Great Yarmouth Borough Council Portal
No.Condition Text
1.The proposal seeks to introduce considerable change to a building that has no intrinsic historic asset character or value in its landscape setting and thereby fails the test of adopted Great Yarmouth Borough Council Local Plan Part 2 policy H7 which requires that works to adapt rural buildings for residential use are only permissible where proposals concern buildings of heritage or landscape value that have been demonstrated to be of permanent and substantial construction and capable of conversion without major or complete reconstruction or replacement. Furthermore, no structural survey has been submitted to demonstrate that the few elements retained are of sufficient integrity to support the proposed work.
2.Although policy CS2 is permissive of conversions of certain rural buildings, because this this proposal represents something much more than a conversion the proposal is in conflict with policy CS2 and policy GSP1 which direct developments to within development limits except in circumstances not considered to occur in this proposal. The proposal is in a relatively poorly accessible area, where there are no foot-ways or lighting rendering access by non-car modes less likely and is outside development limits, therefore considered contrary to the objectives of sustainable development and policies CS2 and GSP1, and it is considered that the delivery of a single home does not carry significant weight to overcome this concern given and the presence of a five year housing supply identified by LPP2 policy UCS3 adjusting Core Strategy policy CS3 which further reduces any weight. This is not proposed as a rural workers dwelling, nor proposed to specifically address identified housing need, nor is the development of exceptional architectural innovation to accord to policy H5 of LPP2 to justify the location proposed for a new open-market dwelling.
3.By virtue of the unsympathetic form and massing, the proposal is considered not to enhance its immediate setting as required by Local Plan Part 2 policy H7 criterion (f), nor meet the design expectations of LPP2 policy A2.
4.The application has been submitted with an ecology appraisal that is over five years old and therefore considered out of date and conflicting with adopted Core Strategy policy CS11(g) where new development must take measures to avoid or reduce adverse impacts on existing biodiversity and geo-diversity assets, and, where adverse impacts are unavoidable, suitable measures must be included to mitigate any adverse impacts. Furthermore, the absence of an up to date protected species survey conflicts with Local Plan Part 2 Policy H7 criterion (e) which requires that the conversion does not result in the loss of protected species (such as barn owls and bats) and must provide compensatory habitat(s) where such loss is unavoidable.
5.No habitat regulation assessment has been received and no mitigation provided. The proposal is contrary therefore with Adopted Core Strategy policy CS11(a), (b) and (g) and Local Plan Part 2 Policy GSP5 where there is a duty to avoid cumulative impacts on proximate designated internationally protected wildlife sites or apply mitigation.
6.Note: The application has been assessed against the policies of the Local Plan Part 2 (LPP2) as the decision post-dates the adoption of these policies on 9th December 2021: -The proposal fails to contribute to the provision of Public Open Space as provided for by adopted Local Plan Part 2 policy H4. It is recognised this could be rectified by mitigation payments by s106 or S111 process) - While there are no trees or hedgerows other than those (pines) along the frontage with Sidegate Road, No details of landscaping or replanting on the frontage for vision splay purposes have been received contrary to landscape policy in the LLP2 policy E4. - No contaminated land survey has been provided to establish former uses and investigation protocols therefore contrary to policy E6 (this was conditioned in the earlier decision). - Policy E7 water efficiency - no details accompanied this application to demonstrate how water use is restricted to 110 litres per person per day. - Policy I3 requires that development demonstrates how foul drainage interacts with the wider drainage system or the environment, this proposal includes a package treatment plant, but further information is required to confirm soakage for the outfall. - All new homes need to demonstrate they can be built to meet disabled access requirements to satisfy LLP2 policy A2(f) for the provision of accessible housing under Part M4(2) of the building regulations, where practicable. It is considered that with the provision of further information this proposal could be modified to ensure the proposed dwelling could practically achieve this.