| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | In the absence of any evidence to the contrary the nature of the proposed use, with associated activities in comparison with the lawful use of the existing premises as a single dwelling house would adversely affect the predominantly residential character of the immediate area and therefore, would be contrary to Policies 16 and 17 of the Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 which amongst other things requires uses as that proposed not to adversely impact on residential character and amenity. |
| 2. | In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the proposed development would, by reason of the intensification of the use of the premises and rear garden as a day care nursery, give rise to increased noise and disturbance and an increase in pedestrian and vehicular movements over and above existing conditions, particularly during early morning and early evening, detrimental to neighbouring amenity and hence the proposed development would accordingly be contrary to Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 Policies 6, 7, 16, 17, 26 and 34 which seek amongst other things high quality development that ensures that the amenity and quality of life of existing residents is not adversely affected. These aims are reflected in the National Planning Policy Framework at Para 130(f). |
| 3. | In the absence of evidence to the contrary the proposed change of use would lead to increased vehicle movement to and from the site over the existing lawful use to the detriment of surrounding neighbouring amenity and the safe and free flow of traffic with potential impact upon highways safety for both edestrian and vehicular traffic and would therefore be contrary to Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 Policies 16, 17, 23 and 24 in addiiton to Paragraph 111 of the NPPF. |
| 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, 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. |
