Councillors look set to agree plans to replace an historic coastal retreat with a new home which has been branded "repulsive".

West Norfolk council's planning committee deferred a decision on an application to demolish the house called Brownsea at Holme, near Hunstanton, last month.

It came after the parish council issued a 42-page document arguing for the application to be blocked due to the historic importance of the property, on Beach Road.

Now an officer's report recommends the plans are given the go-ahead when the planning committee meets on Monday, June 3.

Eastern Daily Press:

It says: "The existing dwelling is deteriorating and suffering from damp, vegetation ingress, water ingress and large cracks and in need of repair.

"It is likely therefore that, irrespective of whether planning permission is granted or not, that significant works would take place which would in their own right have an impact on the appearance of the dwelling and its aesthetic value as a non-designated heritage asset."

Villagers objected to the proposals, with one labelling them "repulsive".

Eastern Daily Press:

They involve replacing the existing bungalow with an 'H-shaped two-storey home with five bedrooms, balcony, glazed areas and a timber pergola.

Holme Parish Council objected said: "The proposed house will present as a large, over-bearing and highly visible structure which is unsympathetic to the rural location and the character of the surrounding residential environment."

Brownsea was built as a coastal getaway for Charles Bennion, a wealthy shoe manufacturer from Leicestershire.

Eastern Daily Press:

His company, British United Shoe Machinery, became the largest manufacturer of footwear machinery in the world and helped revolutionise the industry.

Parish councillor Wendy Norman described the house as "one of the best examples of interwar architecture" and believes it is a heritage asset.

But the planning officer's report says the property "is not a key part" of Holme's conservation area and the plans "would therefore not be considered to represent substantial harm".