| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed developments, by reason of the first floor side extension's limited set back from the front of the host dwelling and partly gabled roof form, would not be surbordinate to the host dwelling and unbalance the pair of semi-detached properties at roof level through causing a loss of symmetry. Accordingly, the proposals are considered to be of a poor quality design and contrary to the purposes and intent of Local Plan Policies 7 and 26, Policy D4 of the London Plan and the Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document. |
| 2. | The proposed developments, by reason of the depth and inappropriate flat roof form of the rear extension at first floor level, would appear as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature within the rear garden scene that relates poorly to the existing property and thus harm the character and appearance of both the host dwelling and surrounding area, contrary to Local Plan Policies 7 and 26, Policy D4 of the London Plan and the Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document. |
| 3. | The proposed developments, by reason of the depth of the rear aspect of the extensions at both ground and first floor and their proximity to the shared attached boundary with no. 48 Plumpton Avenue, would appear as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature from within the rear garden environment of this neighbouring property that would have an overbearing impact on their amenity, contrary to Local Plan Policy 7 and the Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document. |
| 4. | The proposed outbuilding, by reason of its scale, footprint, height and proximity to the shared boundaries of the site, would appear as a dominant, incongruous and visually intrusive feature in the rear garden environment and therefore would be harmful to the character and appearance of the rear garden scene and visual amenity of the neighbouring occupiers at no. 48 Plumpton Avenue from within their rear garden environment, contrary to Local Plan Policies 7 and 26 of the Local Plan, Policy D4 of the London Plan and the Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document. |
| 5. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for the Mayor of London and Havering Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Based upon the information supplied with the application, the Mayoral CIL payable would be £3,625 based on the calculation of £25.00 per square metre and the Havering Community Infrastructure Levy (HCIL) would be a charge of £18,125 based on calculation of £125 per square metre. Each would be subject to indexation.
Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
| 6. | 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 reasons for it was given to the agent via email on 11/03/2026. |
