Great Yarmouth Borough Council

No.	Condition Text
1.	The proposed site is within the coastal change boundaries as defined in the Core Strategy Local Plan Proposals Map adopted 2015 and the Kelling to Lowestoft Shoreline Management Plan adopted 2012 indicating that new development within the defined area will be at risk of coastal change. Policy CS13 (criterion e) of the adopted Core Strategy adopted 2015 states that risk to people and property of coastal erosion should be minimised and new development encouraged to be located away from areas outlined in the Shoreline Management Plan at risk of coastal change. In addition saved policy INF16 of the Borough Wide Local Plan 2001 states that where new development is proposed in such areas applicants will need to demonstrate there is no significant risk of coastal erosion to the site and that the proposed development will be capable of withstanding potential damage. The policies are consistent with Paragraphs 99, 107 and 108 of the National Planning Policy Framework which states that local planning authorities in the decision making process should consider coastal line management changes along with the lifetime and safety of new developments. No evidence has been submitted to demonstrate there is no significant risk of coastal erosion and the proposed development will be capable of withstanding potential damage; the local planning authority therefore considers that the proposal is contrary to aims of Policy CS13 (criterion e) of the adopted Core Strategy, Policy INF16 of the Borough Wide Local Plan 2001 and the National Planning Policy Framework.
2.	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.

No.

Condition Text

The proposed site is within the coastal change boundaries as defined in the Core Strategy Local Plan Proposals Map adopted 2015 and the Kelling to Lowestoft Shoreline Management Plan adopted 2012 indicating that new development within the defined area will be at risk of coastal change. Policy CS13 (criterion e) of the adopted Core Strategy adopted 2015 states that risk to people and property of coastal erosion should be minimised and new development encouraged to be located away from areas outlined in the Shoreline Management Plan at risk of coastal change. In addition saved policy INF16 of the Borough Wide Local Plan 2001 states that where new development is proposed in such areas applicants will need to demonstrate there is no significant risk of coastal erosion to the site and that the proposed development will be capable of withstanding potential damage. The policies are consistent with Paragraphs 99, 107 and 108 of the National Planning Policy Framework which states that local planning authorities in the decision making process should consider coastal line management changes along with the lifetime and safety of new developments. No evidence has been submitted to demonstrate there is no significant risk of coastal erosion and the proposed development will be capable of withstanding potential damage; the local planning authority therefore considers that the proposal is contrary to aims of Policy CS13 (criterion e) of the adopted Core Strategy, Policy INF16 of the Borough Wide Local Plan 2001 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

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.