Planning application · Barnet
23/0952/FUL.
Full / Other Planning at 4 Langley Park London NW7 2AA, received 6 Mar 2023 — refused on 17 Nov 2023 (delegated, Jade Gillespie).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationBarnet profile →
Refused
Outcome
17 Nov 2023
37 wks
Decision time
29 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
36
Documents
36 linked
—
Objections
not captured
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?
Conversion of existing 2no. self-contained flats into 3no. self-contained flats, including first floor rear extension, first floor side extension with associated hip to gable roof extension, rear dormer window and 2no. rooflights to front roofslope. Associated amenity space, refuse storage and cycle parking
Reference
23/0952/FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
NW7 2AA
Ward
Council
Received
6 Mar 2023
Validated
23 Mar 2023
Target date
18 May 2023
Decision date
17 Nov 2023
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
23/0952/FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
NW7 2AA
Ward
Council
Received
6 Mar 2023
Validated
23 Mar 2023
Target date
18 May 2023
Decision date
17 Nov 2023
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 17 Nov 2023, delegated decision by Jade Gillespie — 37 weeks from submission (29 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
6 Mar 2023
Application received
23 Mar 2023
Application validated
18 May 2023
Statutory target date
17 Nov 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Jade Gillespie
6 Mar 2023
Application received
23 Mar 2023
Application validated
18 May 2023
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
17 Nov 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Jade Gillespie
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed first floor rear extension, first floor side extension, hip to gable roof
extension and rear dormer window extension by reason of their excessive scaling,
design and position would cumulatively result in an unduly dominating, prominent,
bulky and incongruous form of development to the detriment of the character and
appearance of the host property, the street scene and the surrounding area,
contrary to Policies CS NPPF, CS1 and CS5 of the Local Plan Core Strategy DPD
(2012), Policy DM01 of the Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD
(2012), the Residential Design Guidance (2016), and Policy D3 of the London Plan
(2021).
2
The proposed first floor rear extension would have a detrimental impact on the
amenity of No.2A, 2B and 2C Langley Park. Due to its excessive depth and close
proximity to the shared boundary, the first floor rear extension would appear
overbearing, cause overshadowing and create a sense of enclosure contrary to
Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CS1 and CS5 of the LB Barnet: Core
Strategy (2012), Policy DM01 of the LB Barnet: Development Management Policies
DPD (2012) and the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (2016).
3
The proposed plans indicate that the scheme would result in poor room stacking
following the internal reconfiguration of Flat 2. The kitchen, dining and living areas
of Flat 2 would be located directly above bedroom 1 and bedroom 2 of Flat 1. Given
that kitchen, dining and living areas are primary living accommodation, it is
considered that Flat 2 could have the potential to cause noise disturbance to the
occupants of the bedrooms within Flat 1. This in turn would result in sub-standard
accommodation for the future occupiers of Flat A contrary to Core Strategy Policies
CS1 and CS5, Development Management Policies DM01 and DM02, the
Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016) and Sustainable Design and Construction
SPD (2016), and to advice in the National Planning Policy Framework and London
Plan (2021).
4
The future occupiers of Flat 2 and Flat 3 would experience a sub-standard form of
accommodation as the proposal fails to provide sufficient outdoor amenity space to
either of these flats, contrary to Core Strategy Policies CS1 and CS5, Development
Management Policies DM01 and DM02, the Residential Design Guidance SPD
(2016) and Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (2016), and to advice in the
National Planning Policy Framework and London Plan (2021).
1
The proposed first floor rear extension, first floor side extension, hip to gable roof
extension and rear dormer window extension by reason of their excessive scaling,
design and position would cumulatively result in an unduly dominating, prominent,
bulky and incongruous form of development to the detriment of the character and
appearance of the host property, the street scene and the surrounding area,
contrary to Policies CS NPPF, CS1 and CS5 of the Local Plan Core Strategy DPD
(2012), Policy DM01 of the Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD
(2012), the Residential Design Guidance (2016), and Policy D3 of the London Plan
(2021).
2
The proposed first floor rear extension would have a detrimental impact on the
amenity of No.2A, 2B and 2C Langley Park. Due to its excessive depth and close
proximity to the shared boundary, the first floor rear extension would appear
overbearing, cause overshadowing and create a sense of enclosure contrary to
Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CS1 and CS5 of the LB Barnet: Core
Strategy (2012), Policy DM01 of the LB Barnet: Development Management Policies
DPD (2012) and the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (2016).
3
The proposed plans indicate that the scheme would result in poor room stacking
following the internal reconfiguration of Flat 2. The kitchen, dining and living areas
of Flat 2 would be located directly above bedroom 1 and bedroom 2 of Flat 1. Given
that kitchen, dining and living areas are primary living accommodation, it is
considered that Flat 2 could have the potential to cause noise disturbance to the
occupants of the bedrooms within Flat 1. This in turn would result in sub-standard
accommodation for the future occupiers of Flat A contrary to Core Strategy Policies
CS1 and CS5, Development Management Policies DM01 and DM02, the
Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016) and Sustainable Design and Construction
SPD (2016), and to advice in the National Planning Policy Framework and London
Plan (2021).
Show all 4 rows
4
The future occupiers of Flat 2 and Flat 3 would experience a sub-standard form of
accommodation as the proposal fails to provide sufficient outdoor amenity space to
either of these flats, contrary to Core Strategy Policies CS1 and CS5, Development
Management Policies DM01 and DM02, the Residential Design Guidance SPD
(2016) and Sustainable Design and Construction SPD (2016), and to advice in the
National Planning Policy Framework and London Plan (2021).
Policies cited
CS1CS5DM01D3NPPF
Public response
Comment counts were not captured for this application.
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.