| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The site is within the Metropolitan Green Belt and the proposed development would not align fully with any of the exceptions set out in Section 13 of the NPPF. The proposed alterations to the main building, mindful of historic development and their design concept, would result in disproportionate additions over and above that of the original building. Furthermore the replacement Coach House building, in the absence of any compelling evidence otherwise, would result in a building materially larger than that which it replaces. Through its overtly residential appearance and defined curtilage it would hold the potential to be detrimental to the open character of the site through urbanisation. Through this resultant conflict with Paras 149/150 of the Framework and the purposes of including land within the Green Belt the proposals as a whole are regarded as inappropriate development. In the absence of any Very Special Circumstances which would outweigh the harm of inappropriateness and harm to openness the proposed development is unacceptable in principle and in contrast to the objectives of the NPPF and Policy G2 of the London Plan 2021 |
| 2. | Through alterations to the subject building internally and externally the proposals would be detrimental to the the historic core of the main building and its architectural character. This presents in incongruous additions to the roof of the historic parrt of the building and internal alterations which diminish the legibility of the asset and its plan form. Through the increased scale, bulk and mass of the single storey projection to the rear of the modern part of the building in conjunction with those other alterations the scheme as a whole would fail to contribute positively to local character and distinctiveness, as required by Paragraph 197(c) of the NPPF. Furthermore the development would be contrary to Havering Local Plan Policy 28, London Plan Policy HC1 and the objectives of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (in particular sections 16, 66 and 72). |
| 3. | The proposed replacement Coach House building would fail to reflect its historic character as a modest coach house and its subservient and utilitarian association with the listed building would be lost. The overtly formal design would fail to reflect its context and its historic relationship with the listed building but would also compete with it. The scheme as a whole would therefore fail to contribute positively to the local character and distinctiveness, as required by Paragraph 197(c) of the NPPF as well as being contrary to Havering Local Plan Policy 28, London Plan Policy HC1 and the objectives of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (in particular sections 16, 66 and 72). |
| 4. | The alterations to the main building to facilitate the proposals include a prominent flat roofed section in the historic part of the building. This would present as an incongruous design feature which would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the subject building. Furthermore the replacement Coach House building would read as a visually dominant and intrusive feature out of scale with its setting. The development as proposed fails to comply with the objectives of Havering Local Plan Policies 7 and 26, in addition to Para 130 of the Framework which requires that development add to the overall quality of the area. |
| 5. | Through the lack of dedicated amenity provision for Units 1, 2 and 3 and single aspect of units 2, 3, 6 and 7 the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposals would comply fully with the minimum prescribed standards set out by london Plan Policy D7 and that the development would make suitable provision for the amenity of future occupants having regard to those standards and objectives. The proposals therefore fail to comply with Policy D6 of the London Plan, Policy 7 of the Havering Local Plan and the objectives of the Framework, specifically Para 130(f) which requires fundamentally that development make provision for a high standard of amenity for existing and future users. |
| 6. | 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 the applicant in writing 13-12-2023. |
| 7. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for the Havering Community infrastructure Levy (HCIL) and Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (MCIL). Based upon the information supplied with the application, the Levy payable are (subject to indexation).
New floor area of 184.6 sqm:
Havering CIL (125 per sqm) - £23,075
Mayoral CIL (25 per sqm) - £4615
Further details with regard to CIL are available from the councils website. |
