| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | In the absence of marketing evidence to clearly demonstrate that the existing public house is not viable and due to insufficient quantitative and qualitative information regarding the functionality, operation, viability and management of the proposed community cafe/bar, in the absence of this information 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 building would, by reason of its height, scale, bulk, mass, design, materiality, prominent siting and position close to the boundaries of the site, appear incongruous, unduly dominant and visually intrusive in the streetscene harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area, as well as be an unneighbourly development and appear overbearing, dominant and visually intrusive in the rear garden environment harmful to the amenity of adjacent occupiers, particularly neighbouring properties in Arundel Road,contrary to Policy 7 and 26 of the Havering Local Plan and Policies D3 and D4 of the London Plan. |
| 3. | The proposed layout of the development would result in a significant number of undersized bedrooms and some flats with insufficient internal floor space failing to meet the minimum internal floor space standards, resulting in substandard residential accommodation detrimental to the amenity of the future residents contrary to Policy 7 of the Havering Local Plan and Policy D6 of the London Plan. |
| 4. | The proposed layout of the development would give rise to a very poor relationship given the siting and proximity of a five storey wall adjacent to the rear elevations of Units 1, 10, 17 and 23 and the rear garden of Unit 1, which would appear overbearing, result in poor outlook and provide a "wall of development" which would give rise to a sense of enclosure and provide a poor quality living environment and a poor quality amenity space for Unit 1, resulting in substandard residential accommodation to the detriment of the amenity of the prospective occupiers contrary to Policy 7 of the Havering Local Plan and Policy D6 of the London Plan. |
| 5. | The proposed development does not include any wheelchair accessible units and therefore fails to achieve the highest standards of accessible and inclusive design, as such the proposals are contrary to Policy 7 of the Havering Local Plan and Policies D5 and D7 of the London Plan. |
| 6. | The communal garden and play space is of poor quality and useability, given its siting adjacent to the car park, layout, shortfall of overall space and narrow proportions would be harmful to the amenity of future occupiers and contrary to Policy 7 of the Havering Local Plan and Policies D6 and S4 of the London Plan. |
| 7. | The proposed development, due to inadequate on site provision of parking spaces would result in overspill on to surrounding street detrimental to the surrounding highway network and amenity enjoyed by nearby residents, contrary to Policy 24 of the Havering Local Plan and Policies T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan. |
| 8. | In the absence of a satisfactory Heath Impact Assessment, it has not been possible to sufficiently demonstrate that full consideration has been given to health and wellbeing and the principles of active design and ensuring that any potential negative impacts are mitigated contrary to Policy 12 of the Havering Local Plan. |
| 9. | In the absence of sufficient information, including a biodiversity survey and report, to demonstrate that the proposal will avoid, mitigate and enhance the biodiversity of the site, the proposal is contrary to the provisions of Policy 30 of the Havering Local Plan and Policy G6 of the London Plan. |
| 10. | In the absence of a legal agreement to secure the contributions towards carbon reduction and an obligation to enter into a legal agreement under Section 16 of the Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1974 to prevent future occupiers from applying for parking permits, the proposal fails to satisfactorily mitigate the infrastructure impact of the development, contrary to the provisions of Policies 24 and 36 of the Havering Local Plan and Policy T6, T6.1 and SI 2 of the London Plan. Furthermore in the absence of a satisfactorily completed legal agreement means that the provision of affordable housing cannot be secured and therefore the application is also contrary to Policies H4 and H5 of the London Plan; London Plan Affordable Housing SPG; Policy 4 of the Havering Local Plan. |
| 11. | In the absence of any evidence that a preliminary Air Quality Assessment has been carried out to inform further assessment of the design evolution and impacts of the development on air pollution, the proposal would result in the degradation of air quality or it will introduce sensitive receptors to an area of poor air quality contrary to Policy 33 of the Havering Local Plan and Policy SI 1 of the London Plan. |
| 12. | The proposed landscape scheme would fail to retain and protect important features including the mature hedge and trees on the site, which would be harmful to local character contrary to Policy 27 of the Havering Local Plan and Policy G7 of the London Plan. |
| 13. | 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 Reeve Brown via email on 5th July 2022. |
| 14. | For mixed use development (as applicable: All other retail A1-A5 in Metropolitan, District and Local Centres is £50/m²)
Please be advised that approval of this application from 1st September 2019 (either by London Borough of Havering, or subsequently by PINS if allowed on appeal following a refusal by London Borough of Havering) will attract a liability payment of £324,646.19 plus indexation in Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This charge has been levied under s.206 of the Planning Act 2008 and includes both the Mayor of London's CIL and London Borough of Haverings CIL.
London Borough of Havering, as CIL collecting authority, has responsibility for the collection of the Mayoral CIL, in addition to Havering's CIL, on commencement of the development.
Your proposal is subject to a CIL Liability Notice indicating a levy of £56,752.50 plus indexation for the application, based on the Mayoral CIL levy rate for Havering of £25/sq.m plus Havering's charging rate for residential of £125/sq.m (Zone A) and the floorspace of 2510.1 square metres and based on the levy rate for Havering of £50/sq.m (All other retail (A1-A5) in Metropolitan, District and Local Centres) and the stated floorspace of 258 sq.m.
You are advised to visit the planning portal website where you can download the appropriate document templates.
http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/applications/howtoapply/whattosubmit/cil |
