| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The site is within the area identified in the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document as Metropolitan Green Belt. The LDF and Government Guidance as set out in the NPPF is that in order to achieve the purposes of the Metropolitan Green Belt it is essential to retain and protect the existing rural character of the area so allocated and that the new development will only be permitted outside the existing built up areas in the most exceptional circumstances. No special circumstances have been submitted in this case and the proposal is therefore contrary to Policy DC45 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document and the provisions of the NPPF. |
| 2. | The proposed development would, by reason of its size, design and appearance, result in unsympathetic, visually intrusive development. The harm to the heritage asset can be perceived as a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the area by undermining key views, the quality of built environment as well as the settlement plan form and the setting of key heritage assets within the locality contrary to Policies DC61 and DC67 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 3. | The proposed development would, by reason of its cramped internal layout, establish a property which fails to ensure the provision of adequate internal space to all bedrooms. This scheme would be detrimental to the living conditions and amenity of the property's future occupiers contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD, the Residential Design SPD and Policies 3.5 and 7.4 of the London Plan. |
| 4. | In the absence of a legal agreement to secure contributions towards the demand for school places arising from the development, the proposal fails to satisfactorily mitigate the infrastructure impact of the development, contrary to the provisions of Policies DC29 and DC72 of the Development Control Policies DPD and Policy 8.2 of the London Plan. |
| 5. | The planning obligations recommended in this report have been subject to the statutory tests set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 and the obligations are considered to have satisfied the following criteria:-
(a) Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;
(b) Directly related to the development; and
(c) Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. |
| 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 reason(s) for it was given to Mr Matthew Letten via email on 16/01/19. |
| 7. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for the Mayor of London Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Based upon the information supplied with the application, the CIL payable would be £2,640. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
