| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | There is no evidence that there is an identified need in the borough for the use proposed for local residents and based on evidence presented through consultation responses received the use of the premises at 26 Guysfield Close for the purposes described would be in conflict with Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 Policy 6(i). |
| 2. | The applicant has not demonstrated that the site is suitable for the needs of intended occupants, Policy 6(v). The conversion of the two reception rooms to an office and bedroom would reduce the amount of critical leisure space for the children and would contribute to an insufficient living environment. There is only one staff bedroom and there must be two staff overnight. There is no staff shower/bathroom. In the absence of evidence otherwise and based on the consultation response received, it is highly unlikely that children resident in the home would attend local schools and accordingly would require home tuition. There would be limited space available for this to take place. The rear garden is small and would not provide an appropriate level of amenity space to meet the needs of the intended occupants. Accordingly, the proposed use would be in conflict with the objectives of Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 Policy 6(v) and (vi), Policy H12 of the London Plan as well as the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 3. | The development by virtue of its use and scale including proposed occupancy, levels of staffing and overly intense operation would be materially out of character and at odds with the suburban nature of its surroundings and resulting in undue harm to the residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers from noise and disturbance associated with the significant level of activity and comings and goings of the use contrary to Policies 6, 7, 16 and 34 of the Havering Local Plan, Policies D14, H12, S1 and S2 of the London Plan and the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 4. | The site is not well served by public transport. The applicant has not demonstrated that proposed use would not lead to increased comings and goings to the site over and above that of a single dwelling house and that an adequate degree of visitor and carer parking facilities would be provided. Therefore as a consequence this would result in an adverse impact on the safety and convenience of the local highway network through exacerbating pedestrian-vehicular conflict along pavements and traffic congestion within the area. As such there would be conflict with Policy 6 of the Havering Local Plan 2016-2031, Policy T6 of the London Plan as well as the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 5. | 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 Mrs Ahmed via email on 15th January 2026. |
