| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would, by reason of its siting and uncharacteristic design, appear as an incongruous feature in the street scene and represent a departure from the established pattern of development, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the surrounding area contrary, to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Design SPD. |
| 2. | The proposed development would, by reason of the inadequate on site car parking provision and impact on existing on-street parking bays, result in unacceptable overspill onto the adjoining roads to the detriment of highway safety and residential amenity contrary to Policy DC33 and DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 3. | The proposed development would, by reason of the cramped layout of the site, lack of separation from site boundaries and lack of any amenity space, result in over-development, giving rise to an inadequate setting and poor outlook which would create an unacceptable living environment for future occupiers, to the detriment of their residential amenity. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Residential Design SPD. |
| 4. | In the absence of a legal agreement to secure contributions towards the demand for school places arising from the development, the proposal fails to satisfactorily mitigate the infrastructure impact of the development, contrary to the provisions of Policies DC29 and DC72 of the Development Control Policies DPD and Policy 8.2 of the London Plan. |
| 5. | 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 agent in writing 29-09-2016 |
