| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed scheme would appear as an incongruous form of development within the streetscene, out of character with the surrounding environment and established pattern of development creating a cramped form of development that would adversely affect the open character of the area and therefore would be harmful to the visual amenity of the locality. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies 7, 10 and 26 of the Havering Local Plan as well as policy advise which requires developments to be sympathetic to local character, including the surrounding built environment. |
| 2. | The proposed extension by reason of its depth and consequently its bulk and height and proximity to the shared neighbouring boundaries of nos.66 and the adjacent independent annex would form a visually intrusive and overbearing feature from adjacent rear gardens and habitable rooms of these properties and therefore be detrimental to neighbouring amenity in terms of loss of outlook and sense of enclosure, contrary to Policies 7, 10 and 26 of the Havering Local Plan. There would also be conflict with policy advice in the National Planning Policy Framework which seeks to ensure a high standard of amenity for existing and future occupiers. |
| 3. | The proposal fails to provide sufficient information with respect to bio-diversity in order to protect and enhance the borough's natural environment and seek to increase the quantity and quality of biodiversity in Havering. The proposal would therefore be contrary to policy 30 of the Local Plan (biodiversity and geodiversity) and the schedule 14 of The Environment Act 2024 which requires any scheme to provide 10% Biodiversity Net Gain. |
| 4. | There would be insufficient car parking spaces for the proposed development. In addition the proposal fails to demonstrates that the potential three vehicular cross overs would have an acceptable impact upon the safety of other road users and pedestrians and the free flow of traffic. In these respect the proposal would be contrary to policy 24 of the Local Plan 2021. |
| 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 reason(s) for it was given to the agent Matthew Driscoll via email on 18/10/2024. |
| 6. | You are informed that the development has been wrongly described as "Conversion of existing 5-bed dwelling into 2x 3-bed dwellings involving a single storey rear extension". However, the site plan, includes an annex, which whilst been used as an independent unit, it has not been formally laid as a separate plot with its own front (including site boundaries, and potentially the formation of additional vehicular cross over) or the rear garden as yet. Therefore, the more accurate description should have been, "The subdivision of the existing five bedroom dwelling and its independent annex into three plots, following the erection of single storey rear extension to the main dwelling and formation of additional vehicular cross over. |
