Planning application · Barnet
21/0956/FUL.
140 - 146 Brent Street London NW4 2DR
Full / Other Planning at 140 - 146 Brent Street London NW4 2DR, received 22 Feb 2021 — refused on 29 Sep 2021 (delegated, Will Collier).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationBarnet profile →
Refused
Outcome
29 Sep 2021
31 wks
Decision time
23 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
7
Documents
7 linked
0
Objections
1 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Barnet planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Addition of a third storey to create 3no self-contained flats
Reference
21/0956/FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
22 Feb 2021
Validated
24 Feb 2021
Target date
21 Apr 2021
Decision date
29 Sep 2021
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
21/0956/FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
22 Feb 2021
Validated
24 Feb 2021
Target date
21 Apr 2021
Decision date
29 Sep 2021
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Barnet portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 29 Sep 2021, delegated decision by Will Collier — 31 weeks from submission (23 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
22 Feb 2021
Application received
24 Feb 2021
Application validated
21 Apr 2021
Statutory target date
29 Sep 2021
Delegated decision: Refused · Will Collier
22 Feb 2021
Application received
24 Feb 2021
Application validated
21 Apr 2021
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
29 Sep 2021
Delegated decision: Refused · Will Collier
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposal, by reason of the roof design with shallow pitched roof set well below
a parapet, would result in a roof form that would not respect the character of the
original buildings and have a detrimental impact on the character of the area,
departing from the common roof form of visible pitched roofs in the parade and thus
appearing incongruous in the parade, exacerbated by an abrupt drop in height
where it adjoins neighbouring buildings to the south. The proposal is therefore
contrary to policies CS1 and CS5 of Barnet's Adopted Core Strategy (2012), policy
DM01 of the Adopted Development Management Policies DPD (2012) and the
Adopted Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).
2
The proposal fails to provide sufficient off-street parking for the additional residential
units. Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that any overspill
parking can be accommodated on the public highway without adversely affecting
the free flow of traffic and pedestrian and highway safety, contrary to Policy DM17
of the Development Management Policies DPD (adopted September 2012) and
Policies T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan 2021.
1
The proposal, by reason of the roof design with shallow pitched roof set well below
a parapet, would result in a roof form that would not respect the character of the
original buildings and have a detrimental impact on the character of the area,
departing from the common roof form of visible pitched roofs in the parade and thus
appearing incongruous in the parade, exacerbated by an abrupt drop in height
where it adjoins neighbouring buildings to the south. The proposal is therefore
contrary to policies CS1 and CS5 of Barnet's Adopted Core Strategy (2012), policy
DM01 of the Adopted Development Management Policies DPD (2012) and the
Adopted Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).
2
The proposal fails to provide sufficient off-street parking for the additional residential
units. Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that any overspill
parking can be accommodated on the public highway without adversely affecting
the free flow of traffic and pedestrian and highway safety, contrary to Policy DM17
of the Development Management Policies DPD (adopted September 2012) and
Policies T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan 2021.
Policies cited
CS1CS5DM01DM17T6T6.1
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
1
Total comments
1
Objections
0
In support
1
Total comments
1
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.