| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would - by reason of its height, bulk, mass and proximity to the boundaries of the site - appear as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature within the streetscene, and would be harmful to the appearance of the Emerson Park Special Character Area, contrary to policies DC61 and DC69 of the Havering Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD 2008, as well as policies 7.4, 7.5 and 7.6 of the London Plan 2016 (MALP), policies D4 and D8 of the emerging Draft London Plan ("Intend to Publish" version December 2019), and the Residential Design SPD and the Emerson Park Policy Area SPD. |
| 2. | The proposed development would - through sub-division of an existing plot - diminish the spacious characteristics of the donor property and the area more generally, and consequently would result in a cramped over-development of the site to the detriment of future occupiers and the character of the surrounding area more generally. The proposed development would be unacceptable when assessed against policies DC61 and DC69 of the Havering Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD 2008, as well as policies 7.4, 7.5 and 7.6 of the London Plan 2016 (MALP), policies D4 and D8 of the emerging Draft London Plan ("Intend to Publish" version December 2019), and the Residential Design SPD and the Emerson Park Policy Area SPD. |
| 3. | 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 in writing prior to the decision notice being issued.
Further to this, paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) (the NPPF) requires Local Planning Authorities to approach decisions on proposed development in a positive and creative way, and paragraph 41 of the NPPF places an expectation that issues on applications should be addressed prior to submission of an application. The Council has made available on its website the policies and guidance provided by the Development Plan in its entirety. The Council also offers a full pre-application advice service in order to ensure that the applicant has every opportunity to submit an application that's likely to be considered acceptable. On the Council's website in relation to pre-application advice, it is explicitly stated that:
"If a planning application is submitted without the benefit of pre-application advice, we will not normally negotiate amendments before reaching a decision."
In this instance, the application followed from two recently refused schemes, and no requests for pre-application advice in relation to the proposed development were submitted to the Council prior to the submission of this application. Furthermore, the proposed development was found to be unacceptable on its own merits, and no changes to the application could make the application acceptable without a substantial and materially different submission. Consequently, officers consider that the requirements to issue a decision as close to the statutory timeframes as possible (as required by paragraph 47 of the NPPF) outweighs the need to require changes with the application. |
