| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would, by reason of its prominent rear garden location, height, bulk and mass, and position close to the boundaries of the site, appear as an incongruous, unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature in the rear garden environment harmful to the open appearance of the surrounding area and to the amenity of adjacent occupiers contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 2. | The proposed development would, by reason of its position and proximity to neighbouring properties cause overlooking and loss of privacy to the rear garden environments of neighbouring properties which would have a serious and adverse effect on the living conditions of these occupiers, contrary to Policy DC61 of the Local Development Framework Development Plan Document. |
| 3. | In the absence of a mechanism to secure a planning obligation towards the infrastructure costs of new development the proposal is contrary to the provisions of the Havering Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document and Policy DC72 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 4. | Statement Required by Article 31 (cc) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management) Order 2010: Consideration was given to seeking amendments, but given conflict with adopted planning policy, notification of intended refusal, rather than negotiation, was in this case appropriate in accordance with para 186-187 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012. |
| 5. | 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 £3000.00. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
