| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposal, by reason of the number of units and the proposed design and layout, including an excessive amount of hard standing, would represent an overdevelopment of the site and give rise to a cramped urban form, detrimental to local character and amenity and contrary to Policies DC2 and DC61 of the LDF Development Control Policies Development Plan Document and the guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 2. | The proposed layout of the development would be inadequate resulting in substandard accommodation for future residents through lack of internal space, poor outlook, limited light, undue overlooking, loss of privacy, noise and disturbance from vehicle movement and headlights beaming into habitable rooms and no pedestrian front entrance for plots 1-3, detrimental to future residential amenity and contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD, Policy 3.5 of the London Plan (as amended), the DCLG Technical Housing Standards and the Residential Design SPD. |
| 3. | The proposed development, by reason of the creation of eight, one, two and three bedroom residential units and the provision of eight car parking spaces would result in increased parking congestion in surrounding streets, and the cumulative impact of the width and siting of the access road and the lack of pedestrian visibility splays would impede the vehicular entry and egress of the site harmful to highway safety contrary to Policies DC32, DC33 and DC34 of the Local Development Framework and the guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 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 Mr Lewis Cook during a telephone conversation on 27th September 2016. |
| 6. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for the Mayor of London Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Based upon the information supplied with the application, the CIL payable would be £1,033. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
