| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed new two storey dwelling attached to the side of the existing semi-detached dwelling would create a row of terraces, which would be an out of character for the built form in this locality and disrupt the established pattern of development, contrary to policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 2. | The proposed development would, by reason of introducing an overhanging first floor that would protrude forward of the ground floor section facing the highway and a large box style rear dormer, would be out of character for the semi-detached pair and appear dominant, intrusive and incongruous in this location, harmful to the appearance of the host dwelling, the streetscene, the rear garden scene and the surrounding area contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Design Supplementary Planning Document 2010. |
| 3. | The proposed development would, by reason of introducing a two storey (albeit 3 storey with the rear dormer) building close to the proximity of the common boundary with no. 1 Cree Way, would likely result in overshadowing, loss of access to sunlight/daylight, increased overlooking and loss of privacy for the neighbour, which is deemed to be unneighbourly and contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Design Supplementary Planning Document 2010. |
| 4. | The proposed development would, by reason of the low ceiling heights, result in a low quality design that would be at the detriment of future occupants, contrary to the Residential Design Supplementary Planning Document 2010 (SPD), Policy DC4 and Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and Policy D6 of the London Plan (adopted 2021). |
| 5. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for the Mayor of London Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Havering Community Infrastructure Levy (HCIL). Based upon the information supplied with the application, the total CIL payable would be £11,829. CIL amounts are subject to indexation. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
| 6. | The proposed would, by reason of the lack of subservience and cohesion with the existing semi-detached pair, would not appear subordinate and would result in unbalancing the symmetry of the semi-detached pair. The development fails to respect the design features of the existing building, referring to the addition of the loft space with the large rear dormer for accommodation and does not repeat the characteristic front bay windows and thus would appear particularly incongruous in comparison, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD 2011. |
| 7. | 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 was given to the agent via email on 28 May 2021. |
