Planning application · Barnet
24/5616/FUL.
Power League Bobby Moore Way London N10 1ST
Full / Other Planning at Power League Bobby Moore Way London N10 1ST, received 23 Dec 2024 — refused on 26 Jun 2025 (delegated, Will Collier).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationBarnet profile →
Refused
Outcome
26 Jun 2025
26 wks
Decision time
18 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
13
Documents
13 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
Yes
Appeal
Dismissed
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?
Alterations to existing outdoor sports facility, including installation of enclosure boards, synthetic playing surface, canopies, lighting and associated works to facilitate use for padel tennis
Reference
24/5616/FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
23 Dec 2024
Validated
6 Jan 2025
Target date
3 Mar 2025
Decision date
26 Jun 2025
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
24/5616/FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
23 Dec 2024
Validated
6 Jan 2025
Target date
3 Mar 2025
Decision date
26 Jun 2025
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
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 26 Jun 2025, delegated decision by Will Collier — 26 weeks from submission (18 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
23 Dec 2024
Application received
6 Jan 2025
Application validated
3 Mar 2025
Statutory target date
26 Jun 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Will Collier
Appeal
Appeal Dismissed · Dismissed
23 Dec 2024
Application received
6 Jan 2025
Application validated
3 Mar 2025
Statutory target date
Show all 5 rows
26 Jun 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Will Collier
Appeal
Appeal Dismissed · Dismissed
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development and in particular the associated extensive perimeter
fencing and canopies, would fail to preserve the openness of the Metropolitan Open
Land and consequently constitutes as inappropriate development. Furthermore,
collectively the proposal would result in excessive scale and disproportionate
additions that would erode the open character of the site and verdant backdrop of
the surrounding landscape setting, detrimental to the character and appearance of
the host site, streetscene and locality. No case for very special circumstances has
been demonstrated to outweigh the harm caused to the Metropolitan Open Land by
reason of inappropriateness or any other harm as identified. As such the proposal
would be contrary to Policies CDH01 and ECC06 of the Adopted Local Plan (2025),
Policies D3, and G3 of the London Plan (2021) and Section 13 of the National
Planning Policy Framework (2024) (as amended)
2
Insufficient information has been submitted to enable the LPA to properly assess
the impact of the proposed floodlighting, in accordance with its duty under Section
40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, or determine
acceptable mitigation, and it is considered that the proposed development could
cause potential undue harm to wildlife and protected species contrary to Schedule
7a of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Policy G6 of the London Plan
(2021) and Policies CDH01 (Promoting High Quality Design) and ECC06
(Biodiversity) of the LB Barnet Local Plan (2025)
1
The proposed development and in particular the associated extensive perimeter
fencing and canopies, would fail to preserve the openness of the Metropolitan Open
Land and consequently constitutes as inappropriate development. Furthermore,
collectively the proposal would result in excessive scale and disproportionate
additions that would erode the open character of the site and verdant backdrop of
the surrounding landscape setting, detrimental to the character and appearance of
the host site, streetscene and locality. No case for very special circumstances has
been demonstrated to outweigh the harm caused to the Metropolitan Open Land by
reason of inappropriateness or any other harm as identified. As such the proposal
would be contrary to Policies CDH01 and ECC06 of the Adopted Local Plan (2025),
Policies D3, and G3 of the London Plan (2021) and Section 13 of the National
Planning Policy Framework (2024) (as amended)
2
Insufficient information has been submitted to enable the LPA to properly assess
the impact of the proposed floodlighting, in accordance with its duty under Section
40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, or determine
acceptable mitigation, and it is considered that the proposed development could
cause potential undue harm to wildlife and protected species contrary to Schedule
7a of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Policy G6 of the London Plan
(2021) and Policies CDH01 (Promoting High Quality Design) and ECC06
(Biodiversity) of the LB Barnet Local Plan (2025)
Policies cited
CDH01ECC06G3National Planning Policy Framework 13NPPFG6
Appeal
Appeal
Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Appeal Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
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.