Harrow planners have refused permission for a development at 46 Flambard Road, Kenton, that would have seen a family home converted into four self-contained dwellings.
The decision by Harrow Council's Planning Committee was unanimous and went against the recommendation of planning officers, who had advised approval. The committee's concerns focused on the proposal's height and its impact on the street scene, with Councillor Marilyn Ashton proposing refusal on the grounds that the proposal by reason of its location on a corner plot and overall height, would appear overbearing, incongruous, and out of character with the street scene, to the detriment of visual and residential amenities.
Planning officers had recommended approval, stating that the proposal would convert and extend the building to provide additional family-sized accommodation in a highly accessible and sustainable location.
They also noted that the apartments would exceed the relevant minimum internal space standards and would benefit from access to external amenity spaces, including ground floor patios and first floor terraces, as well as a substantial communal garden.
Regarding design, officers acknowledged the proposed building would be larger and the ridge height would increase, but concluded that When considered within the wider context, the building would not be considered to appear excessively tall or fundamentally out of character.
They also stated there was no objection from the council's urban design officer in terms of the scale of the building.
However, the committee's assessment of 'overbearing' and 'out of character' was primarily driven by the overall height of the proposed roof extensions, would increase the height of the building
. Specifically, the ridge height would also increase by approximately one metre, with further accommodation provided within the roof.
Councillor Marilyn Ashton stated, I just think that it's just going to be overbearing and incongruous in the street scene.
and the specifics of this are, for me, anyway, is the height. It's just overwhelmingly overdeveloped.
While the wider area contains considerable variation in building heights, roof forms and scale,
the committee's concern was that the proposed development, by reason of its location on a corner plot and overall height, would appear overbearing, incongruous, and out of character with the street scene.
Councillor Ashton further noted that Flambard Road and its immediate surroundings have a special character. It's one of the most historic roads in the ward in Greenhill.
The specific characteristics that made the proposal out of character were not detailed beyond the general height and corner plot location.
The committee felt that the visual and residential amenities
would be detrimentally affected, manifesting as the proposal appearing overbearing, incongruous, and out of character with the street scene.
The specific details of how these residential amenities would be affected beyond the visual and character impact were not elaborated upon.
The application sought permission for side and rear extensions, changes to the front curtilage, and the conversion of the dwelling into four three-bedroom flats. The proposal also included an increase in ridge height and the provision of two dormers.
During the committee meeting, objectors raised concerns about the scale of the development, the impact on local character, and potential issues with parking and privacy. The agent for the applicant argued that the development would provide much-needed housing in a sustainable location and make efficient use of an existing building.
Regarding parking, the meeting information states that Parking was therefore reduced from four spaces to three, allowing substantially more planting, retention of the protected tree and a reduction in hard surfacing.
It also notes that The three proposed parking spaces represent the London plan maximum, and future occupiers would be prevented from applying for parking permits via a section 106 agreement.
The report does not detail the existing parking provisions on Flambard Road itself, only the proposed changes to parking on the site.
Ultimately, councillors sided with the objectors, citing the detrimental impact on the street scene and local amenities as the primary reasons for refusal. More information on the planning committee meeting can be found in the Public reports pack.
