| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development, by reason of its scale, bulk, layout and industrial/logistics typology, would result in an inward-facing form of development that fails to respond appropriately to the site's sensitive, mixed-use context or its role within the wider Romford Strategic Development Area. The scheme would create extensive inactive frontages, poor integration with surrounding residential uses, and limited permeability. The proposal would have a negative impact on the character of the existing area. As such, the proposal fails to demonstrate a design-led approach and would not function well or contribute positively to the quality of the area.
The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), in particular paragraphs 131 and 135, which emphasise the importance of achieving high quality, well-designed places, and paragraph 139, which states that development that is not well designed should be refused; London Plan Policies D1, D3 and D4, which require development to respond positively to local context and deliver high quality design; and Havering Local Plan Policies 1 and 26, which seek well-integrated development that responds appropriately to local character and provides active frontages and high-quality public realm. The submitted proposal does not comply with ambitions set out in the Romford Town Centre Masterplan SPD, including chapter 6.11, as the proposal would fail to activate surrounding streets and integrate sensitively with the surrounding context. The proposal does not comply with guidance set out in the LB Havering Character Study and the National Design Guide. |
| 2. | The proposed development would generate a significant increase in vehicle movements, including servicing and HGV activity, on a highway network that is already subject to congestion and operational pressure. The application is not supported by robust or sufficient transport evidence to demonstrate that the impacts of the development on the surrounding highway network can be appropriately assessed or mitigated.
In the absence of adequate and validated transport modelling and mitigation, the Local Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the development would not result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety or severe residual cumulative impacts on the road network.
The proposal is therefore contrary to paragraph 115 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024); London Plan Policies T1, T2 and T4, which require development to promote sustainable transport and appropriately assess and address transport impacts; and Havering Local Plan Policies 23 and 24, which seek to ensure safe and suitable access and appropriate integration with the transport network. |
| 3. | The proposed development provides an excessive level of car parking which significantly exceeds that required to support the development having regard to its scale, use and accessibility. The applicant has failed to robustly justify the quantum of parking proposed, particularly in the context of the site's accessible location within the Romford Opportunity Area and its proximity to public transport and services. The over-provision of parking would be likely to encourage car-dependent travel, undermine the achievement of sustainable mode share, and conflict with the objectives of reducing reliance on private vehicles.
The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), in particular paragraph 115 which requires that development should not give rise to unacceptable impacts on the transport network, and paragraph 108 which seeks to promote sustainable transport choices. The proposal also conflicts with London Plan (2021) Policies T1 (Strategic approach to transport), T2 (Healthy Streets) and T6 (Car parking), which require development to minimise parking provision and prioritise walking, cycling and public transport. Furthermore, the proposal is contrary to Havering Local Plan Policies 23 (Transport Connections) and 24 (Parking Provision), which seek to ensure that development supports sustainable and integrated transport outcomes and provides parking at appropriate and justified levels. |
| 4. | In the absence of a completed planning obligation, the proposed development fails to secure appropriate mitigation and measures necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms. This includes, but is not limited to, contributions towards local employment and training initiatives, and the provision of affordable workspace, carbon offset, Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), sustainable (Active) travel, and public realm having regard to the nature of the proposed commercial development and the need to support inclusive economic growth.
The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), which requires that planning obligations are secured where necessary to make development acceptable; London Plan Policies E2, E11 and DF1, which support affordable workspace, employment opportunities and the use of planning obligations; and Havering Local Plan Policy 12, which supports the delivery of inclusive communities and local employment opportunities. |
| 5. | 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 the agent on 7th May 2026. |
