| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed front alterations (box-like bay window feature and dominant pitch roof front porch) by reason of their design, bulk and scale would unacceptably compromise the architectural composition/feature of the building and would appear dominant, incongruous and visually intrusive in the street scene 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 of the London Plan. |
| 2. | The proposed enlarged rear dormer window, by reason of its bulk, massing and proximity to the eaves would occupy an unacceptably large area of the rear roof slope, forming a dominant and visually intrusive feature, detrimental to the character and appearance of the property and materially harmful to the visual amenity of the surrounding area 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 of the London Plan. |
| 3. | The proposed outbuilding would, by reason of its width, height, scale, bulk and mass, appear as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature in the rear garden environment and streetscene (Stoke Road), harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area 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 of the London Plan. |
| 4. | The development in the form of the front boundary wall and railings to be retained, would by reason of its design, height and position close to the property boundary form an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature, harmful to the appearance of the street scene and detracting from the open character of the surrounding area, contrary to the London Borough of Havering Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document 2011 and Policy DC61 of London Borough of Havering LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Plan Document 2008. |
| 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, it was necessary to issue a decision as close to the statutory timeframe as possible as opposed to seeking amendments which would have significantly delayed the application. |
