| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The layout of the application does not provide any usable public open space or grounds for children's recreation. This is contrary to the adopted Core Strategy CS15 f) and the National Planning Policy Framework specifically paragraph 8 b) which requires new developments to consider the needs of future occupiers and provide well laid developments with appropriate levels of open space. This is exacerbated by the location of the development and the lack of provision in the vicinity which would make future occupiers car reliant to access open areas. The application fails to consider, in accordance with paragraphs 8 and 92 of the National Planning Policy Framework, the layout and enjoyment of future users and is therefore unsustainable in this regard. |
| 2. | The loss of a tree protected by tree preservation order is not in accordance with paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy framework as, although planting has been put forward, the loss of the character of a tree of importance is an environmental harm and a harm to the natural environment that cannot be replaced with new planting. By removing mature trees the application has not sought to reflect the characteristics of the site and instead seeks to erode the unique character and as such is contrary to policy CS3 g) of the adopted Core Strategy. The harm to the natural environment is also exaggerated by the urban location of the development placing higher importance on the retention of good quality trees with a long life expectancy. |
| 3. | Developments should be design led in accordance with policy CS3 of the adopted Core Strategy, the development as submitted does not provide a layout that adequately reflects the character of the area nor does it make efficient use of land with car parking being the dominant feature as opposed to a functional necessity. The layout and design do not function well or add to the quality of the area by seeking to provide ill thought out architecture, layout and inappropriate
and ineffective landscaping contrary to paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The houses to the frontage of the site bounding High Road are out of character with the area by being too close to the footway and in appearance contrary to policy CS9 of the adopted Core Strategy and do not give environmental enhancements by eroding the gap between the development site and the conservation area directly adjacent to the south contrary to policy CS10 of the adopted Core Strategy. In addition the gardens are not reflective of the character of the area contrary to paragraph 122 of the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 4. | The design of the development is considered to detract from rather than reinforce the identity and character of the area nor has it been demonstrated that any inspiration has been drawn from the surrounding area with specific reference the conservation area which is adjacent to the application site. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to policy CS9 a) of the Great Yarmouth Core Strategy adopted 2015 in that the design does not protect or enhance the conservation area and its setting and as such does not accord with the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 s72. |
| 5. | STATEMENT OF POSITIVE ENGAGEMENT: In accordance with the NPPF, in determining this application for planning permission, the Borough Council has approached it in a positive and proactive way and where possible has sought solutions to problems to achieve the aim of approving sustainable development. Unfortunately, despite this, in this particular case the development is not considered to represent sustainable or an acceptable form of development and has been refused for the reasons set out above. |
