes this requirement as they consider it to be the responsibility of the developers of the Pelham and Endurance schemes that reached their trigger points first. Nevertheless, all three developments generate traffic that uses the junction, and it is for the relevant parties to resolve how the improvements are to be delivered. Removing the trigger point from condition 9 would undermine certainty that the necessary junction works would be carried out. 16.

Page 3 · Chunk 10 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. Overall, I have not been provided with substantive evidence to demonstrate that the circumstances have materially changed or that the junction improvements are no longer required. I find that the imposition of the disputed condition remains justified and meets the six tests set out in Paragraph 57 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework). 17. I therefore conclude that it has not been demonstrated that varying condition 9 would not result in an adverse effect on the transport network or highway safety. Moreover, it could fetter the delivery of the off-site junction improvement works. In these respects, it would conflict with Policy DM3.11 of the South Norfolk Local Plan Development Management Policies Document (2015) (LP) which states that development that effects the satisfactory functioning of the highway network will not be permitted. 18. The reason for condition 9 refers to Policy 20 of the Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk (JCS) which requires a coordinated approach to be taken to the timely provision of infrastructure to support 8 294 occupations as at the 1 July 2025. 9 Council ref: 2022/2361. 10 Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980.

Page 3 · Chunk 11 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Page 3 · Chunk 12 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced.

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — 246 dwellings)3. During my site visit, I observed that development has commenced. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3 Appeal Decision APP/L2630/W/25/3365424 development. This policy has however been superseded. Nevertheless, the Council’s decision in relation to this appeal, refers to Policy DM3.11 of the LP which forms part of the current development plan and is relevant for the reasons set out above. 19. For the same reasons, the proposal would conflict with Paragraphs 115 and 116 of the Framework which require any significant impacts from the development on the transport network (in terms of capacity and congestion), or on highway safety to be mitigated and for development to be refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety. Other Matter 20. The appellants have raised concerns regarding the Council’s lack of statement in its decision explaining how it has worked with the appellant in a positive and proactive manner. However, this is not a matter for this appeal, and I have made my decision on the basis of the merits of the proposal. Conclusion 21. For the reasons given above the appeal should be dismissed.

Page 4 · Chunk 13 H Marriott

Land Between London Road And Suton Lane London Road, Wymondham, NR18 9GH — South Norfolk District Council — H Marriott INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Extracted from the decision letter PDF and shown in full, chunk by chunk.

Main issues and findings

Green belt
Against appellant
¶11

The condition in dispute is necessary to ensure the satisfactory implementation of the site in accordance with JCS Policy 20.

Highway safety
Against appellant
¶13

The mitigation measures required by condition 9 remain necessary to prevent adverse effects on the transport network and highway safety.

Other
Against appellant
¶14

The condition in dispute is necessary to ensure the satisfactory implementation of the site in accordance with JCS Policy 20.

Policies relied on

Reference Weight
JCS Policy 20
Determinative
LP DM3.11
Determinative
Paragraphs 115 and 116 of the Framework
Determinative

Site constraints from the Casework Database

Conservation area
Green belt
Listed building setting
AONB
SSSI
Flooding an issue

Source

Decision letter, 4 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 18 August 2025 under the Open Government Licence.