Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed11 November 20253362120

Development Site At Rear Of 148 To 172, High Street, Barnet, EN5 5XP

‘Outline application for the erection of a 4-storey building comprising 8 flats (first, second & third floor), affordable ground floor commercial (Class E), associated car parking and infrastructure with landscaping reserved’

Authority
London Borough of Barnet
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector
Burley P

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • whether the appeal scheme would prejudice the delivery of planning permission 18/4700/FUL and the benefits secured through the associated section 106 agreement
  • whether the reduction in the amount of employment space proposed, when compared with the previously-approved scheme for this site, has been adequately justified
  • whether the appeal scheme would result in unacceptable highways impacts
  • whether suitable living conditions for the future residential occupiers of the development would be provided with regard to the amount of outdoor amenity space provided
  • the effect of the appeal scheme on the living conditions of 166-168 High Street with specific regard to privacy and overlooking

What decided it

The reduction in employment floorspace compared with the approved scheme has not been adequately justified, and the absence of evidence demonstrating sufficient private outdoor space for the proposed dwellings, taken together, outweigh the benefits of the scheme.

Plan policies cited: BLP Policy HOU01, BLP Policy ECY01, BLP Policy ECY02, BLP Policy TRC03, BLP Policy CDH07, BLP Policy CDH01, BLP Policy TOW01

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.