| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would, by reason of its height, bulk, mass, design and proximity to the northern boundary of the site, closing the established spatial gap, appear as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature within the streetscene and the area more generally, and would be harmful to the appearance of the site and surrounding area, and would be contrary to Policy DC61 of the Havering Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD 2008, as well as Policies 7.4, 7.5 and 7.6 of the London Plan 2016 (MALP), the Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD, and the Residential Design SPD. |
| 2. | The proposed extensions would, by reason of its excessive width, height and position close to the boundaries of the site, have an unacceptable impact on the neighbouring amenity in terms of light, outlook, increased sense of enclosure, overbearing and would be unacceptable when assessed against Policy DC61 of the Havering Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD 2008, as well as Policies 7.4, 7.5 and 7.6 of the London Plan 2016 (MALP), the Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD, and the Residential Design SPD. |
| 3. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for both the Mayor of London Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and the Havering Council's Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) . Based upon the information supplied with the application, the CIL payable would be a total £3,750.00. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
| 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, it was necessary to issue a decision as close to the statutory timeframe as possible as opposed to seeking amendments which would have significantly delayed the application. |
