Planning application · Harrow
PL/1145/25.
3 Brook Drive, Harrow, HA1 4RS
Full / Other Planning at 3 Brook Drive, Harrow, HA1 4RS, received 29 Apr 2025 — refused on 31 Jul 2025 (delegated, Jonathan Kwok).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHarrow profile →
Refused
Outcome
31 Jul 2025
13 wks
Decision time
5 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
24
Documents
24 linked
—
Objections
not captured
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?
Conversion of dwellinghouse into two separate dwellings (1 x 4 bed and 1 x 3 Bed); two storey side extension; rear conservatory; rear dormer; roof light in side and front roofslopes; external alterations; separate amenity space; landscaping; parking; cycle stores
Reference
PL/1145/25
Type
Full Planning Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
HA1 4RS
Ward
Council
Received
29 Apr 2025
Target date
31 Jul 2025
Decision date
31 Jul 2025
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Reference
PL/1145/25
Type
Full Planning Application
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
HA1 4RS
Ward
Council
Received
29 Apr 2025
Target date
31 Jul 2025
Decision date
31 Jul 2025
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 Jul 2025, delegated decision by Jonathan Kwok — 13 weeks from submission (5 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
29 Apr 2025
Application received
31 Jul 2025
Statutory target date
31 Jul 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Jonathan Kwok
29 Apr 2025
Application received
31 Jul 2025
Statutory target date
31 Jul 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Jonathan Kwok
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
- The proposal would result in the additional residential dwelling being sited on garden land. As such, the
principle of the development is contrary to the Harrow Core Strategy of directing new residential and other
development to the Harrow and Wealdstone Opportunity Area, town centres and, in suburban areas, to
strategic previously developed sites and would therefore harm its implementation, contrary to the National
Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies CS1.A and CS1.B of the Harrow Core Strategy (2012) and the
adopted Supplementary Planning Document: Garden Land Development (2013).
2
- The proposed development, by reason of its excessive bulk, width and poor and unsympathetic design,
would give rise to an extension of excessive scale which would unbalance the symmetry of the existing semi-
detached dwellings in this part of the streetscene and would result in an unduly obtrusive and incongruous
development which would fails to respect the prevailing pattern of development in the locality, to the detriment
of the character and appearance of the existing dwellinghouse and locality, contrary to the high quality design
aspirations of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy D3 D.1, D.11 of the London Plan (2021),
Core Policy CS.1B of the Harrow Core Strategy, Policy DM1 of the Harrow Development Management
Policies Local Plan (2013), and the Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guide SPD
(2010).
3
- The proposal, by reason of the lack of Gross Internal Floor Space for the proposed dwelling 3 and
insufficient bedrooms sizes in both Nos. 3 and 3A Brook Drive, would cumulatively result in substandard level
of living accommodation for future occupiers of the proposed dwellings, to the detriment of their residential
amenity. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024),
Policies D3 D.7 and D6 of the London Plan (2021), Policies DM1 and DM26 of the Harrow Development
Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document Residential
Design Guide SPD (2010).
4
- The proposal, by reason of the site being located within an area of land liable to flooding and the lack of an
acceptable Flood Risk Assessment, has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would not
exacerbate the risk of flooding within the site or increase the risk and consequences of flooding elsewhere,
contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies SI12 and SI13 of The London Plan
(2021), Core Policy CS1.U of Harrow Core Strategy (2012) and Policies DM 9 and DM 10 of the Harrow
Development Management Polices Local Plan (2013).
1
- The proposal would result in the additional residential dwelling being sited on garden land. As such, the
principle of the development is contrary to the Harrow Core Strategy of directing new residential and other
development to the Harrow and Wealdstone Opportunity Area, town centres and, in suburban areas, to
strategic previously developed sites and would therefore harm its implementation, contrary to the National
Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies CS1.A and CS1.B of the Harrow Core Strategy (2012) and the
adopted Supplementary Planning Document: Garden Land Development (2013).
2
- The proposed development, by reason of its excessive bulk, width and poor and unsympathetic design,
would give rise to an extension of excessive scale which would unbalance the symmetry of the existing semi-
detached dwellings in this part of the streetscene and would result in an unduly obtrusive and incongruous
development which would fails to respect the prevailing pattern of development in the locality, to the detriment
of the character and appearance of the existing dwellinghouse and locality, contrary to the high quality design
aspirations of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy D3 D.1, D.11 of the London Plan (2021),
Core Policy CS.1B of the Harrow Core Strategy, Policy DM1 of the Harrow Development Management
Policies Local Plan (2013), and the Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guide SPD
(2010).
3
- The proposal, by reason of the lack of Gross Internal Floor Space for the proposed dwelling 3 and
insufficient bedrooms sizes in both Nos. 3 and 3A Brook Drive, would cumulatively result in substandard level
of living accommodation for future occupiers of the proposed dwellings, to the detriment of their residential
amenity. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024),
Policies D3 D.7 and D6 of the London Plan (2021), Policies DM1 and DM26 of the Harrow Development
Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document Residential
Design Guide SPD (2010).
Show all 4 rows
4
- The proposal, by reason of the site being located within an area of land liable to flooding and the lack of an
acceptable Flood Risk Assessment, has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would not
exacerbate the risk of flooding within the site or increase the risk and consequences of flooding elsewhere,
contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies SI12 and SI13 of The London Plan
(2021), Core Policy CS1.U of Harrow Core Strategy (2012) and Policies DM 9 and DM 10 of the Harrow
Development Management Polices Local Plan (2013).
Policies cited
NPPFLondon Plan 11DM1London Plan 7D6DM26SI12SI13DM9DM10
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.