Planning Search

1)

Because of the lack of demolition details/drawings, the development fails to demonstrate that in the case of substantial harm or loss to the significance of a heritage asset, substantial public benefits that would outweigh that harm or loss would be provided by the development and; that the building or part(s) of the building to be demolished makes no positive contribution to the character or appearance of the area. This is thereby contrary to policy CL3 of the Local Plan plus guidance contained within the Ladbroke Conservation Area Appraisal which identifies the property as being a positive building within its historic towscape.

2)

The proposed development, because of its overall scale, prominent upper floor levels location and detailed design, would diminish an important historic towscape gap and would fail to reflect the architectural symmetry of the application site building and the terrace group of which forms part. For these reasons, the proposals would have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the Ladbroke Conservation Area which would neither be preserved nor enhanced as its result. The proposed development is thereby contrary to LP policies CL1, CL2, CL3, CL6, CL9 and CL11 accordingly.

3)

The proposed development fails to demonstrate to which extent if any, the proposed additions would adversely impact upon the living conditions of the occupiers/users of nearby properties in terms of reduced levels of sunlight and daylight and increased levels of sense of enclosure. The proposals are thereby contrary to Local Plan policy CL5.

4)

The proposed rear first floor level roof terrace area, because of its closely positioned location to the northern boundary of the site adjoining Peniel Chapel to the north, would detrimentally impact upon the occupiers/users of this property in terms of increased levels of overlooking, noise and disturbance, thereby contrary to LP policy CL5 accordingly.

5)

In the absence of an undertaking within a legal agreement to ensure that the net additional residential unit would be 'parking permit free', there is no mechanism to prevent the proposed net increased dwelling from adding pressure to the existing residents parking provision in the area and, consequently, the proposal fails to comply with Local Plan Policy CT1 plus the associated guidance contained within the 'Transport and Streets' SPD.

1)

Refused/No pre-app or discussion
To assist applicants in finding solutions to problems arising in relation to their development proposals the Local Planning Authority has produced planning policies, and provided written guidance, all of which are available on the Council's website. A pre-application advice service is also offered. In this case the proposal does not comply with guidance and policies. No pre-application discussions were entered into, but the Council is ready to enter into discussions with the applicants through the advice service to assist in the preparation of any new planning application.

2)

Relevant Policies Used
You are advised that this application was determined by the Local Planning authority with regard to Development Plan policies including relevant policies contained within the London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London adopted July 2011; the Core Strategy adopted 8 December 2010