| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The cumulative addition of hardstanding and subsequent loss of a defined front boundary treatment and front garden which all contributes positively to the setting of the adjacent Gorleston Conservation Area (No. 17) and contributes to the positively to the the architectural and historic significance of No. 7 Marine Parade and the wider terrace (which can be considered a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA)), is considered to result in an unacceptable level of harm to the heritage assets due to the erosion of the characteristic verdant street scene, boundary treatment and historic settlement pattern and by disrupting its well-preserved Edwardian curtilage.
The proposal would fail to preserve or enhance the character, appearance, and setting of the adjacent Gorleston Conservation Area (No. 17) causing a low-to-moderate level of less than substantial level of harm to the significance of the Conservation Area and will cause direct harm to the architectural and historic significance of No. 7 Marine Parade and the wider terrace block by introducing parked vehicles that would obscure historic views of the NDHA.
It is considered that there are no public benefits arising from the scheme which would outweigh the the low-to-moderate level of less than substantial level of harm identified; moreover, the loss of existing on-street parking creates a public detriment.
This is contrary to adopted policy CS10 of the Great Yarmouth Core Strategy (2015) and policy E5 of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan Part 2 (2021), as well as Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. As the proposal fails to preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area and Non Designated Heritage Asset and is contrary to paragraphs 212, 213, 215 and 216 of the National Planning Policy Framework (December 2024), and is contrary to draft policy HOU11, DHE2 and DHE4 of the Emerging Local Plan (examination version 2026), to which significant weight should be afforded. When assessed against the adopted Borough-wide Design Code SPD section 5.4 , the extension fails to meet the expected standard of being built with regard to local context in the context of boundary treatments in the Gorleston Seafront area. |
| 2. | The proposed development, by virtue of the removal of the defined front boundary and the replacement of the grass front garden with block-paved hardstanding and vehicular parking, would result in an incongruous and visually intrusive form of development on a prominent corner plot. The lack of proposed Eastern (front ) elevation boundary treatment constitutes poor design. The application is therefore contrary to adopted policies CS09 of the Great Yarmouth Core Strategy (2015) and policy A1 of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan Part 2 (2021), paragraphs 131 and 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework, and is contrary to draft policies DHE4 of the Emerging Local Plan (examination version 2026), to which significant weight should be afforded. |
| 3. | 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. |
