| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed layout of the development would be inadequate resulting in substandard accommodation for future residents through lack of internal space. As a result, the development represents an overdevelopment of the site contrary to Policies DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD, the Technical Housing Standards, the Housing Standards Minor Alterations to the London Plan, Policy 3.5 of the London Plan and the Housing SPG 2016. |
| 2. | The amenity space for the proposed four bedroom, six person dwelling would not be particularly usable, good quality or sufficiently private for future occupiers, given its irregular shape, its siting to the front and side of the dwelling, and would be overshadowed for most of the day harmful to the amenity of future occupiers and contrary to Policy DC61 of Local Development Framework Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document and the Design for Living Residential Design Supplementary Planning Document. |
| 3. | The proposed dwelling would, by reason of its scale, bulk, mass, siting and position close to the boundaries of the site, result in a cramped overdevelopment of the site and appear overbearing, dominant and visually intrusive in the streetscene harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 4. | The proposed dwelling would, by reason of its scale, bulk, mass, siting and position close to the boundaries of the site, result in a significant loss of residential amenity including loss of light and outlook of the donor property contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 5. | The proposed dwelling would, by reason of its position and proximity to neighbouring properties cause overlooking and loss of privacy which would have a serious and adverse effect on the living conditions of adjacent occupiers, particularly No.'s 67 and 69 Philip Road, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 6. | The proposal, by reason of the creation of one four bedroom, six person residential unit and the provision of one car parking space, combined with no off street car parking provision for the donor property, would result in increased parking congestion in surrounding streets, and the siting of the vehicle crossing to the parking area would be harmful to pedestrian safety contrary to Policies DC32, DC33 and DC34 of the Local Development Framework and the guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 7. | 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. |
| 8. | 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 Charterhouse Design and Build via email on 31st May 2018. |
| 9. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for the Mayor of London Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Based upon the information supplied with the application, the CIL payable would be £2,040. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
