| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed first floor rear extension would, by reason of its scale, bulk, mass and cramped appearance, appears as an unacceptably dominant and visually intrusive feature in the streetscene harmful to the appearance of the surrounding area contrary to Policy DC61 and DC69 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD, Emerson Park Policy Area and Residential Extensions and Alterations SPDs. |
| 2. | The first floor side extension would, by reason of its position and proximity to neighbouring properties cause perceived overlooking and loss of privacy which would have a serious and adverse effect on the living conditions of adjacent occupiers, contrary to Policy DC61 and DC69 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD. |
| 3. | The proposed first floor side extension would, by reason of its height and position close to the boundaries of the site, be an intrusive and unneighbourly development as well as having an adverse effect on the amenities and outlook of the adjacent occupiers at No.2 Rockchase Gardens contrary to Policy DC61 and DC69 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD. |
| 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 Mr Mathew (applicant/agent) by e-mail on 04/04/18. |
