| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would, by reason of its height, result in a unsympathetic, visually intrusive addition to the building. The proposed design, appearance and materiality of the development would not preserve or enhance the special character of this part of Romford Conservation Area and accordingly it is considered that the development is contrary to policies CP17, CP18, DC61, DC67 and DC68 of the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document; and policies 7.4, 7.6 and 7.8 of the London Plan. |
| 2. | The proposed development would, as a result of the lack of drop-off facility, result in vehicles parking and waiting on Market Link to the detriment of traffic flow and highway safety, contrary to policies DC32, DC33 and DC61 of the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document; and policies 6.1, 6.3 and 6.13 of the London Plan. |
| 3. | The proposed servicing arrangements would result in vehicles reversing from Market Link into Ducking Stool Court which would be hazardous to highway and pedestrian safety, contrary to policies DC32, DC36 and DC61 of the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document; and policies 6.1 and 6.3 of the London Plan. |
| 4. | Statement Required by Article 35 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015: During consideration by the committee, members placed different weight on the planning merits and decided to refuse planning permission. |
