| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | Flat 2 in particular by virtue of its contrived layout results in insufficient space for future occupiers. Of particular concern is the cramped sizes of the bedrooms which would provide an oppressive environment for residents - this is exacerbated further by the roof slope minimising headroom and useable space. The inadequate amenity proposed is demonstrated in part by the lack of useable living space: in comparison to the national guidance within the Technical Housing Standards: Nationally Described Space Standards document (2015), the two-bedroom flat within Flat 2 is notably smaller than the desired space standards. As such, the proposal would not provide sufficient amenity levels for future occupants and provides inadequate amenity for future residents, contrary to the expectations of policies A1 of the adopted Local Plan Part 2 and CS09 F from the adopted Core Strategy. |
| 2. | Inadequate details have been provided to demonstrate that the bin storage location is proposed in a suitable position and it has not been demonstrated that the is sufficient space, ventilation, security and ease of collection for storage of refuse from three dwellings, nor that there is appropriate space to accommodate the additional bins required - this is contrary to policy A2 F which seeks convenient and discrete bin storage. Moreover, it has not been demonstrated that the area is well ventilated and as such bin storage in this location could cause undesirable odour which would be detrimental to the amenity of residents living in the flats above - contrary to policy A1 of the adopted Local Plan Part 2. |
| 3. | The application is located within the Orange 400m to 2.5km Indicative Habitat Impact Zone but there has not been a Shadow Habitats Regulations Assessment or financial contribution provided as part of this application, which are necessary for the purposes of satisfying the Council's Green Infrastructure Recreational Avoidance Mitigation Strategy (GIRAMS). As such the Local Planning Authority cannot fully assess the additional impact upon the designated sites within the Borough, nor does the development secure the appropriate mitigation. Consequently, the application is contrary to Core Policy CS11 from the Core Strategy and Local Plan Part 2 Policy GSP5 which seek to avoid or mitigate the cumulative potential adverse impacts to designated sites arising from development. |
| 4. | The proposal does not address the public open space demands of the development, whether by on-site provision or through means to secure financial contributions towards off-site provision, as required by adopted policy H4. It has not been demonstrated that it is otherwise unviable to do so, nor that there is a surplus of open space within the ward rendering the requirement unnecessary. As such, the impacts of the development and the pressures the development places on public open spaces have not been mitigated and the proposal is contrary to policy H4 and the application fails to comply with policies CS14 (Securing appropriate contributions from new Developments), CS15 (Providing and protecting community assets and green infrastructure) and GSP8 (Planning Obligations) of the adopted Local Plan Part 2. |
| 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. |
