| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed extension would, by reason of its mass, bulk, height and close proximity to the common boundary with neighbour no.69 would have a detrimental impact to the character and appearance of the host property and the visual amenity of the streetscape. The proposals would be contrary to the NPPF, policies 7.4 and 7.6 of The London Plan, Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the Council's Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD 2011. |
| 2. | The proposed extension would, by reason of its mass, bulk, height and close proximity to the common boundary with neighbour no.69 would result in an increased sense of enclosure and an overbearing effect and would cause an adverse impact on the visual amenity enjoyed from the neighbouring property contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document, the Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document and Policy 7.4 and 7.6 of the London Plan. |
| 3. | 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 A Leborgne(agent) by email on 14/01/21. |
