Great Yarmouth Borough Council Portal
No.Condition Text
1.The sites location within an area defined by the Environment Agency as Flood Risk 2 and 3 results in the proposed development being considered unacceptable by virtue of the fact that there is no suitable 1st floor refuge space proposed, and as such the single storey dwellings would not adequately mitigate flood risk. The dwellings would therefore pose an unacceptable risk to future residents should a flood event occur. On balance therefore the scheme is considered to be contrary to policy CS13 ( Protecting areas at risk of flooding and coastal change) of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan - Core Strategy (2015).
2.Due to the minimal distance to the rear of the property, and the height of the boundary wall to the south (two storey wall), the development would offer poor outlook, limited daylight, and almost no direct sunlight into the rooms to the rear of the proposed properties. As such the scheme is considered to be unacceptable as the poor amenity offered to future residents would not meet the requirements as set out in saved policy HOU16 of the Great Yarmouth Borough Wide Local Plan (2001), or adopted policy CS9 (Encouraging well-designed, distinctive places) of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan - Core Strategy (2015).
3.By virtue of the proposed developments poor design which does not take any design influences from the neighbouring building's scale, massing, layout, features or construction would form an incongruous feature in the street scene which would adversely harm the character and amenity of the area. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to policy CS9 (Encouraging well-designed, distinctive places) of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan - Core Strategy (2015).
4.STATEMENT OF POSITIVE ENGAGEMENT (REFUSALS): 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.