| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed detached dwellings would, by reason of their prominent rear garden location, height, bulk and mass, appear as an incongruous and unacceptably dominant, overbearing and visually intrusive features in the rear garden setting which would be harmful to the appearance and character of the surrounding area and detrimental to neighbouring residential amenity, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 2. | The proposed development would result in living conditions that do not create a suitably high quality living environment for future occupiers. The reliance on obscurely glazed windows to primary rooms and reliance of roof-lights to primary rooms is considered to be detrimental to future amenity and to be in direct contrast to the aims of London Plan Policy 3.5 and Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 3. | 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. |
| 4. | The proposed layout of the proposed development, including the narrowness of the plot, the proximity of the proposed dwellings and the access road to neighbouring residential properties, combined with the restricted width of the access road leading to the rear of the site, would result in a poor quality of development, giving rise to material harm to the amenity of occupiers of neighbouring property by reason of overbearing impact and noise and disturbance from the access and parking arrangements, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 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 reasons for it was given to the agent 20-04-2017 in writing. |
| 6. | 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 £3800.00. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
