| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | There is insufficient marketing evidence to clearly demonstrate that the existing public house is not viable, the proposal would result in the loss of a public house and a community facility contrary to Policy 16 of the Havering Local Plan and Policies HC7 and S1 of the London Plan. |
| 2. | The proposed extractor system and associated flue, would by reason of its scale, bulk and prominent siting, be a significant addition on the rear elevation of the building and appear dominant, visually intrusive and as incongruous paraphernalia in the streetscene, which would detract from the architectural interest of the pub in views along Albert Road, contrary to Policies 26 and 28 of the Havering Local Plan, Policy HC1 of the London Plan and the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 3. | The proposed car parking area and hard surfacing would result in the overprovision of parking within the site, which would reduce the size of the rear garden and result in the loss of soft landscaping, which is contrary to the aim of the Mayor to reduce car use and would adversely affect the significance of the site and harm the immediate setting of this historic public house and the character of the site contrary to Policies 24, 26, 27 and 28 of the Havering Local Plan, Policies HC1 and T6.4 of the London Plan and the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 4. | The position and insufficient height of the external extract flue would be materially harmful to the amenity of neighbouring properties, including the occupiers of the first floor of the public house, in terms of odours and fumes contrary to Policies 7, 14 and 34 of the Havering Local Plan and the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 5. | The proposed car park to the rear of the site would, by reason of its siting and close proximity to the western boundary of the site, be unneighbourly and result in noise and disturbance from car doors slamming, vehicles entering, egressing and manoeuvring within the site and fumes, which would be harmful to the amenity of neighbouring properties, particularly No. 99 Brentwood Road contrary to Policies 7, 14, 34 of the Havering Local Plan, Policy D14 of the London Plan and the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 6. | In the absence of information regarding the types of vehicles intended for the loading bay and vehicle tracking, the proposed development would, by reason of its layout, result in inadequate servicing arrangements contrary to Policy 35 of the Havering Local Plan and Policy T7 of the London Plan. |
| 7. | In the absence of a parking stress survey, the proposed vehicle crossover may adversely impact on the functionality of the on street parking bays within a current Controlled Parking Zone and may reduce parking amenities and result in increased parking congestion in surrounding streets contrary to the Havering Dropped Kerb Policy, Policy 24 of the Havering Local Plan and T6 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 Cityscape PA via email on 27th June 2024. |
