No. | Condition Text |
---|
1. | By virtue of its scale and footprint and detachment from the donor dwelling, the proposal is not considered to offer an ancillary form of accommodation to the main dwelling. Due to the scale and siting of the proposal the use of the building as an annex would fail to be subordinate to the main dwelling, and the proposed unit of accommodation would be tantamount to creating an independent dwelling within the site, evidenced by the fact that the accommodation would provide its own kitchen/living facilities along with a bedroom and bathroom and have access to private garden area detached from the donor dwelling, notwithstanding its position outside the application site. As such, the annexe would be capable of providing independent accommodation separate to the main dwelling and therefore would not be ancillary in use or function to the bungalow and would likely result in an increase in parking pressures and vehicle movements and have a resultant adverse impact on highway safety as well as being contrary to the principles of allowing annexes within the countryside. The proposal would therefore be considered to be contrary to policy H10 of the Local Plan Part 2 (2021) and Core Strategy (2015) Policy CS16. |
2. | Due to the detachment from the existing dwelling and lack of reliance or dependence on the the donor dwelling in order to function as an annex, the proposal is considered to be tantamount to an independent dwelling in the countryside. The site is located within an area considered unsuitable for market housing, being located outside of the development limits, in an area distant from services and with no lit footpaths to the limited range of village facilities. The site is therefore considered to be located in an unsustainable location remote from schooling, day to day shopping, health provision and other services, and has restricted employment opportunities with limited scope for access by foot and cycling precluding any realistic opportunity of encouraging a modal shift away from the private car. Therefore, the site is not located to minimise the need to travel and is not in a sustainable location for new development. As a result, the proposed development conflicts with the aims of sustainable development and does not satisfy the requirements of Policies CS01 and CS02 of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan Core Strategy (2015) and Policy GSP1 of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan Part 2 (2021). |
3. | 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 nor the required £210.84 per dwelling GIRAMS contribution, which are necessary for the purposes of satisfying the Council's duty to avoid impacts on internationally protected site 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 Policies GSP5 and GSP8 (2021) which seek to avoid or mitigate the cumulative potential adverse impacts to designated sites arising from development. |
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. |