Great Yarmouth Borough Council Portal
No.Condition Text
1.By virtue of the unsympathetic form, massing, and the excessive bulk of the proposed dwellings, the proposal is considered not to enhance its immediate setting and would appear incongruous and overly dominant when compared to the smaller, predominantly single storey properties which front Butt Lane. The development does not draw inspiration from its immediate surroundings and the character of the built environment, particularly in its approach to the materials and form, furthering the disconnect between the existing settlement and the proposed dwellings. This is contrary to the design expectations of Core Strategy (2015) Policy CS09 and Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policy A2 together with Paragraphs 135 and 139 of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2023).
2.The private drive, which is proposed to be built to a fully adoptable standard, together with the prominence and size of the garages, and the set back of the dwellings to the north of the private drive, gives rise to a development which would have a car dominated design and provide a strongly suburban character that would detract from the rural surroundings. The over-engineered layout of the private drive would contribute to poor legibility and road users would assume that the street is higher up the hierarchy than a private road only serving seven dwellings. This is contrary to the design expectations of Core Strategy (2015) Policies CS09 and CS16 and Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policy A2 together with Paragraphs 135 and 139 of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2023).
3.Plot 1 is proposed in a prominent position within the site, with visibility from Butt Lane and within the site as well. The dwelling fails to avoid blank walls and non-active frontages on the eastern elevation which benefits from a high degree of visibility entering the site and would exacerbate the backland nature of the scheme. The proposed dwelling would also appear cramped on the plot and due to this has compromised the shape of the garden; when combined with the mass of the dwelling, this garden is likely to feel overbearing and enclosed, compromising its enjoyment and usability for future residents. This impact of these combined issues is exacerbated due to the prominence of the plot within the development. The scheme therefore is contrary to Core Strategy (2015) Policy CS09 and Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policies A1 and A2 together with Paragraphs 135 and 139 of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2023).
4.Due to the size of the garages and their orientation and positioning, plots 5-7 offer insufficient manoeuvring space in front of the garages for vehicles. This is contrary to Core Strategy (2015) policies CS09 and CS16.
5.The turning head proposed is too small to provide sufficient space for service vehicles to comfortably turn, which would create an adverse impact on the safety and efficiency of the road network. In combination with limited parking space derived from the over-developed nature of each plot and the size, positioning and accessibility of the garages, this would also affect residential amenity and represents inadequate design standards, and has not been demonstrated to be unable to be enlarged or revised. This is contrary to Core Strategy (2015) policy CS16 and Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policy A2.
6.The proposed scheme does not provide a diversity of dwelling types and mixes. The scheme provides five five-bedroom dwellings and two three-bedroom dwellings which fails to account for the housing demand in this part of the Borough identified in the Housing Needs Assessment (2022) and no justification has been given for proposing a mix which does not reflect the character of the area or the mix of housing needs in the Borough. The proposal would therefore fail to comply with Core Strategy (2015) policy CS03 and Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policy A2.
7.The proposal seeks the removal of protected trees which are positioned prominently towards the front of the plot at Dovedale and play an important role in the visual amenity of the street scene and contribute towards the landscape character of the area where wooded skylines are key sensitives providing a sense of containment. The loss of these Category B trees would therefore cause harm to the character of the area and this loss could not be offset by replacement planting elsewhere on the site, which would be in a less prominent location and therefore not provide the same contribution to visual amenity and character as the existing trees provide. As such, this application is contrary to Core Strategy (2015) policies CS09 G and CS11 and adopted Local Plan Part 2 (2021) policies E4 and A2(e).
8.The application site is located within the Orange 400m to 2.5km Indicative Habitat Impact Zone and the application is not supported by an up-to-date shadow template Habitats Regulations Assessment. Furthermore, the uplift payment required to provide a full £210.84 per dwelling GIRAMS contribution has bit been provided. Both are necessary for the purposes of satisfying the Council's duty to avoid impacts on internationally protected sites through the use of the Green Infrastructure Recreational Avoidance Mitigation Strategy (GIRAMS). As such the Local Planning Authority and the Council as Competent Authority under the Habitats Regulations cannot fully assess the additional impact, in terms of indirect and direct impacts upon the internationally-designated sites within the Borough, without satisfaction that the required mitigation would be provided. As a result, the application is contrary to the adopted Great Yarmouth Core Strategy (2015) Policy CS11 and the adopted Great Yarmouth Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policies GSP5 and GSP8 which seek to both avoid or mitigate the cumulative potential adverse impacts to designated sites arising from development, and secure the appropriate mitigation.
9.The site layout plan submitted in support of this application (2295.18.4B) shows the proposed private drive extending beyond the boundaries of the approved development area defined by the red line within the site location plan (2295.18.2E) as approved within outline planning permission ref. 06/18/0545/O. As such this application seeks works outside of the application site area and therefore cannot be dealt with through reserved matters proposals for the layout of the site.
10.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.
11.NOTES - Please read the following notes carefully:- This reserved matters application has been submitted pursuant to, and relates to, outline planning permission 06/18/0545/O and not the subsequent Section 73 permission 06/21/0968/F which was allowed on appeal on the 24th November 2023. The original outline planning permission 06/18/0545/O requires submission of all reserved matters in a valid application(s) before 24th December 2023; the permission will expire on 24th December 2023 should a valid application(s) not be submitted before then. The alternative and varied outline planning permission ref 06/21/0968/F created by virtue of the appeal decision of 24th November 2023 also requires submission of all reserved matters in a valid application(s) before 24th December 2023; the permission will expire on 24th December 2023 should a valid application(s) not be submitted before then.