| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | It is considered that insufficient information has been submitted to robustly demonstrated that the proposals would achieve a suitably high quality living environment for future occupants. Further there is inadequate information provided to clearly indicate that the proposal would not unduly harm the amenity of the surrounding residents, by potentially intensifying the use in particular with respect to coming and goings to the site. Further it is feared that the proposal would be detrimental to the sense of place, safety and community experienced by those residents through the proposed nature of the use in regards to the likelihood of high prospective turnover and occupancy in comparison to the existing use of the site as a single dwelling house. The proposals would therefore be contrary to Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 Policies 6, 7, 26 and 34 as well as Policy H12 of the London Plan and the objectives of the NPPF. |
| 2. | In the absence of sufficient information with respect to trip generation and the potential increase in demand for car parking in an unsustainable location together with the absence of mitigating measures to overcome any parking problem or reduction in the demand for mode of travel other than by private motor car the proposed change of use wold be likely to increased competition for on-street parking, to the detriment of the amenity of surrounding neighbouring occupiers and would contribute further to existing parking stress, thereby having adverse impact upon the free flow of traffic and the safety of highway condition,contrary to Havering Local Plan 2021 Policies 6 and 24 which seek to ensure adequate parking provision and such proposal are located in sustainable locations. |
| 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, it was necessary to issue a decision as close to the statutory timeframe as possible as opposed to seeking amendments which would have significantly delayed the application. |
