| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would, by reason of its site constraints and design approach including the site coverage and quantum of development, resulting in an overdevelopment, cramped layout, undersized accommodation, compromised outlook, loss of privacy, creation of poor and non-functional communal amenity space with no provision of private amenity space, and proximity of units with some habitable room windows to the boundaries of the site, give rise to an unsatisfactory relationship between the proposed block and the site boundaries leading to a substandard and poor quality of living accommodation environment to the detriment of the amenity of future occupiers and the character of the surrounding area, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD, Policy D6 of the London Plan and the NPPF. |
| 2. | The proposed development would, by reason of its design, bulk and mass, appear as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature in the streetscene harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 3. | The proposed large front parking area and the unjustified impacts on existing trees at the front of the site would be visually intrusive, as well as resulting in an increase in noise and disturbance causing harm to neighbouring residential amenity and adversely effecting the living conditions of adjacent occupiers, contrary to Policies DC55 and DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 4. | The proposal, by reason of its failure to provide a safe dedicated pedestrian and cyclist access to the site, coupled with the poor layout, would result in an overly cramped development to the detriment of highway safety and the residential amenity of future occupiers. The development would be contrary to Policies DC32, DC34 & DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and Policy D6 of the London Plan. |
| 5. | The proposed development by reason of its scale, poor design and sitting would result in an overdominant, discordant and unduly prominent form of development that fails to respect the established pattern of development, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area, in particular the established character of this rear garden setting, contrary to Policies Policy DC61 of the Local Development Framework Development Plan Document and the Residential Design SPD. |
| 6. | The proposed development, by reason of its scale, design and siting, combined with the arrangement of habitable room windows and external staircases, give rise to an intrusive and unneighbourly form of development, giving rise to overlooking and loss of privacy to occupiers of neighbouring residential property, contrary to Policies Policy DC61 of the Local Development Framework Development Plan Document and the Residential Design SPD. |
| 7. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for the Mayor of London Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Based upon the information supplied with the application, the CIL payable would be £3,550.Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website.
Havering Council CIL requirement according to the information supplied with the application would be £17,750 plus indexation in Havering Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). |
| 8. | 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 reasons for it was given to the agent and applicant via email on 17/06/2021. |
