Great Yarmouth Borough Council Portal
No.Condition Text
1.The addition of two further storeys on top of the existing building at no.11 Southtown Road would result in an unacceptable, significant impact on the amenity of occupiers of no.11B Southtown Road due to the close proximity of the extension to their property. This would result in an overbearing sense of enclosure and would restrict outlook from their south facing windows and subject residents to an unacceptable level of overshadowing. Moreover, the enlarged height of the building would compromise the use of the neighbour's balcony due to the increased level of overshadowing and proposed inclusion of windows on the northern elevation, causing a significant loss of privacy. The proposal would therefore not comply with Core Strategy (2015) Policy CS9, Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policy A1 or with Paragraph 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024) and Emerging Local Plan Policies DHE1 and HEC7.
2.The site is located within Flood Zone 3 and proposes two new dwellings. The application has not been supported by a Sequential Test to identify and discount alternative sites for the development nor demonstrating that there are no suitable alternative available sites within the town of Great Yarmouth that could accommodate the modest scale of growth proposed in areas at lower risk of flooding. Furthermore, the Local Planning Authority can demonstrate an adequate supply of deliverable housing sites and does not rely on provision of new windfall sites to maintain this supply. As such, the proposal is contrary to the adopted Great Yarmouth Core Strategy Policy CS13 (2015) and the adopted Great Yarmouth Local Plan Part 2 policy E1 (2021), and contrary to the approach of the NPPF (December 2024) (in particular Paragraphs 173-177), and Emerging Local Plan Policy CLC2.
3.The application site is located within the Orange 400m to 1.5km Indicative Habitat Impact Zone and the application is not supported by an up-to-date shadow template Habitats Regulations Assessment or by the required £608.34 GIRAMS contribution, which is 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 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 (2021) Policies GSP5 and GSP8 and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and Emerging Local Plan Policy NAT4.
4.The proposal does not address the public open space demands of the development through means to secure financial contributions towards off-site provision, as required by the adopted Great Yarmouth Local Plan Part 2 (2021) policy H4 as informed by the Open Space Supplementary Planning Document (2023) and associated Open Space Needs Assessment (2023). It has not been demonstrated that it is otherwise unviable to provide this mitigation, nor that there is a surplus of open space within the ward rendering the policy-based requirement unnecessary. As such, the impacts of the development and the pressures the development places on public open spaces have not been mitigated and the proposed development fails to comply with the adopted Great Yarmouth Core Strategy (2015) policies CS14 and CS15 and the adopted Great Yarmouth Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policies H4 and GSP8 and Emerging Local Plan Policy HEC2.
5.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.