| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed extensions would, by reason of its bulk and mass, appear as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature in the gardenscene harmful to the appearance of the site and surrounding area and harming the Garden Suburb character of the Conservation Area . By reason of its design and appearance especially at the rear and loss of the hedge to the front, the proposal is considered to be an unsympathetic form of development within the Conservation Area, failing to preserve or enhance the special character of this part of the Gidea Park Conservation Area contrary to the NPPF 2021, London Plan Policy HC1, Core Strategy Development Control Policies Development Plan Document Policies 7, 26, 27 and 28 and the Heritage Supplementary Planning Document. |
| 2. | The proposed development would give rise to development encroaching to the open rear of the site which by reason of its bulk, scale, roof design and position close to the boundaries of the site, appear unduly dominant, visually intrusive and overbearing in the rear garden environment harmful to the amenity of neighbouring properties and their rear gardens including loss of light and outlook particularly those to the east of the site. Further, the proposed balconies result in undue loss of privacy, harmful to residential amenity. In these respects, the proposal would be contrary to Policy 7 of the Local Plan 2021. |
| 3. | In absence of details regarding the archaeological impact of the proposals on the archaeological interest surrounding the site, it would not be possible to adequately assess the effect of the proposals on the archaeological interest and their implications on the Gidea Hall and the Fish Pond, therefore the proposals would be contrary to the NPPF 2021 and Policy HC1 of the London Plan 2021. |
| 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, notification of intended refusal and the reason(s) for it was given to Mr. Gary Cumberland via email on 31st October 2021. |
