| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | Insufficient information has been provided in relation to water-voles - a protected species - and the final discharge points of the drainage ditch to be used for the disposal of foul and surface water, and therefore the Local Planning Authority as the competent authority, is unable to make the appropriate assessment of its impact of the development proposal on protected species and Natura2000 habitat and therefore the Local Planning Authority could not meet its statutory duty as required by The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, Circular 06/2005, the National Planning Policy Framework, and conflicts with the provisions of Adopted Core Strategy 2013 - 2030 - Policies CS11 and CS14(e). |
| 2. | The proposed dwelling would infill the gap between the 2 adjacent dwellings and would therefore erode the spacious and open rural character of the area around Beccles Road. As a result, the dwelling would appear cramped in the street-scene and be harmful to the character of the locality contrary to the advice contained within paragraph 127-130 of the National Planning Policy Framework, and conflicts with the provisions of Policies CS3(g) and CS9 of the Adopted Core Strategy 2013 - 2030. |
| 3. | The proposal does not meet the Local Highway Authority's normally accepted standards for visibility splays which are sub-standard in both directions as they cross third-party land outside of the applicant's control. In addition, the indicated turning area serving the car parking bays, would result in awkward vehicle movements on or within close proximity to the public highway. As a result, the development would be harmful to highway safety and conflicts with the provisions of Policies CS16 and CS9(d) of the Adopted Core Strategy 2013 - 2030 |
| 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. |
