Planning Atlas
Planning AtlasBarnetCricklewood ward22/0972/RCU
Planning application · Barnet

22/0972/RCU.

9 Ash Grove London NW2 3LJ

Full / Other Planning at 9 Ash Grove London NW2 3LJ, received 23 Feb 2022 — refused on 13 May 2022 (delegated, Refael Saffer).

BarnetCricklewoodNW2 3LJ22/0972/RCU
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationBarnet profile →
Refused
Outcome
13 May 2022
11 wks
Decision time
3 wks over the 8-week target
Conditions
not captured
13
Documents
13 linked
0
Objections
0 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?

Roof extension involving rear dormer window and 2no front facing rooflights (Retrospective Application)

Reference
22/0972/RCU
Type
Retention/Continued Use
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
NW2 3LJ
Council
Received
23 Feb 2022
Validated
17 Mar 2022
Target date
12 May 2022
Decision date
13 May 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Reference
22/0972/RCU
Type
Retention/Continued Use
Show all 16 rows
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
NW2 3LJ
Council
Received
23 Feb 2022
Validated
17 Mar 2022
Target date
12 May 2022
Decision date
13 May 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Documents

What was filed?

Document
Published
View
DELEGATED REPORT
16 May 2022
DN: REFUSE RCU
13 May 2022
REVISED EXISTING ELEVATIONS
26 Apr 2022
PHOTOS
21 Apr 2022
PRE EXISTING
17 Mar 2022
EXISTING
17 Mar 2022
EXISTING FLOOR PLANS/SECTION
17 Mar 2022
EXISTING
11 Mar 2022
EXISTING
11 Mar 2022
APPLICATION FORM REDACTED PDF
23 Feb 2022
DELEGATED REPORT
16 May 2022
DN: REFUSE RCU
13 May 2022
REVISED EXISTING ELEVATIONS
26 Apr 2022
Show all 10 rows
PHOTOS
21 Apr 2022
PRE EXISTING
17 Mar 2022
EXISTING
17 Mar 2022
EXISTING FLOOR PLANS/SECTION
17 Mar 2022
EXISTING
11 Mar 2022
EXISTING
11 Mar 2022
APPLICATION FORM REDACTED PDF
23 Feb 2022

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 13 May 2022, delegated decision by Refael Saffer — 11 weeks from submission (3 over the 8-week target).

Timeline

Date
Event
23 Feb 2022
Application received
17 Mar 2022
Application validated
12 May 2022
Statutory target date
13 May 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Refael Saffer
23 Feb 2022
Application received
17 Mar 2022
Application validated
12 May 2022
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
13 May 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Refael Saffer

Why it was refused

Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed roof extension by reason of its bulk, size, scale, massing and design results in an incongruous form of development which fails to appear subordinate, proportionate or sympathetic to the existing dwelling house to the detriment of the character and appearance of the host property and surrounding area. In this regard, the proposal is considered unacceptable and fails to comply with policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies DPD (2012), Policies CS1 and CS5 of the Barnet Core Strategy (2012) and the Barnet Adopted Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).
1
The proposed roof extension by reason of its bulk, size, scale, massing and design results in an incongruous form of development which fails to appear subordinate, proportionate or sympathetic to the existing dwelling house to the detriment of the character and appearance of the host property and surrounding area. In this regard, the proposal is considered unacceptable and fails to comply with policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies DPD (2012), Policies CS1 and CS5 of the Barnet Core Strategy (2012) and the Barnet Adopted Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016).
Policies cited
DM01CS1CS5

Public response

Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
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.