| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | This application for prior approval is submitted under Schedule 2 Part 3 Class Q of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). Part Q.2(2) states that where the development proposed is development under Class Q(a) only, development is permitted subject to the condition that before beginning the development, the developer must apply to the local planning authority for a determination as to whether the prior approval of the authority will be required as to the items referred to in sub-paragraphs (1)(a) to (e) and (g), and the provisions of paragraph W (prior approval) of this Part apply in relation to that application.
A document has previously been submitted to the Local Planning Authority under outline application ref. 06/24/0137/O advising that works had commenced on previously approved prior approval application ref. 06/21/0351/PAD. However, this previous prior approval application has lapsed as development under Class Q is permitted subject to it being completed within a period of 3 years starting with the prior approval date. The development has not been completed and as such, the proposal does not comply with part Q.2(2). |
| 2. | In order for such a proposal to be granted Prior Approval, it is necessary to comply with the Nationally Described Space Standard issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government on 27th March 2015 as read with the notes dated 19th May 2016 which apply to it.
Insufficient information has been included on the plans, as in conflict with W.2(b)(c), which requires a floor plan indicating the total floor space in square metres of each dwellinghouse, the dimensions and proposed use of each room.
None-the-less, having measured the submitted floorplans, it appears that the 2no double bedrooms are both less than 11.5m2, as required by the supporting notes of the NDSS. The proposal therefore does not meet the requirements of the notes. |
| 3. | The road serving the site "Cherry Lane" is considered to be inadequate to serve the development proposed, by reason of its restricted width, lack of passing provision and restricted visibility at adjacent road junctions. The proposal, if permitted, would be likely to give rise to conditions detrimental to highway safety. As such, the proposal does not accord with Q.2(1)(a). |
| 4. | In order for such a proposal to be granted Prior Approval, the curtilage may be no larger than the land occupied by that building. In this instance the land occupied by the building appears to equate to 126sqm, when measured from the block plan, whilst the curtilage constituting of the area of land immediately around the building, including the land to the front, excluding the building, measures approximately 151sqm. As such, the proposal is not considered to comply with the definition of curtilage as directed by Q.3.(1)(b). |
| 5. | The application site is located within the Orange 400m to 2.5km Indicative Habitat Impact Zone and would constitute a net addition of a single dwelling. The application is not supported by an up-to-date shadow template Habitats Regulations Assessment nor the payment to provide the required £221.17 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 cannot fully assess the additional impact, in terms of indirect and direct impacts upon the 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. |
| 6. | 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. |
