Two large housing schemes proposed for the edge of communities near Lynn have been deemed “not necessary” by council officials.
Almost 80 new homes are planned on the sites in West Lynn and Clenchwarton, which will be debated by West Norfolk Council’s planning committee on Monday.
But planning officers have called for both schemes to be turned down, because of the potential damage to the countryside and the provision of other development lands.
In both cases, they said: “The council contends that this proposed development is not necessary as there are sites allocated for residential development.”
Developers KRB Builders Ltd are proposing 28 for the Kenfield Farm site on Main Road, Clenchwarton.
The site was the subject of a previous application, which was turned down in 2010 and rejected again on appeal the following year.
But the applicant claims the new scheme is an enabling development that would allow work on a “lighthouse style observatory, including a Wash Visitor Centre, and Port & Marina complex off Clockcase Road adjoining the river” to be completed.
Planning permission for those schemes was originally granted in 2003 and 2006 respectively.
And officers’ report said the application also contained a statement of intent from the landowner, Danny Thorpe, on the projects.
But the paper added: “The perceived benefit of the leisure facility does not warrant the significant departure from the development plan presented by this proposed residential estate in the countryside.”
Meanwhile, George Goddard Ltd want to build 50 homes on land between Clenchwarton Road and Orchard Grove in West Lynn.
The proposal includes eight affordable units and the provision of public open space, which the applicant says is much greater than required, and a fenced off wildlife area to attract species such as the great crested newt.
The firm also claims to have the support of county roads officials for the scheme and an extension of the existing 30 mile per hour speed limit, though the report only shows no objection from that department.
But the firm insists it is ready to start work if councillors approve the plan.
It said: “This is not a land banking exercise. This site will be developed whilst others still sit dormant, although they had previous permissions or are adopted as preferred sites.”
But planners say the site is outside the village’s development boundary and would change the area’s character if it is permitted.
They maintain it is not required for development, because of the establishment of an adequate supply of housing land following the council’s victory in a public inquiry over a proposed housing scheme in Heacham earlier this year.
Education chiefs have also warned that, between them, the applicants would have to pay more than £240,000 towards improved school and library provision in order to secure consent for the two sites.