An appeal to revive a rejected bid to build 71 houses off a cul-de-sac already clogged with cars has been dismissed by the planning inspectorate.
The scheme would have seen houses built on land near St Mary and St Peter Catholic Primary School in Gorleston with sole access to the proposed estate an extension of East Anglian Way.
But the plan proved controversial - objections from residents stated their lives were already blighted by traffic problems during drop-off and pick-up times at the nearby school, which has a large catchment area with pupils travelling from miles around.
The developer, Lowestoft-based Badger Building, had also proposed building a carpark and drop-off point at the edge of the new estate which would serve drivers taking students to and from the school.
The land, an overgrown area and haven for wildlife, has been the subject of a long-running saga of proposals for development.
A decision on the application was deferred twice by Great Yarmouth Borough Council before being refused last year on account of concerns over road safety.
The latest chapter saw Badger Building attempt to revive the scheme after lodging an appeal with the planning inspectorate.
That body, however, has dismissed the bid.
Outlining reasons for the decision a planning inspector said: "The appeal does not provide sufficient assurance that the proposal would not result in unacceptable levels of congestion.
"As a result, the proposal would be likely to result in regular inconvenience to users of the highway.
"The development would consequently have a harmful effect on the convenient use of the highway network.
"The proposal would result in a significant increase in vehicular movements along East Anglian Way, coupled with the potential for conflict between vehicles and more vulnerable road users due to congestion and manoeuvring.
"It would consequently increase the potential for accidents, with resulting harm to highway safety," the inspector said.
Concluding remarks noted the "adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits".
"Therefore the proposal would not be a sustainable form of development," the inspector said.
Badger Building has declined to comment.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here