| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The subdivided flats would provide insufficient space for future occupiers. The inadequate amenity proposed is demonstrated in part by the lack of useable living space and small room sizes: in comparison to the national guidance within the Technical Housing Standards: Nationally Described Space Standards document (2015), both new dwelling units are significantly below the suggested sizes. As such, the proposal would not provide sufficient amenity levels for future occupants and would create an oppressive environment, contrary to the expectations of policies A1 of the adopted Local Plan Part 2 and CS09 F from the adopted Core Strategy. |
| 2. | The bedroom to proposed Flat 4 is of insufficient size to provide adequate amenity for future residents. The usable floor space is reduced by the inclusion of the staircase which results in a cramped bedroom of a usable floor area below what is suggested in the Technical Housing Standards: Nationally Described Space Standards document (2015). As such, the application is contrary to the expectations of policies A1 of the adopted Local Plan Part 2 and CS09 F from the adopted Core Strategy. |
| 3. | The courtyards proposed for Flat 1 and Flat 4 are considered small but on balance, are considered an acceptable size for a single bedroomed flats given the proximity of alternative open space. However, due to the positioning of the courtyard to Flat 1 in particular the development will lead to unacceptable overlooking and loss of privacy. The courtyard to Flat 1 would have unobstructed views into the kitchen dining room of Flat 4 and subject Flat 4 to noise and other disturbance; this would result in an oppressive living environment for the occupants of Flat 4. Neither would the courtyard provide a suitable provision of undisturbed private amenity space for residents of Flat 1 which would be overlooked in return, which might also give rise to the users of the courtyard blocking the window and depriving light to
the adjoining habitable room of Flat 4. This is contrary to policy A1 from the adopted Local Plan Part 2 and core policy CS09 F from the adopted Core Strategy which seeks to provide high levels of amenity for future residents. |
| 4. | The main living area of Flat 1 would have its primary outlook to the east and this would be dominated by the flank wall of the neighbouring dwelling and the bin storage area. This would not provide a satisfactory level of amenity future residents and could provide an oppressive living environment due to odours arising from the bins and limited outlook. Furthermore, the position and size of the window and proximity to flanking walls may result in less than adequate levels of light reaching the interior of the only non-bedroom habitable room to the reduced-size Flat 1. These issues combine to result in an unacceptable level of amenity for future residents of the reduced-size Flat 1. This is contrary to policy A1 from the Local Plan Part 2 and core policy CS09 F from the adopted Core Strategy which seeks to provide high levels of amenity for all future residents. |
| 5. | STATEMENT OF POSITIVE ENGAGEMENT (REFUSALS): In accordance with the NPPF, in determining this application for planning permission, the Borough Council has approached it in a positive and proactive way and where possible has sought solutions to problems to achieve the aim of approving sustainable development. Unfortunately, despite this, in this particular case the development is not considered to represent sustainable or an acceptable form of development and has been refused for the reasons set out above. |
