Planning application · Harrow
PL/0390/23.
THE RECTORY Rectory Lane, Stanmore, Harrow, HA7 4AQ
Full / Other Planning at THE RECTORY Rectory Lane, Stanmore, Harrow, HA7 4AQ, received 1 Nov 2023 — refused on 31 Oct 2024 (delegated, Nicola Rankin).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHarrow profile →
Refused
Outcome
31 Oct 2024
52 wks
Decision time
44 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
51
Documents
51 linked
6
Objections
4 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Harrow 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?
Application for detailed planning permission for the demolition of existing building and erection of a three-storey building (plus basement/lower ground floor) to accommodate a residential - physiotherapy led - rehabilitation facility (Use Class C2) along with landscaping, boundary treatments, car a
Reference
PL/0390/23
Type
Full Planning Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
1 Nov 2023
Validated
16 Nov 2023
Target date
31 Oct 2024
Decision date
31 Oct 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Reference
PL/0390/23
Type
Full Planning Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
1 Nov 2023
Validated
16 Nov 2023
Target date
31 Oct 2024
Decision date
31 Oct 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Harrow portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 31 Oct 2024, delegated decision by Nicola Rankin — 52 weeks from submission (44 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
1 Nov 2023
Application received
16 Nov 2023
Application validated
31 Oct 2024
Statutory target date
31 Oct 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Nicola Rankin
1 Nov 2023
Application received
16 Nov 2023
Application validated
31 Oct 2024
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
31 Oct 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Nicola Rankin
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
-The proposal by reason of its large scale, footprint, massing, siting, use, design, modern character, and
loss of greenery and trees, would significantly harm the special character and appearance of the Old Church
Lane Conservation Area and the setting of two grade II* listed churches which are focal points, and the wider
locally listed churchyard of St John and Old Stanmore (including various grade II listed monuments). It would
remove important openness and greenery, and create a dense, obtrusive urban character at odds with the
coherent, comprehensive Old World village character of the conservation area, which comprises a genuinely
medieval and Tudor (and 1930s Tudor revival) character and appearance with principal mansion house,
ancillary cottages, locally listed churchyard with grade II* listed churches, nationally listed monuments, and
important historic green, open spaces. There is not clear and convincing justification for the harm, nor public
benefits to outweigh them, contrary to the requirements of National Planning Policy Framework (2023). The
proposal is therefore contrary to Sections 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) Act 1990, the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), London Plan HC 1C, Harrow Core Strategy
Policies CS1 B and D, Harrow Development Management Policies Local Plan policy DM7, and the Old
Church Lane Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy.
2
-The proposed redevelopment of the site, by reason its excessive building footprint and its encroachment on
a private rear garden area, would represent overdevelopment of the site, and would result in an inappropriate
form of development, at odds with the Councils spatial strategy for growth to the detriment of the character
and appearance of the locality. In the absence of any compelling material considerations in relation to matters
of wider public interest, the proposal is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), core
policies CS1 A and CS 1 B of the Harrow Core Strategy and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document:
Garden Land Development (2013).
3
-The proposed development, in the absence of a Legal Agreement to provide appropriate public benefits,
monitoring and mitigation that directly relate to the development, would fail to adequately ameliorate the
impact of the development on the application site and wider area including the Old Church Lane Conservation
Area and surrounding designated heritage assets and provide for necessary wider public socio economic
public benefits, environmental and infrastructural improvements arising directly from the development. The
proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), policies HC1 C, G1, G6, G7,
SI2, T2, T4 and DF1 of The London Plan (2021), Core Strategy (2012) policy CS1 and policies DM 1, DM 7,
DM 20, DM 22, DM43 and DM 50 of the Harrow Development Management Polices Local Plan and the
Supplementary Planning Document: Planning Obligations (2013).
1
-The proposal by reason of its large scale, footprint, massing, siting, use, design, modern character, and
loss of greenery and trees, would significantly harm the special character and appearance of the Old Church
Lane Conservation Area and the setting of two grade II* listed churches which are focal points, and the wider
locally listed churchyard of St John and Old Stanmore (including various grade II listed monuments). It would
remove important openness and greenery, and create a dense, obtrusive urban character at odds with the
coherent, comprehensive Old World village character of the conservation area, which comprises a genuinely
medieval and Tudor (and 1930s Tudor revival) character and appearance with principal mansion house,
ancillary cottages, locally listed churchyard with grade II* listed churches, nationally listed monuments, and
important historic green, open spaces. There is not clear and convincing justification for the harm, nor public
benefits to outweigh them, contrary to the requirements of National Planning Policy Framework (2023). The
proposal is therefore contrary to Sections 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) Act 1990, the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), London Plan HC 1C, Harrow Core Strategy
Policies CS1 B and D, Harrow Development Management Policies Local Plan policy DM7, and the Old
Church Lane Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy.
2
-The proposed redevelopment of the site, by reason its excessive building footprint and its encroachment on
a private rear garden area, would represent overdevelopment of the site, and would result in an inappropriate
form of development, at odds with the Councils spatial strategy for growth to the detriment of the character
and appearance of the locality. In the absence of any compelling material considerations in relation to matters
of wider public interest, the proposal is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), core
policies CS1 A and CS 1 B of the Harrow Core Strategy and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document:
Garden Land Development (2013).
3
-The proposed development, in the absence of a Legal Agreement to provide appropriate public benefits,
monitoring and mitigation that directly relate to the development, would fail to adequately ameliorate the
impact of the development on the application site and wider area including the Old Church Lane Conservation
Area and surrounding designated heritage assets and provide for necessary wider public socio economic
public benefits, environmental and infrastructural improvements arising directly from the development. The
proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), policies HC1 C, G1, G6, G7,
SI2, T2, T4 and DF1 of The London Plan (2021), Core Strategy (2012) policy CS1 and policies DM 1, DM 7,
DM 20, DM 22, DM43 and DM 50 of the Harrow Development Management Polices Local Plan and the
Supplementary Planning Document: Planning Obligations (2013).
Policies cited
CS1NPPFG1G6G7SI2T2T4DF1DM1DM7DM20DM22DM43DM50
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
6
In support
4
Total comments
10
Objections
6
In support
4
Total comments
10
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.