Planning application · Brent
21/4505.
335 Church Lane, London, NW9 8JD
Full / Other Planning at 335 Church Lane, London, NW9 8JD, received 9 Dec 2021 — refused on 3 Feb 2022 (delegated, Mahya Fatemi).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationBrent profile →
Refused
Outcome
3 Feb 2022
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
11
Documents
11 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Brent 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 single residential dwellinghouse into 2 self-contained flats, amenity space, cycle and refuse storage in front garden area and associated landscaping
Reference
21/4505
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
NW9 8JD
Council
Received
9 Dec 2021
Target date
3 Feb 2022
Decision date
3 Feb 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
21/4505
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
NW9 8JD
Council
Received
9 Dec 2021
Target date
3 Feb 2022
Decision date
3 Feb 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
Documents open on the Brent portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 3 Feb 2022, delegated decision by Mahya Fatemi — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
9 Dec 2021
Application received
3 Feb 2022
Statutory target date
3 Feb 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Mahya Fatemi
9 Dec 2021
Application received
3 Feb 2022
Statutory target date
3 Feb 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Mahya Fatemi
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposal would result in the loss of a good quality family sized dwellinghouse within a low
PTAL area, contrary to policy BH11 of Brent's emerging Local Plan 2020. Furthermore, the
creation of substandard accommodations for Flats A and B with insufficient internal floorspace
and poor layout. This would be contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021 ) and Policy DMP
1 of the Brent's Development Management Policies (2016) and draft policy DMP 1 of emerging
Brent's Local Plan (2020).
2
The application would include an over provision of off street parking for the two flats, with vehicles
driving over the pavement, to the detriment of highway and pedestrian safety. The proposal has
failed to incorporate suitable provision for soft landscaping, to the detriment of the natural drainage
of the site and the appearance of the development in the streetscene. The proposal also fails to
demonstrate front boundary treatments in compliance with section 15 of the Crossover Policy
and Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980 The proposal would therefore be unacceptable and
would be contrary to the requirements of policy T6.1 of London Plan 2021 and policy DMP1,
DMP11 and DMP12 of Brent’s Development Management Policies (2016) and policies DMP1,
BT2 and BT4 of Brent's Emerging Local Plan.
3
The submission fails to demonstrate that the proposed development will achieve an appropriate
standard of fire safety and the proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D12A of the London Plan
(2021).
DocFDN
Document Imaged Ref: 21/4505 Page 2 of 3
1
The proposal would result in the loss of a good quality family sized dwellinghouse within a low
PTAL area, contrary to policy BH11 of Brent's emerging Local Plan 2020. Furthermore, the
creation of substandard accommodations for Flats A and B with insufficient internal floorspace
and poor layout. This would be contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021 ) and Policy DMP
1 of the Brent's Development Management Policies (2016) and draft policy DMP 1 of emerging
Brent's Local Plan (2020).
2
The application would include an over provision of off street parking for the two flats, with vehicles
driving over the pavement, to the detriment of highway and pedestrian safety. The proposal has
failed to incorporate suitable provision for soft landscaping, to the detriment of the natural drainage
of the site and the appearance of the development in the streetscene. The proposal also fails to
demonstrate front boundary treatments in compliance with section 15 of the Crossover Policy
and Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980 The proposal would therefore be unacceptable and
would be contrary to the requirements of policy T6.1 of London Plan 2021 and policy DMP1,
DMP11 and DMP12 of Brent’s Development Management Policies (2016) and policies DMP1,
BT2 and BT4 of Brent's Emerging Local Plan.
3
The submission fails to demonstrate that the proposed development will achieve an appropriate
standard of fire safety and the proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D12A of the London Plan
(2021).
DocFDN
Document Imaged Ref: 21/4505 Page 2 of 3
Policies cited
BH11D6DMP1T6.1DMP11DMP12BT2BT4D12A
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.