Planning appeal decision
Fir Island, The Ridgeway, London, NW7 1AX
Planning appeal 3296889 at Fir Island, The Ridgeway, London, NW7 1AX (London Borough of Barnet) was dismissed on 29 December 2022 by Inspector Edginton A, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the development would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies.
Change of use of, and alterations to, the existing building including a two storey side extension to provide a children's day nursery (Use Class E) with associated changes to hard and soft landscaping. Provision of off-street parking, refuse storage and cycle parking
- Authority
- London Borough of Barnet
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- community-institutional · Change of use
- Inspector
- Edginton A
- Postcode
- NW7 1AX
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the development would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies
- The effect of the development on the openness of the Green Belt
- Whether the development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Mill Hill Conservation Area, including the loss of protected trees, and the effect of the development on the non-designated heritage asset known as Fir Island
- The effect of the development on highway operations, safety and parking stress
- Whether the development would accord with local policies with regard to the availability of residential accommodation
- Whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, would be clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal
What decided it
The cumulative harm to the Green Belt (inappropriateness and loss of openness), heritage assets (conservation area and non-designated heritage asset), highways operations and parking stress, and loss of residential accommodation could not be outweighed by the benefits of additional childcare provision, and no very special circumstances existed to justify the development.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy CS1Policy CS5Policy CS7Policy CS9Policy CS15Policy CSNPPFPolicy DM01Policy DM06Policy DM07Policy DM15Policy DM17Policy G2Policy G7Policy D3Policy HC1Policy T6
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 110Paragraph 111Paragraph 130Paragraph 138Paragraph 147Paragraph 149Paragraph 202Paragraph 213
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in London Borough of Barnet
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022
- Dismissed28 May 2026600424515 Glebe Crescent, London, NW4 1BT
- Dismissed20 May 20263354231The Spinney, 22 Hendon Wood Lane, London, NW7 4HR
- Dismissed1 May 20266003427188 The Vale, London, NW11 8SR
- Allowed30 April 202660014415 Llanvanor Road, London, NW2 2AR
- Dismissed29 April 20266003015Powerleague Barnet, Bobby Moore Way, Muswell Hill, Barnet, N10 1ST
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®