| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The two storey side extension would, by reason of its width, siting and position close to the boundary of the site, be harmful to the open and spacious character of the streetscene and would neither preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Gidea Park Conservation Area contrary to Policies DC61 and DC68 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD. |
| 2. | The front gable with timber fascia would appear as an unrelated addition and rendering the dwelling would appear incongruous, dominant and visually intrusive and neither preserve or enhance the existing dwelling, the character, appearance and setting of the neighbouring 1911 Exhibition properties in Meadway and the Gidea Park Conservation Area contrary to Policies DC61 and DC68 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 3. | The proposed development would, by reason of its width, height, siting and position close to the south western boundary of the site, be unneighbourly, provide a "wall of development" which would give rise to an uncomfortable overbearing effect and sense of enclosure and be harmful to the amenity, including loss of light and outlook to the kitchen and bedroom windows of No. 11 Meadway contrary to Policies DC61 and DC68 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD. |
| 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 Plumb via email on 15th August 2016. |
