| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed dwelling would, by reason of its siting, narrow width and proportions, lack subservience, disrupt the uniform and symmetrical appearance of this pair of semi-detached dwellings and appear uncharacteristically narrow, cramped and incongruous within the site and introduce a sense of enclosure harmful to the open and spacious character in the streetscene contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD. |
| 2. | The proposed dwelling would fail to offer a satisfactory living accommodation layout due to the following issues. The proposed dwelling would have an internal floor area of 88 square metres, which fails to meet the 93 square metres as per the DCLG Technical Housing Standard. The single bedroom (bedroom 3) on the first floor has a floor area of 4.5 square metres, which fails to meet the 7.5 square metres as per the DCLG Technical Housing Standard. Also, bedroom 3 is 2 metres wide, which fails to meet the minimum width of 2.15m as per the DCLG Technical Housing Standard. Bedroom 1 has a floor space of 11.1 square metres, which fails to meet the 11.5 square metres as per the DCLG Technical Housing Standard. The layout of the proposed dwelling would be contrary to Policy 3.5 of the London Plan and the DCLG Technical Housing Standard. |
| 3. | In the absence of a legal agreement to secure contributions towards the demand for school places arising from the development, the proposal fails to satisfactorily mitigate the infrastructure impact of the development, contrary to the provisions of Policies DC29 and DC72 of the Development Control Policies DPD and Policy 8.2 of the London Plan. |
| 4. | 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 Mr Daniel Brandon during a telephone conversation on 6th July 2016. |
| 5. | 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 £1,440. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
