| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The erection of a semi-detached bungalow within the rear garden setting of no. 74 Princes Road would be incongruous in terms of scale, bulk, height and mass. The development is considered to appear as an overly-dominant structure and represent an overdevelopment of the rear garden environment which is inconsistent with the prevailing open character of the rear garden scene and local pattern of development in the surrounding area, contrary to policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 2. | The proposed private outdoor amenity space for the second dwelling of the semi-detached pair (northern side), by reason of its location adjoining a row of large trees and orientation north of the dwelling, would likely result in a lack of access to sunlight / natural light for the outdoor amenity space which would be at the detriment of the future occupiers, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Design Supplementary Planning Document. |
| 3. | The proposed development would, by reason of introducing two self contained new dwellings in the rear garden, likely result in a level of comings and goings, noises and pollution that would not be expected in the rear garden and would negatively impact all adjoining neighbours including nos. 72, 74 and 76 Princes Road, no. 46 Milton Road and no. 75 Carlisle Road, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 4. | The proposed development would, by reason of the lack of manoeuvrability of vehicles along the access road and within the site (including emergency vehicles and waste collection vehicles) and also its distance of more than 25m from the hedge of the highway, not provide adequate refuse collection access to the property, which would result in unacceptable impacts to highway safety and residential amenity contrary to Policies DC33 and DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 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 £15,900. CIL amounts are subject to indexation. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
| 6. | 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 Ivan Jaffa (the agent) via email on 7 May 2021. |
