Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Beal, Anota and Ring.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting.

RESOLVED: The minutes from the previous meeting were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Please indicate if there are any interests which should be declared.  A declaration of interest should indicate the nature of the interest (if not already declared on the Register of Interests) and the agenda item to which it relates.  If a disclosable pecuniary interest is declared, the Member should withdraw from the room whilst the matter is discussed.

Those declarations apply to all Members present, whether the Member is part of the meeting, attending to speak as a local Member on an item or simply observing the meeting from the public seating area.

The Chair, Councillor Parish declared he was the Ward Member for Heacham in relation to Cabinet Report on Heacham Beach Sale of Land.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor Long declared a relative was an the owner of a private beach huts site in relation to the Cabinet Report on Heacham Beach Sale of Land.

To consider any business which, by reason of special circumstances, the Chair proposes to accept as urgent under Section 100(b)(4)(b) of the Local Government Act, 1972.

There was none.

Members wishing to speak pursuant to Standing Order 34 should inform the Chair of their intention to do so and what items they wish to be heard before a decision on that item is taken.  

Councillor Long was present Under Standing Order 34.

If any.

The Chair, Councillor Parish highlighted to the Panel, emails which had been received in relation to Cabinet Report Heacham Beach Sale of Land.

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube.

The Planning Control Manager introduced the report with the Senior CIL Officer providing additional information.

The Chair provided background to CILand invited questions and comments from the Panel.

The Chair sought clarification of the CIL distribution in 2017 when CIL was first introduced and it was confirmed, 60% for strategic projects, 20% for community projects and 20% for local projects.

The Chair commented it had now been reversed to 80% and 20% with the minority going to Parish Council’s. He referred to the match funding of 50%.

In the response to the Chair, the Senior CIL Officer confirmed the consultation was free and no charge was incurred.

Councillor Bubb referred to a previous application he was aware of which had been impacted by the change of criteria and asked for assurance that applications could be protected and considered. 

The Senior CIL Officer explained with the new process, training and guidance would be provided to Members and Parish Clerks to ensure the criteria was met.

Councillor Colwell highlighted the restrictions for ward members of unparished areas and sought assurance on funding opportunities and engagements for members of unparished areas in King’s Lynn.  The Senior CIL Officer explained a significant amount of CIL funding had been spent in unparished areas and highlighted other funding opportunities. She reiterated the CIL Spending Panel would decide the applications. 

In response to a question from Councillor Ryves the Senior CIL Officer confirmed there was currently £3.5million of CIL infrastructure funding and there had been changes in legislation and regulations therefore the governance was now being reviewed.  

Officers responded to questions from Councillor Ratcliffe regarding percentage payments relating to Neighbourhood Plans and requests for consistent terminology to be used in the report.

Councillor Bone indicated his support for the proposed changes and identified there was not a fair balance as it was dependant on the effectiveness of the parish clerk.

In response to Councillor Ryves, the Senior CIL Officer explained applications were previously decided by scoring and added there was no longer a scoring criteria. The Senior CIL Officer advised parishes were being recommended to create a parish infrastructure investment plan to ensure CIL was being spent effectively and guidance was to be provided.

Councillor Ryves questioned the impact of Local Government Reorganisation and the changes in boundaries which could further disadvantage Parish Council’s. He sought reassurance the funding was to be spent within the Borough.

The Senior CIL Officer provided assurance CIL funding was to be spent within in the Borough based on parish boundaries. She reminded the Panel CIL was designed to support Local Plan developments.

Councillor Crofts questioned the control members had to ensure the parish council had spent the CIL funding that had been awarded and was advised this was monitored annually and parish councils had a statutory obligation to submit an annual report to the Borough Council on the CIL funding which had been spent or not.

Under Standing Order  ...  view the full minutes text for item RD38:

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube.

Claire Dollman, from Norfolk County Council gave a presentation to the Panel.

The Chair invited questions and comments from the Panel.

The Chair referred to page 88 and asked which part of the A149 was being referred to and Ian Parkes from Norfolk County Council advised this was in relation to the road from Knights Hill to Hardwick.

The Chair referred to page 89 and the E-Scooter Scheme and expressed he did not support the scheme as illegal E-Scooters were causing chaos and legal scooters were being dumped on the boundaries of where they were rented out. He questioned how this was to be encouraged.

Ian Parkes explained the E-Scooter scheme was successful in Norwich. He further added, scooters part of this scheme were legal however scooters privately owned were not. He commented this scheme contributed to active travel.

The Chair questioned if Sandringham events could be included in strategy and the Borough Council be included as the 2^nd largest employer in the area.

Councillor Bubb raised concerns regarding the ferry and the accessibility. He suggested ramps be installed both sides to provide further accessibility as the King’s Lynn Ferry was a significant mode of transport for the area.

In response from a question from Councillor Ryves, Claire Dollman advised the consultation included the full list which could be found at the end of the strategy document.

In response to a further question from Councillor Ryves, Ian Parkes explained there was data available on the usage of the ferry and highlighted it was not used as much since the pandemic.

Councillor Bone commented there was a need for more public transport and

questioned if NORA active travel hub could be used as park and ride with Harding’s Way used for buses to reduce congestion. He added a bus lane along Hardwick Road would increase congestion however a train station to the South of King’s Lynn would improve the traffic coming into King’s Lynn and the train line to Norwich could be reinstated. 

Claire Dollman explained a feasibility study on the railway was needed to determine passenger demand. She added there had been infrastructure built over the train line to Norwich from King’s Lynn.

Councillor Collingham echoed the comments made my Councillor Bone and explained it was currently a wish list with no funding and hoped Local Government Reorganisation would promote King’s Lynn and a travel hub system.

Councillor Blunt commented the Borough Council were not in control and questioned the decision made to change the speed limit near the pullover roundabout.

Ian Parkes explained funding would be sought from the new Mayor following Devolution. He added the aim was to provide infrastructure for King’s Lynn and the five strategic highway schemes were localised projects.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor Long raised concern relating to E-Bikes and E-Scooter and he had requested a report in relation to the safety of E-Scooters around Norwich. He commented further there  ...  view the full minutes text for item RD39:

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube.

Ian Parkes, from Norfolk County Council gave an update to the Panel. A copy of the presentation is attached.

The Chair invited questions and comments from the Panel.

Councillor Ryves questioned if £20 million was to be sent on a cycle track.

Ian Parkes explained the original gyratory element was around £5 million and the Baxter’s Plain elements were around £8 million.

Councillor Bone questioned if, as part of the transport strategy, cycling down Tower Street could be considered as this provided access to the Multi User Community Hub.

Councillor Bubb referred to previous projects which had enhanced the town and asked if funding could be found to encourage shops along Railway Road to improve the visual and tidy the area.

The Regeneration Programmes Manager explained there was potential for this as a part of the next stage of the gyratory scheme which included significant changes. She added there were grants available through Historic England.

The Vice-Chair, Councillor Osborne questioned if the £2.6 million included improvements to the public realm and cycle path surrounding the Southgates.

Ian Parkes commented further discussions were needed on how Southgates was to be promoted.

Under Standing order 34, Councillor Long referred to the parking near the old post office building and highlighted the importance of the parking to surrounding shops. He commented that the proposal to remove the disabled parking bays would impact negatively on businesses.

The Regeneration Programmes Manager explained the consultation and feasibility study results highlighted that a reduction in parking in that area was welcomed. 

In response to a question from Councillor Blunt, Ian Parkes confirmed a full traffic analysis along with traffic modelling had been carried out on Railway Road and the impact was minimal.

RESOLVED: The Panel noted the update

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube.

Ian Parkes, from Norfolk County Council gave an update to the Panel.

The Chair invited questions and comments from the Panel.

Councillor Blunt sought clarification on the comparison of vehicles compared to buses. He questioned if there was an issue with traffic along Hardwick Road.

Ian Parkes explained following traffic modelling a need was identified and therefore considered.

Councillor Bubb commented his views of the bus lane not being needed and questioned if the lane would allow coaches and taxis.

Ian Parkes explained this was not yet determined but advised typically bus lanes allow taxis and cyclists.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor Long referred to comments on social media and was not in favour of the proposed bus lane. He commented buses using this road are minimal and the expenditure was not needed.

The Chair questioned if the lane was to be camera monitored however this had not yet been determined.

RESOLVED: The Panel noted the update

Click here to view the recording of this item on YouTube.

The Assistant Director of Property and Projects presented the report.

The Chair invited questions and comments from the Panel.

The Chair commented that the Panel had received a significant amount of correspondence from tenants on this and as the Ward Member for Heacham he was not formally consulted and more consultation with tenants and groups was needed. He added if the site was sold were rents going to be put up further and result in locals having to sell their beach huts. He highlighted the beach was unsatisfactory and therefore unable to bathe in. He sought clarification that if the beach hut was to be sold outside the family, then three times the lease value had to be paid to the Borough Council

The Assistant Director of Property and Projects confirmed the condition of sale outside of the family was correct but advised there was £100 fee if the beach hut was sold to immediate family.

Councillor Bone agreed with the Chairs comments on who was to buy the unsuccessful site. He questioned how much land the Council was planning on selling and asked if a map could be provided to members so they could pre-warn residents and suggested this as an item for the Panel. He commented there was issues when selling land through auctions.

The Assistant Director of Property and Projects explained reviewing the Council’s portfolio was an ongoing process and a further report would be available in due course. He explained this current report had been put forward at pace due to the leases expiring at the end of March 2026. He highlighted to the Panel the site had not been managed properly due to lack of resource within the team.

Councillor Ratcliffe commented she appreciated the factual detail however the leisure and wellbeing point of the beach huts had been missed. She added if there was issues with the site being maintained the Council needed to invest into the site rather than sell the site as it would not be profitable.

Councillor Colwell commented he had also received emails with concerns from residents and therefore there was an impact on the wider Borough. He highlighted to the Panel there was an online petition and questioned how much rent which was charged by local private landlords for similar sites.

Under Standing Order 34, Councillor Long declared an interest that a family member was a landlord of a local private beach hut site.

Councillor Ryves commented it was not going to cost the suggested amount to renew the leases and advised the average rental income of a beach hut in North Norfolk was £900. He commented there was confusion with the financial figures and rate of return. He commented the income of the site was around £80,000 with 105 beach huts at £800 rent per year. He added further this asset with a rate of return, the value with interest rates of 10% would be around £800,000.  ...  view the full minutes text for item RD42:

RESOLVED: The Panel’s Work Programme was noted.

Councillor Bone requested an item be put forward which outlined all proposed sales of land within the Borough.

To note that the next meeting of the Regeneration & Development Panel is scheduled to take place on 14^th October 2025 at 6:00pm  in the Council Chamber, Town Hall.

The next meeting of the Regeneration and Development Panel would be held on 14^th October 2025 at 6.00pm in the Council Chamber, Town Hall.