Agenda item

The Lodge, Long Lane, London N3 2PY - 17/4102/FUL

Minutes:

The report and the addendum to the report was presented by the Planning Manager.

 

A verbal representation was heard from Councillor Ross Huston, Ward Councillor for West Finchley, Mr Roger Chapman who spoke in objection, Mr Brian Plen who spoke in support and the applicant’s agent.

 

 

Following the consideration of the report the Chairman requested that the item be moved to the vote. 

 

The vote in favour of the Officer’s recommendation was 0.

 

The Chairman moved an alternative outcome and moved to refuse the application which was seconded by Councillor Ryde.  The Committee considered the reasons for refusal which were supplied by Members. 

 

The Planning Officer confirmed the reasons which were provided by the Committee and unanimously resolved to overturn the officer’s recommendation and therefore the application was refused for the following reasons:

 

1)      The proposed development by virtue of its bulk, size, scale and massing including the extent of the footprint and proximity to the boundaries would give rise to a cramped and overbearing form of development that would be visually dominant, incongruous and significantly out of keeping with the character and appearance of the area and the streetscene and would negatively affect the setting of Victoria Park. As such, the proposed development would fail to accord with policy DM01 of the Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD, Policies CS1, CS5 and CS NPPF of the Local Plan Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and policies 7.4 and 7.6 of the Mayor’s London Plan

 

 2)  The appearance of the proposed elevations would fail to achieve a high quality of design, would not respond to the context and character of the surrounding area and would therefore appear unjustifiably incongruous and alien within the streetscene.  As such, the proposed development would fail to accord with policy DM01 of the Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD, Policies CS1, CS5 and CS NPPF of the Local Plan Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

 

3. The proposed development by virtue of the close proximity of the footprint of the development to the boundaries, presence of boundaries the height of the boundary and associated planting would give rise to a poor quality of residential amenity for future occupiers which would result in poor outlook, sense of enclosure. As such, the proposed development would fail to accord with policy DM01 of the Local Plan Development Management Policies DPD, Policies CS1 and CS NPPF of the Local Plan Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

 

4) In the absence of a legal agreement to provide replacement and additional tree planting to Victoria Park, the proposals would provide inadequate soft landscaping and fail to mitigate the visual impact of the development when viewed from the surrounding area and park. The proposals would be contrary to Policy DM01 of the Adopted Barnet Development Management Policies 2012, CS15 of the Local Plan Core Strategy (adopted September 2012), and the Planning Obligations SPD (adopted April 2013).

 

5) In the absence of a legal agreement to amend the necessary traffic order to create the proposed access, the proposals would have a harmful impact on highway and pedestrian safety, contrary to policy DM17 of the adopted Barnet Development Management Policies 2012, CS9 and CS15 of the Local Plan Core Strategy (adopted September 2012), and the Planning Obligations SPD (adopted April 2013).

 

6) The site is considered ancillaryto the park and the proposals would compromise the open space being contrary to policy DM15 of the Adopted Barnet Development Management Policies and policy 7.18 of the London Plan.

 

Supporting documents: