Appeal 6000305

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the demolition of the existing car repair garage with a replacement building of 3 storeys, plus lower ground floor, comprising 7 self-contained residential units with associated cycle parking, refuse storage and amenity space at [site address] , [site address] , Finchley, Barnet, London [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref: 24/5159/FUL, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

Since the planning application was determined by the Council, the Council has adopted the Barnet Local Plan 2021-2036 (BLP). The BLP together with the London Plan (LP) now forms part of the development plan. It has replaced Barnet’s Local Plan ([name]) Development Plan Document (CS) and Barnet’s Local Plan (Development Management Policies) Development Plan Document (DMP). The main parties have had the opportunity to comment on the relevant policies of the BLP through the appeal process. Planning decisions must be based on the development plan policies prevailing at the time of determination. I have proceeded on that basis.

Both refusal reasons 2 and 3 involve trees on neighbouring land. Following the determination of the planning application, the trees were removed. The Council has confirmed in its statement of case that it therefore withdraws refusal reasons 2 and 3.

However, at appeal stage the Council advised that following the removal of the trees, it now has concerns regarding the ‘visual impact of the building,’ and ‘any resultant overlooking.’ Interested parties have also raised similar concerns. The Council previously did not raise concerns regarding these issues. Nonetheless, it is incumbent upon me as the competent authority to consider these points. It is therefore necessary to consider these matters as main issues. Both parties have had the opportunity to comment on this matter, and I have taken their comments into account in my decision.

The appeal has been accompanied by a signed unilateral undertaking (UU) pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). The UU relates to removing the dropped kerb and reinstating the footway, amongst other things. The UU is a matter I return to later in my decision.

The main issues are the effect of the proposed development on: • parking pressure and highway safety; • the character and appearance of the area; and • the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers with regard to privacy.

The appeal site has a public transport accessibility level (PTAL) score of 2, with 1 being lowest score, and 6 being the highest score in regard to provision of public transport. A maximum parking provision of 5.75 spaces would be required for the development, as set out by Policy T6.1 of the LP and Policy TRC03 of the BLP. Given these are maximum standards, I consider the requirement to be 5 spaces. The scheme would not provide any dedicated parking spaces.

Three parking surveys were undertaken, with the most recent one undertaken in March 2025. The surveys were undertaken on Mondays and Tuesdays between the hours of 00:30 and 05:30. Whilst this represents a snapshot in time, in my view, it is likely that this is when the majority of people would be at home. Although the results of the most recent survey are not presented independently, the average of all surveys is provided, illustrating the on-street parking capacity in the area.

Across the 3 surveys, on average there were [address] car parking spaces on [site address] , and an additional [address] spaces across the wider area, equating to a total of 38 spaces available in a 200-metre walking distance of the site.

Notably, in the survey carried out in March 2025, the operator of the site confirmed that 4 vehicles associated with the garage, awaiting pick up from customers, were parked on-street on [site address] . Details of these cars and their parking location are provided in the appellants submission.

The Council has queried this point, outlining how it was not picked up by the earlier surveys and there is no evidence to suggest that the garage permanently has a number of cars parked on [site address] , including overnight. However, the Council has not provided any substantive evidence to the contrary which disputes the information provided by the operator of the garage. Furthermore, given the use of the garage it would seem reasonable that there would often be cars associated with it parked on the road. As the proposed development would result in the closure of the existing garage and MOT test centre, vehicles associated with this use would no longer be present on [site address] , which would result in additional on street capacity and essentially off set four of the required parking spaces.

One additional parking space would also be provided as the existing access would be removed and the footway reinstated. These works could be ensured through a UU. This would further add to the overall provision of on street capacity, offsetting one of the required parking spaces for the development. Therefore, based on the evidence before me, the closure of the existing use and redevelopment of the site would create [address] car parking spaces. Adequate parking would therefore be provided on street without increasing parking demand or stress in the area.

In addition to the above, despite the sites PTAL score, the closest bus stops are located at [address] and [address], approximately 300 metres from the site. Three bus routes serve these stops, with a frequency of between 10 and 15 minutes. There is a local parade of shops 220 metres from the site, on [site address] , and [name] town centre is located 1.4km from the site offering a range of services and facilities. 3 primary schools are also located less than 500 metres from the site and there is a hospital close to the site. A total of 16 cycle parking spaces are proposed as part of the scheme. This would allow future occupiers to have appropriate opportunities to undertake journeys by active and sustainable transport modes.

Overall, based on the evidence before me, I am satisfied that the proposal would not result in unacceptable parking pressure and would not harm highway safety in this regard. There would be some conflict with Policy T6.1 of the LP and Policy TRC03 of the BLP in that the scheme would not provide the maximum parking standards. However, for the reasons outlined, I am satisfied that the scheme would broadly comply with the wider aims of Policies T4, T6.1 of the LP and Policy TRC03 of the BLP and that of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) of ensuring highway safety and promoting sustainable modes of transport.

The proposed scheme would result in the demolition of the existing car repair garage. It would be replaced with a three-storey building. As outlined in the case officer report, the building line would follow that of 66 [site address] , infill the bend and sit in line with 68 [site address] .

The proposed eaves and ridge height would be consistent with surrounding residential development. The proposed roof form would also help soften and reduce the overall visual bulk and mass of the building whilst the proposed design style and materials would relate well to surrounding development.

Prior to the removal of the trees to the rear of the site, the proposed building would have sat partially against the backdrop of trees. However, given their positioning to the rear of the site, they would not have screened the proposed development from the street scene along [site address] . When viewed from the street scene, the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area would remain largely the same, in comparison to when the trees were in situ.

As a result of the removal of the trees, the proposed development would be more prominent from the rear gardens of properties along [address], particularly [address]. However, for the reasons outlined above, the scale, form and design of the building would be in keeping with surrounding development. Given this, I am satisfied that it would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area.

I therefore conclude that the proposal would secure a high standard of design that would be compatible with, and respond positively to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The Council has not drawn my attention to any adopted policy regarding this matter. Nonetheless, for the reasons outlined above, I am satisfied that the scheme would be in accordance with the aims and provisions of the Framework which seeks to ensure that development is sympathetic to the local character of an area.

Paragraph 7.3 of Supplementary Planning Document- Residential Design Guidance (2016) (SPD) outlines how in new residential development there should be a minimum distance of about 21 metres between properties with facing windows to habitable rooms to avoid overlooking, and 10.5 metres to a neighbouring garden. It states that shorter distances may be acceptable between new build properties where there are material justifications.

The case officer report outlines how the first-floor rear elevation windows of Flat 5 and 6 would be designed with angled windows, allowing views of the rear gardens of properties along [name] at a relatively short distance of between 7.5 and 8 metres. It also outlined how the two rear elevation dormers of the second floor would overlook neighbouring gardens at a distance of between 6.4 and 8.2 metres. Whilst the report did accept that there would be some degree of overlooking, it concluded that the scheme would not prejudice the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers to such a degree that would warrant refusal, before concluding that the scheme was in accordance with policy in this regard.

The removal of the trees to the rear of the site increases the opportunities for overlooking between the proposed development and the properties along [address], particularly 25, 27 and [address]. The window on the rear elevation serving the kitchen/living area of flat 4 would however be obscurely glazed, as would the bedroom window and WC window on the rear elevation at flat

These measures would mitigate any loss of privacy to the properties along [address], from flat 4.

The second-floor window serving the stairwell of flat 7 would face the garden of [address] at a distance of less than 10.5 metres. However, this room is not a habitable room and therefore future occupiers would be unlikely to spend any prolonged periods of time in it, thereby mitigating any loss of privacy.

A dormer window would also serve the smaller bedroom in flat 7, facing the garden of [address] at a relatively short distance of less than 10.5 metres. However, the relationship would be similar to that between 68-78 [site address] and the properties along [address] to the rear. Given the local context, I am satisfied that this reduced distance would be acceptable.

Additionally, the separation distance between the proposed buildings and properties along [address] would be between 25 and 30 metres, preventing any unacceptable overlooking directly between the proposed windows and the existing windows on properties along [address].

Flat 4 and 7 would also incorporate balconies on the south side of the building. Privacy screens would be used to prevent any views of the neighbouring gardens along [address]. The case officer report similarly found that the proposed privacy screens would restrict views from neighbouring gardens.

A 1.8 metre high fence is proposed to the rear of part of the site. I am satisfied that it would prevent any overlooking from the ground floor rear elevation windows. There are no windows on the side elevation facing 68 [site address] . I am satisfied that the proposed development would ensure adequate levels of privacy for this property.

Given the above, I am satisfied that the proposed development would ensure adequate privacy to the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The Council has not drawn my attention to any adopted policy regarding this matter. Nonetheless, for the reasons outlined above, the scheme would be in accordance with the aims and provisions of the Framework which seeks to ensure a high standard of amenity for existing users.

I have had due regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) contained in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (Equality Act), which sets out the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation, and to advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it. The Equality Act sets out the relevant protected characteristics which includes age. In allowing the appeal, any increase in competition for on-street parking spaces throughout the construction of the development and following its completion could impact upon elderly residents by reason of them travelling further distances from their homes to the parking spaces available to them. However, it does not follow from the PSED that the appeal should fail. The magnitude of any adverse effects of the proposed development upon those with protected characteristics would be low and would not be sufficient to dismiss the appeal. Concerns are also raised regarding disabled residents not being able to part in front of their property, however in the absence of an allocated disabled parking space, an occupier does not have the right to park directly in front of their property.

Interested parties have raised concerns regarding noise pollution and the effect of the scheme on the quality of life for local residents. The Council however have not raised any concerns regarding noise pollution and there is no substantive evidence before me to demonstrate this point. As outlined above, I do not consider that the scheme would result in an unacceptable level of parking stress for local residents. I therefore do not consider that it would harm quality of life for local residents in this regard.

Given the separation distance and intervening property between the site and 59 [site address] , I am satisfied that the scheme would not result in an unacceptable loss of light to this property. In any case, a Daylight and Sunlight Assessment has been submitted to demonstrate that the proposed development would not adversely impact neighbouring residents, in terms of provision of daylight and sunlight to their windows and outdoor amenity spaces. The Council also raised no concerns regarding this matter.

Interested parties have also raised concerns regarding the amount of amenity space provided to serve the flats, stating that the scheme is a poor use of land. The Council however has not raised any concerns regarding these points, and I see no reason to disagree with this. The proposed units would comply with the Gross Internal Area standards and bedroom size standards.

There is no substantive evidence before me to indicate that the scheme would result in anti-social behaviour, crime or effect the security of neighbouring properties. The Council has not raised any concerns associated with the loss of the garage. There is limited evidence to demonstrate that the scheme would put unacceptable pressure on local services. The evidence indicates that the local community and any relevant consultees have been consulted appropriately.

The trees along the shared boundary of the site, with [address] have been removed. The evidence indicates that these were not under the control of the appellant. There are a number of trees towards the southern tip of the site, however, should the appeal be allowed a planning condition to ensure their protection through construction could be used.

Demolition and construction may cause some disruption, but it would be short-term in nature and not significant enough to withhold permission. If the appeal were to be allowed, a condition to control hours of construction could be used. A condition requiring the submission of details of the measures to be undertaken to control the emission of dust, noise and vibration could also be used. There is no evidence before me to suggest that pests or odours would increase as a result of the scheme. The Council also consider the proposed refuse store to be acceptable.

The Ecology Officer sets out that the landscape proposal would need to be amended to remove reference to the proposed hedgerow, to ensure the scheme matches the submitted [name] and the [name] report. If the appeal were to be allowed, a condition requiring the submission of details of hard and soft landscaping scheme could be used to address this.

A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) was carried out and deemed the site to be of low suitable for bats for use for roosting, commuting and foraging. It also found no evidence of nesting birds on the site walkover. Given the results of this report, it was not deemed necessary to carry out any additional specific ecological surveys. A condition could be used if the appeal were to be allowed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures set out in the PEA.

Concerns are raised regarding the effect of the proposed development on local property values. However, I am mindful of the advice set out in the Planning Practice Guidance which sets out that planning is concerned with land use in the public interest, so that the protection of purely private interests such as the impact of a development on the value of a neighbouring property could not be a material consideration.

The appellant has submitted a [name] (UU) at appeal stage. The Council and any interested parties have had the opportunity to comment on this through the appeal process. The UU references the wrong planning application number on the final page. However it is referenced correctly on the first page, and the site is clearly shown on a map in the UU. It is therefore clear that the agreement relates to the site.

The UU would ensure commitment to enter into an agreement with the Highways Authority over the highway works related to removing the dropped kerb and reinstating the footway, marking out of the car club space and funding the car club membership for each of the units for a period of 3 years, a [name] contribution and an amendment to the traffic management order (TRO) to prevent future occupiers from applying for a parking permit.

Paragraph 58 of the Framework and Regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations sets out three tests that planning obligations must meet. Firstly, they must be necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms. Secondly, they must be directly related to the development. Thirdly, they must be fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

However, as outlined above, I do not consider that the development would result in unacceptable parking pressure. The obligations regarding the car club space and membership are therefore not necessary. I also do not consider the CPZ contribution or amendment to the TRO to prevent further occupiers from applying for a parking permit, should a CPZ be introduced, to be necessary. In any case, the Council have outlined how there is no indication that a CPZ would be feasible or acceptable in this area. Accordingly, these measures would not meet the tests for planning obligations set out in regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations and Paragraph 58 of the Framework.

In contrast, an agreement with the Highways Authority to ensure highway works to remove the dropped kerb and reinstate the footway would however be necessary to make the development acceptable, as explained above. It would also be directly related to the development and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to it, in compliance with the tests set out in regulation 122 of the CIL Regulations and Paragraph 58 of the Framework.

The Council has suggested a number of conditions which I have considered in light of the advice in the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. Where appropriate, I have adjusted the wording of the conditions in the interests of precision and enforceability.

In addition to the standard time condition (1), I have imposed a condition requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of certainty (2). I have also added a materials condition to ensure a satisfactory appearance and to safeguard the character of the area (3).

A pre-commencement condition requiring the submission of levels of buildings, roads and footpaths is used to safeguard the character and appearance of the area and amenities of future occupiers and neighbouring residents (4). A pre-commencement condition requiring the submission of a construction and demolition management plan is necessary to maintain highway and pedestrian safety and safeguard the living conditions of nearby residents (5).

A pre-commencement condition is used to ensure the submission of a tree protection plan and method statement for the existing trees on site in the interests of the visual amenity of the area (6). A pre-commencement condition requiring the submission of details of services in relation to trees on and adjacent to the site is necessary to safeguard the health of existing trees (7). A pre-commencement condition requiring assessment of the risks posed by any contamination is necessary to ensure environmental and public safety (8). Given the development is flatted, a sound insulation condition is necessary to protect the living conditions of neighbouring and future occupants (9).

A condition to ensure submission of a hard and soft landscaping scheme, including the green roof, is used to ensure the development contributes to biodiversity and enhances the appearance of the development (10). Condition 17, as suggested by the Council, has been combined with this condition.

Conditions are also necessary to ensure the development efficiently uses water and meets carbon emission reduction requirements (11) and (12). A condition is used to ensure cycle parking is provided prior to first occupation of the development, in the interests of promoting sustainable modes of transport (13). To ensure air quality and reduce greenhouse gases, a preoccupation condition requiring the submission of details of the boilers to be installed is used (14).

A condition to ensure the submission of details of a biodiversity enhancement plan prior to the first occupation of the development is used to enhance the biodiversity value of the site (15). Details of a [name] are also required to ensure that any protected species present are not adversely affected by the development (16).

A condition requiring the submission of [name] has been attached (17). This is necessary to protect the living conditions of future and neighbouring occupiers. A condition to ensure the recommendations set out in the Flood Risk Assessment is used to ensure that the proposed development is safe from flooding (18).

To ensure that refuse storage provision is adequate and accessible, a condition requiring details of refuse storage and collection is necessary prior to occupation (19). A condition prior to occupation is also necessary to require details of privacy screens to ensure a satisfactory appearance and to protect the living conditions of both future and neighbouring occupiers (20). A condition is also necessary to ensure the windows on the first floor marked as being obscurely glazed, are glazed with obscure glass prior to first occupation of the development, to protect the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers (21).

A condition to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures set out in the PEA is used to ensure that wildlife is not harmed through construction (22). To meet the changing needs of future occupants a pre-occupation condition requiring that the proposed dwellings are accessible and adaptable is required (23). A condition restricting the construction hours is required in the interests of living conditions of neighbouring residents (24). A condition ensuring the units are used solely as Class C3a) dwellings is necessary to ensure that control is maintained over any potential intensification of the site, in the interests of the character and appearance of the area (25).

A condition restricting access to the roof of the extension is required to protect the living conditions of nearby residents (26). Finally, a condition is used to ensure that [name] complies with specific emission standards in the interests of air quality (27).

I have not attached the suggested condition relating to the removal of various permitted development rights, as listed in suggested condition 23, as I am not satisfied that it has been demonstrated that there is clear justification for such a

For the reasons given above, and having regard to all other matters, I conclude that the development would comply with the development plan and the Framework. The appeal is therefore allowed.

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Proposed Site Plan (Drawing no. PA-633-150 [name]) [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-200 [name]) Proposed Ground Floor Plan (Drawing no. PA-633-201 [name]) [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-202 [name]) [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-203 [name]) Proposed Roof Plan (Drawing no. PA-633-205 [name]) [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-210 [name]) [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-211 [name]) [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-212 [name]) [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-213 [name]) [name] - [address] (Drawing no. PA-633-214 [name]) Proposed Section AA (Drawing no. PA-633-300 [name]) Proposed Section BB (Drawing no. PA - 633-301 [name]) Proposed Landscaping Plan PA-633-PLP-LGL Proposed Landscaping Plan PA-633-[name]-633-PLP-A Planning Statement ([name], Nov 2024) Design & [name] ([name], Nov 2024) [name] ([name], Nov 2024) [name] (i-[name]: NM/DW/ITL19706-002A, Date: 19 November 2024) [name] & Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment (Ref 0854_04, Nov 2024) Phase 1 Geo Environmental Desk Study Report (Ref 1716/DS, Nov 2024) Internal Daylight Assessment (T16 Design, [name]: 5932, November 2024, Issue No 4) Daylight and Sunlight Assessment (T16 Design, [name]: 6003, November 2024, Issue No 1) Flood Risk Assessment (Flo Consult UK Ltd, Ref 1091, November 2024, [name]) Tree Constraints Plan (Drawing no. 12302 TCP 01) Tree Schedule Ref: 12302 TS 01

No development (other than demolition and below ground works) shall take place until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

No development shall take place until details of the levels of the building(s), road(s) and footpath(s) in relation to the adjoining land and highway and any other changes proposed in the levels of the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the details as approved under this condition and retained as such thereafter.

No development shall take place until a Demolition and [name] and Logistics Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall include the following: i. details of the routing of construction vehicles to the site, hours of access, access and egress arrangements within the site and security procedures; ii. site preparation and construction stages of the development; iii. details of provisions for recycling of materials, the provision on site of a storage/delivery area for all plant, site huts, site facilities and materials; iv. details of wheel washing; v. the methods to be used and the measures to be undertaken to control the emission of dust, noise and vibration arising from demolition and construction works; vi. a suitable and efficient means of suppressing dust, including the adequate containment of stored or accumulated material so as to prevent it becoming airborne at any time and giving rise to nuisance; vii. noise mitigation measures for all plant and processors; viii. details of car parking arrangements for the duration of demolition and construction; ix. details of a community liaison contact for the duration of all works associated with the development. The approved Demolition and [name] and Logistics Plan shall be adhered to throughout the demolition and construction period for the development.

No development shall take place until a tree protection plan and a method statement detailing precautions to minimise damage to trees in accordance with Section 6.1 of [name] BS5837: 2012 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No development shall take place until the temporary tree protection shown on the tree protection plan approved under this condition has been erected around existing trees on site. This protection shall remain in position until after the development works are completed and no material or soil shall be stored within these fenced areas at any time. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the protection plan and method statement as approved under this condition.

No development (other than demolition works) shall take place until details of the location, extent and depth of all excavations for services (including but not limited to electricity, gas, water, drainage and telecommunications) in relation to trees on and adjacent to the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with details approved under this condition.

No development shall take place until an assessment of the risks posed by any contamination, carried out in accordance with [name] 10175: Investigation of potentially contaminated sites - Code of Practice and the Environment Agency‚ [name] (LCRM) (or equivalent [name] and [name] if replaced), has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. If any contamination is found, no development shall take place until: i. a report specifying the measures to be taken, including the timescale, to remediate the site to render it suitable for the development hereby permitted has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority; ii. the site has been remediated in accordance with the approved measures and timescale; and iii. a verification report has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. If, during the course of development, any contamination is found which has not been previously identified, work shall be suspended until: i. additional measures for the remediation of the site have been carried out in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority; and ii. a verification report for all the remediation works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

No development (other than demolition and below ground works) shall take place until details of mitigation measures to show how the development will be constructed so as to provide sufficient air borne and structure borne sound insulation against internally and externally generated noise and vibration has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This sound insulation shall ensure that the levels of noise; as measured within habitable rooms of the development shall be no higher than 35dB(A) from 7am to 11pm and 30dB(A) in bedrooms from 11pm to 7am. The report shall include all calculations and baseline data, and be set out so that the Local Planning Authority can fully audit the report and critically analyse the content and

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved, a scheme of hard and soft landscaping, including the green roof, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall include details of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, identify those to be retained and set out measures for their protection throughout the course of development. All work comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall be carried out before the end of the first planting and seeding season following occupation of any part of the buildings or completion of the development, whichever is sooner, or commencement of the use. Any existing tree shown to be retained or trees or shrubs to be planted as part of the approved landscaping scheme which are removed, die, become severely damaged or diseased within five years of the completion of development shall be replaced with trees or shrubs of appropriate size and species in the next planting season.

Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, they shall all have been constructed to have 100% of the wholesome water supplied to them by the mains water infrastructure provided through a water meter and comply with the Building Regulations optional requirement of a water consumption rate of no more than 110 litres per person per day. Any use of grey water and/or rain water systems needs to be separate from the potable (wholesome) water system and needs to meet the requirements and guidance set out in [name] of the Building Regulations. The dwellings shall be maintained as such in perpetuity thereafter.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved, it shall be constructed incorporating carbon dioxide emission reduction measures which achieve an improvement of not less than 10% in carbon dioxide emissions when compared to a building constructed to comply with the minimum [name] requirements of the 2010 Building Regulations. The development shall be maintained as such in perpetuity thereafter.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved, a minimum of 14 (long stay) cycle parking spaces in accordance with the London Plan Cycle Parking Standards and [name] shall be provided and shall not be used for any purpose other than parking of cycles in connection with the approved development.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved, details of the boilers to be installed shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. The boilers shall have dry NOx emissions not exceeding 40 mg/kWh (0%),and shall be installed in full accordance with the details approved.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved, the details of the Biodiversity Enhancement Plan shall be submitted and approved by the local planning authority. The document shall contain the location, height, orientation, specification of all ecological enhancement feature including 2 x integrated bat roost box (Woodstone or similar alternative); 1 x swift brick nest box; and 1 x [address] [name]; to be installed on the building and/or trees nearby as in line with guidance 'Designing for [name] technical guide for new and existing buildings (RIBA)'.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved, details of a [name] shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. Any artificial lighting scheme designed for development including off street lighting, shall be in accordance with Bats Conservation Trust Guidance Note 08/23 Bats and artificial lighting in the [name] and the [name] series.

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, copies of [name] shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, confirming compliance with [name] of the Building Regulations 2010 (or any subsequent amendment in force at the time of implementation of the permission).

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, the recommendations set out within the Flood Risk Assessment (Flo Consult UK Ltd, Ref 1091, November 2024, [name]) shall be implemented and shall be maintained/ adhered to as such in perpetuity thereafter.

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, details of enclosures for the storage of recycling containers and wheeled refuse bins, together with a satisfactory point of collection shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in full accordance with the details as approved under this condition prior to the first occupation and retained as such thereafter.

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, details of privacy screens to be installed for the balconies shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The screens shall be installed in accordance with the details as approved under this condition prior to the first occupation and retained as such thereafter.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted, the proposed window(s) identified as ‘obscured’ in the first-floor rear elevation, as shown on the [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-202 [name]) shall be glazed with obscure glass only and shall be permanently retained as such thereafter and shall be permanently fixed shut with only a fanlight opening

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation and compensation measures set out in ‘[name] & Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment’ at 79 [site address] by [name], dated November 2024.’

The dwellings hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the relevant criteria of Part M4(2) of Schedule 1 to the Building Regulations 2010 for accessibility and adaptability have been complied with.

No construction work resulting from the planning permission shall be carried out on the premises at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays, before 8.00 am, or before 8.00 am or after 6.00pm pm on other days.

The units shall be used as self-contained units as shown in the hereby approved drawings under Class C3(a) and no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class C3 or C4 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning ([name]) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order, with or without modification).

Aside from the outdoor amenity terraces shown on the [name] (Drawing no. PA-633-202 [name]) and [name] (Drawing no. PA-633- 203 [name]), the roof of the development hereby permitted shall only be used in connection with the repair and maintenance of the building and shall at no time be converted to or used as a balcony, roof garden or similar amenity or sitting out area.

[name] (NRMM) of net power of 37kW and up to and including 560kW used during the course of the demolition, site preparation and construction phases shall comply with the emission standards set out in chapter 7 of the Mayor of London’s supplementary planning guidance "Control of Dust and [name] and Demolition" dated July 2014 (SPG), or subsequent guidance. Unless it complies with the standards set out in the SPG, no NRMM shall be on site, at any time, whether in use or not, without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. The developer shall keep an up to date list of all NRMM used during the demolition, site preparation and construction phases of the development on the online register at https://nrmm.london/. **END OF SCHEDULE**