| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would, by reason of its scale and bulk, taking into account the cumulative impact of the existing extensions, result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building and therefore, would be inappropriate in principle within the Green Belt. No special circumstances have been submitted in this case to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and the other harm identified. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies CP14 and DC45 of the adopted LDF Development Control Policies Development Plan Document, Policy 7.16 of the London Plan 2016 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. |
| 2. | The proposed development would, by reason of its scale, bulk and mass, result in material harm to the character and openness of the Metropolitan Green Belt and appearance of the surrounding area, taking into account the cumulative impact of the existing extensions. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies DC61, CP14 and DC45 of the adopted LDF Development Control Policies Development Plan Document, Policy 7.16 of the London Plan 2016 and the provisions of National Planning Policy Framework 2019. |
| 3. | The proposed partial hip to gable roof alteration including rear dormer would by reason of their scale, bulk, mass and unsympathetic design, unbalance the appearance of the pair of semi-detached properties and appear as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature in the street scene and rear garden harmful to the appearance of the site and 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. | 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 Shairaz Yasin via email on 21/07/2020. |
