| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would, by reason of its bulk, scale, massing and configuration, form an incoherent relation with its neighbouring buildings and by reason of its design create a blank and unattractive frontage to the street level, forming an visually intrusive development detrimental to the visual amenity of the streetscene and character and appearance of the surrounding area contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 2. | The proposed development, due to the lack of communal amenity space, inadequately sized balconies, single aspect units, poor outlook and aspect from lower floor habitable rooms would result in the provision of substandard residential accommodation detrimental to the amenity of prospective occupiers of the flats, contrary to Policy London Plan Policy 3.5 of London Plan and Policy DC 61 of LDF and the advice given in the adopted Residential Design Supplementary Planning Document 2010and the National Planning Policy Framework, which generally all aim to achieve a high standards of quality accommodation for the residents. |
| 3. | The proposed development, due to its position, height and scale would result in unacceptable loss of daylight, sunlight, outlook,sense of enclosure, loss of privacy and other amenities harmful to the existing occupiers of the Halyards Court and the existing and the future occupiers of the Holgate Court. The development, in terms of its impact on neighbouring amenity would contrary to policy DC61 of the LDF, the Residential Design SPD, and the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 4. | The proposed development fails to present an affordable housing scheme as is required for development proposals of 10 dwellings or more, in conflicts with the requirements of the London Plan Policies 3.11 and 3.12 and Policy DC6 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 5. | The proposal will result in the loss of existing parking spaces for the occupiers of Holgate Court and it fails to satisfactorily mitigate the parking impacts of the development on the surrounding highway network, contrary to the provisions of Policies DC2 and DC33 of the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 6. | The proposal fails to demonstrate that there is sufficient space on site to accommodate waste and cycle storage (for both the existing and the future occupiers of the flats in Holgate Court) which is a critical consideration given the scale of the proposed development. Due to the lack of information the proposal fails to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies. |
| 7. | In the absence of a legal agreement to prevent future occupants from applying for or obtaining a residents parking permit, the proposal fails to satisfactorily mitigate the parking impacts of the development, contrary to the provisions of Policies DC2 and DC33 of the Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 8. | 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 STATE WHO, HOW (EMAIL/PHONE/MEETING) AND WHEN. |
| 9. | 4. 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 £137,867. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
