No.Condition Text
1.The development would result in the irrevocable loss of a community facility and offers no replacement provision, contrary to Policy DC27 of the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document.
2.The proposed development would, by reason of the number of rooflights proposed, their design and appearance in relation to the host building and the wider streetscene, result in unsympathetic, visually intrusive development which would not preserve or enhance the special character of the Conservation Area, nor the inherent character of the application building when viewed as a heritage asset and is therefore contrary to Policies DC61 and DC68 of the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document.
3.The proposal would, by reason of its internal arrangement and reliance on roof-lights represent a poor quality living environment for future residents to the detriment of the amenity of future occupiers and is therefore contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and Policy 3.5 of the London Plan.
4.In the absence of a legal agreement to secure contributions towards the demand for school places arising from the development, the proposal fails to satisfactorily mitigate the infrastructure impact of the development, contrary to the provisions of Policies DC29 and DC72 of the Development Control Policies DPD and Policy 8.2 of the London Plan.
5.Statement Required by Article 35 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015: Consideration was given to seeking amendments, but given conflict with adopted planning policy, notification of intended refusal and the reason(s) for it was given to the agent in writing 02-02-2017.