Planning appeal decision
Arcady, Holt Road, Cley-next-the-sea, Holt, NR25 7TU
Planning appeal 3236385 at Arcady, Holt Road, Cley-next-the-sea, Holt, NR25 7TU (North Norfolk District Council) was allowed in part (a split decision) on 17 May 2023 by Inspector Lewis D, following a hearing. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: The main issue is whether the existing development or the development proposed is of a high standard of design that reinforces local distinctiveness, taking particular account of its effect on the historic environment, landscape character and the AONB.
dwelling and associated external works and landscaping
- Authority
- North Norfolk District Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- residential · Householder developments
- Inspector
- Lewis D
- Postcode
- NR25 7TU
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The main issue is whether the existing development or the development proposed is of a high standard of design that reinforces local distinctiveness, taking particular account of its effect on the historic environment, landscape character and the AONB.
- The main issue is the effect of the proposed variation of condition 2 on the historic environment, landscape character and the AONB (Appeal C).
- As with Appeal A, the main issue is whether the development proposed is of a high standard of design that reinforces local distinctiveness, taking particular account of its effect on the historic environment, landscape character and the AONB (Appeal D).
What decided it
The less than substantial harm to the significance of Cley Conservation Area and to the setting of the Grade I listed St Margaret's Church, caused by the excessive height, mass and scale of the replacement dwelling, was not outweighed by the limited public benefits, providing a clear reason for refusal in both the enforcement appeal (Appeal A) and the mediation scheme appeal (Appeal D).
The less than substantial harm to the significance of the Conservation Area and the Church was not outweighed by the small public benefits identified (ecological enhancement, sustainable construction, addition to housing stock), so the balance favoured refusal of the dwelling and engineering works, while permission was granted for the annexe and swimming pool which caused no such harm.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy EN 1Policy EN 2Policy EN 4Policy EN 6Policy EN 8Policy HO 8
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 199
- Judgments
- Choiceplace Properties Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2021] EWHC 1070 (Admin); Armstrong v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities [2023] EWHC 142 (KB); Council of the City of Newcastle upon Tyne v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities and others [2022] EWHC 2752 (Admin)
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in North Norfolk
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2023
- Dismissed24 July 202633514093 Fenside Cottages Fenside, Catfield, Great Yarmouth, NR29 5DD
- Notice varied and upheld20 July 202633575482 Shipden House High Street, Cromer, NR27 9HG
- Dismissed20 July 202633560602 Shipden House, High Street, Cromer, Norfolk, NR27 9HG
- Notice upheld17 November 20253335629Land at Dam Hill Plantation, Edgefield, Norfolk, NR24 2RR
- Planning permission granted31 October 20253332273Homewood Mill Lane, East Runton, Cromer, NR27 9PH
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®