| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposal would result in the loss of a standard dwelling below 120sqm GIA, in addition, the proposals due to insufficient information received has failed to demonstrate that the HMO would comply with the quality and minimum living space standards set out within the East London HMO guidance contrary to policy 8 of the Local Plan. |
| 2. | The proposed hip-to-gable conversion would unbalance the existing symmetry of the semi-detached pair of dwellings harming both the character of the pair and the surrounding street scene. This would introduce an incongruous design element within the roof scene inconsistent with the established form of development to roofs of neighbouring dwellings along Retford Road appearing as a visually intrusive feature in the streetscene harmful to the appearance of the surrounding area contrary to contrary to Policies 7 and 26 of the Local Plan and the Council's Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD. |
| 3. | The proposed rear dormer by reason of its design, scale and mass would fail to appear well contained within the existing roof form of the dwelling appearing as a bulky addition poorly positioned in relation to the adjacent party wall ridge line of the main roof materially harmful to the existing character of the host dwelling contrary to Policies 7 and 26 of the Local Plan and the Council's Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD. |
| 4. | The proposed rear extension would, by reason of its excessive depth and position close to the boundaries of the site, be an intrusive and unneighbourly form development which reduces the availability of light while compromising the outlook of the neighbour at No. 30 Retford Road and contributing to an increased sense of enclosure causing significant harm to the neighbouring amenity contrary to Policy 7 of the Local Plan and the Council's Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD. |
| 5. | The proposal would lead to an intensification of the subject property whereby the added activity of future occupants would increase the levels of noise and disturbance harmful to the amenity of neighbours contrary to Policy 7 of the Local Plan. |
| 6. | The proposed development would, by reason of the inadequate on site car parking provision, result in unacceptable overspill onto the adjoining roads to the detriment of highway safety and residential amenity and contrary to Policy 24 of the Local Plan. |
| 7. | Statement Required by Article 35 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015: Consideration was given to seeking further amendments, but given conflict with adopted planning policy, notification of intended refusal and the reason(s) for it was given to the agent via email on 24/10/2023. |
