Planning – Application Comments

Mr/Mrs I smith
3 Jubilee Court
PE321LA

Date: 12/12/2025
Planning Department
Kings Lynn West Norfolk

Re: Objection to Planning Application 25/01826/O- Proposed Dwelling at Church close E572461 N313816 Church close Pentney Norfolk
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally object to the above planning application for the construction of a new dwelling directly behind my property at 3 Jubilee Court I wish to highlight the significant and multiple concerns that this development raises for me and for neighbouring residents.
________________________________________
1. Severe Loss of Privacy and Overlooking
My garden backs directly onto the proposed development site. The new house would overlook both my garden and my bedroom window, resulting in a serious loss of privacy. This would materially alter the character and enjoyment of my home and outdoor space and completely change the peaceful view I currently have.
________________________________________
2. Inadequate and Unsafe Access Road
The only access to this site is a single-width road, suitable for just one car at a time.
This already narrow road is used frequently by:
- Elderly residents
- Horse riders
- Children
- Dog walkers
- Local traffic
There are no paved footpaths, creating dangerous blind spots. Construction vehicles, machinery, and future residential traffic will make this road extremely unsafe. The introduction of a driveway on this lane would exacerbate risks and reduce visibility even further.
This location is simply not suitable for additional traffic or construction access.
________________________________________
3. Risk to Established Eucalyptus Tree and Property Safety
A tall eucalyptus tree stands on the perimeter of my garden.
Any road construction, groundwork or excavation will:
- Disturb and restrict the tree's root system
- Potentially destabilise its natural growth
- Increase the risk of the tree becoming unsafe
- Possibly cause structural issues to my property
This is a material planning concern due to tree health, safety risk, and long-term structural implications.
________________________________________
4. Traffic Congestion and Construction Obstruction
This back road already experiences substantial through-traffic.
During construction, the presence of heavy machinery, delivery vehicles, and contractors will cause significant obstruction for:
- Residents living along the lane
- Horses at the property directly opposite
- Emergency vehicles
- Other road users
The disruption would be ongoing and severe.
________________________________________
5. Noise, Disturbance and Impact on Health
The construction of this dwelling is likely to continue for 18 months or more.
I suffer from a nerve-related medical condition, and prolonged exposure to:
- Loud banging
- Drilling
- Machinery noise
- Vibrations
would cause serious deterioration of my health and wellbeing. One of the reasons we moved here was to enjoy peace and quiet, which this development would completely remove for an extended period.
________________________________________
6. Environmental and Wildlife Disruption
The area behind my home supports established wildlife and peaceful rural character. Construction noise and disturbance-especially near horse stables-will cause:
- Stress to horses directly opposite the site
- Disturbance to local wildlife
- Loss of natural habitat
This development is out of keeping with the environment and unsuitable for the location.
________________________________________
7. Drainage, Sewage and Water Pressure Concerns
The addition of a new dwelling will place further strain on existing services, including:
- Sewage systems
- Drainage infrastructure
- Local water pressure
Without careful, detailed planning and guarantees of adequate capacity, this development risks causing long-term issues for surrounding homes.
________________________________________
8. Overdevelopment and Out of Character with the Area
The plot is not appropriate for a development of this nature. The proposal represents:
- Overdevelopment
- A dwelling that does not fit the character of the surrounding area
- A cramped and intrusive form of backland development
This would have a negative impact on the visual and residential amenity of neighbouring properties.
________________________________________
9. Full List of Concerns
In addition to the points detailed above, I object on the grounds of:
- Loss of privacy
- Loss of light / overshadowing
- Overdevelopment of the plot
- Noise and disturbance
- Traffic and access hazards
- Environmental/wildlife impact
- Drainage, sewage and water pressure concerns
- Out-of-character development
- Health and wellbeing impact
________________________________________
Conclusion
For all the reasons outlined above, I strongly urge the council to reject this planning application.
This proposed development is inappropriate for the location, unsafe due to inadequate access, damaging to the environment and local character, and severely detrimental to my health, privacy and quality of life.
Thank you for considering my objection.
Yours faithfully,
Mr and Mrs Ian Smith

Back Road is 0.4 miles long with a narrow 90-degree bend at one end, along which there are approximately 63 dwellings - I am unclear how many residences there are at the Church Farm complex.
The majority of these properties are multi vehicle households.

This is a single-track carriage way with no formal passing places which results in some vehicle manoeuvring to enable vehicles to pass. The Highways report states that 'existing opportunities to pass vehicles safely in formal bays are limited.'
If formal bays are the same as passing places this is incorrect as there are no designated passing places along Back Road.

Under the proposals a 'parking and turning area would be available for up to 3 vehicles '
and it is suggested that the construction of a passing place would mitigate any such increase in traffic.
An increase in the number of vehicles in Back Road cannot be mitigated by an opportunity for vehicles to pass each other.

The Design and Access Statement frequently confuses Back Road and Back Lane and the Site Assessment suggests there would be an 'aesthetic outlook over the open countryside to the North.' The outlook is in fact a commercial stables and livery yard opposite the proposed site. This means horses and ponies are regularly having to negotiate with vehicles to enable them to pass safely. Pedestrians frequently have to mount the verge to let vehicles pass.

The Design and Access Statement states Back Lane, has a 'low level of traffic'
It is not made clear how this conclusion was reached.
Back Road has approximately 63 dwellings with at least one, and in some cases having up to 3 vehicles or more. The livery yard and stables attract not inconsiderable associated vehicles. There are van deliveries, tanker deliveries, a school bus etc through Pentney and along Back Road. This is not low-level traffic.

In addition, Pentney residents frequently experience low water pressure, it is an ongoing issue, symptomatic of over development in a small village not capable of sustaining any further and development

Pentney is designated as a "Smaller Village and Hamlet" by the 2011 Core Strategy and the Parish Council confirm there is an emerging Neighbourhood Plan in the final stages of completion and the general consensus when the Neighbourhood Plan was undertaken confirmed that the existing population of Pentney did not want any new houses to be built. Despite this, just the Back Road/Narborough Road loop between the church and Golden Gym crossroads already has 19 new houses constructed, all with at least three (3) bedrooms, and that's approximately 38 additional cars in the area already.

All the access roads into the small hamlet of Pentney, apart from Narborough Road from The Ship Chinese Inn, Narborough to the Church, are single carriageways with very limited passing places, especially Paws Lane and Abbey Road. Pentney Lane has had at least seven (7) large new houses built along it and a new passing place on a particularly dangerous bend and now has a sign saying it's not accessible for large vehicles and when large vehicles come down Back Road the road is completely blocked and the new passing space where this development is proposed will not be large enough to solve the issue.

Few houses (only Local Authority and ex Local Authority) are on mains drains, the water pressure to Pentney is already low and frequently gets cut off and the infrastructure generally is not suitable for more houses, especially along Back Road which is already extremely narrow.

The site is far too small to include a 3 bedroom chalet bungalow type house, associated foul sewerage removal plus a retaining wall, 2 parking spaces and a passing place with enough of a splay to be able to see what's approaching. The road is very, very narrow at this point. Back Road is frequently used by dog walkers and horse riders and the additional traffic will detract from this small rural hamlet which should be protected as such.

I am concerned that this is an application for Outline planning this time and often these get approved and then passed later as Full Planning without much consultation. When the original planning application for this particular plot went through many years ago, there were at least 30 LESS houses in Pentney at the time. The new Outline Application has no drainage or foul sewerage removal shown on the plans and the building itself is extremely close to my boundary fence. I do not want to discover further down the line that there are windows overlooking my property which interfere with my privacy. The construction traffic on a single track lane where the banks are high and steep will not be acceptable as the road will be blocked frequently or closed entirely.