| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed rear extension would, by reason of its excessive depth and position close to the boundaries of the site, be harmful to the character of the rear garden scene and result in an intrusive and unneighbourly development with adverse effects on the amenities of adjacent occupiers at no. 18 Millbrook Gardens resulting in a sense of overbearing development, a sense of enclosure, overshadowing and loss of access to sunlight/daylight, contrary to Havering's Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD (adopted 2011) and Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD (adopted 2008). |
| 2. | The overall bulk, mass and scale of the proposed development would result in the unbalancing of the semi-detached pair and the extensions not appearing subordinate to the main dwelling, which would be harmful to the character of the original dwelling as well as the streetscape, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (Adopted 2011). |
| 3. | The proposed development would, by reason of the proposed Juliette balcony and roof top terrace as well as the 1.5m high screen facing rear and the full height window to the two-storey rear extension, would contribute to potential loss of privacy and overlooking to No. 16 Millbrook Gardens, which would have a serious and adverse effect on the living conditions of adjacent occupiers, contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 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 was given to the agent via email. |
