Agenda item

Cllr Parekh left the room whilst this item was presented and debated:

PROPOSAL:

Comprehensive, phased mixed-use redevelopment of the site comprising of residential (C2, C3, and Sui Generis) and a range of town centre uses, flexible commercial business and service, hotel, learning and non-residential (Use Classes E/C1/ F1/ Sui Generis), within a range of tall buildings, together with a new transport interchange, basement bus depot, public realm, car and bicycle parking, public open space, hard and soft landscaping and other associated works. (OUTLINE APPLICATION with full details in respect of access for phases 1, 3 and (in part) 2 and (in respect of part of phase 1) landscaping).

Further information provided by the applicant for consultation purposes only (not forming part of the formal description of development set out below):

The Outline Planning Application includes an Illustrative Scheme which indicates one way in which the development for which planning permission was being sought could be delivered.  The Illustrative Scheme contains: -

a)              New buildings including tall buildings up to 29 storeys

b)              3,365 new homes (Use Class C3) and

c)              463 student or co-living units (Sui Generis)

In addition to a new transport interchange commercial, hotel, learning and non-residential uses, streets, open space, landscaping, and public realm including improvements and public access to the Deans Brook Nature Reserve.

RECOMMENDATION:

The London Borough of Harrow objects to the proposed development due to the adverse impacts of the proposal with respect to misplaced/overspill parking in Harrow’s streets, transportation impacts in relation to travel to and from surrounding tube stations on the Jubilee line in Harrow and additional pressure on Harrow’s open space infrastructure as a result of the increased numbers of residents that would result.  There are no proposals to offer mitigation of these concerns through funding or appropriate heads of terms to be secured through a S106 agreement.

The Chair expressed serious concerns about the outline permission, highlighting the lack of detail and the proposed height, density, and mass of the development.  The Chair emphasised that the scale and bulk were completely out of keeping with Harrow as well as Barnet in respect of the suburban character.

The Chair also raised concerns about the impact on local infrastructure, such as roads, parking, and healthcare services, stressing that the development would put undue pressure on already strained resources.  Heritage was another concern, with the potential adverse effect on nearby listed buildings and conservation areas.

Additionally, the feasibility of building a proposed underground bus station was questioned, and the Chair voiced scepticism about the ability of any conditions or agreements to mitigate these concerns.

The Chair urged Barnet councillors not to approve the application, warning that it would have significant negative impacts on the area, despite the need for regeneration.

Finally, the Chair acknowledged that while the area may be suitable for development, the scale and nature of this proposal were unacceptable, describing it as "a monster of a development" and urging Barnet councillors to vote against it.

The Chair suggested two additions to the report: first, raising concerns about the feasibility of the proposed bus station; and second, acknowledging that while the development may not have a substantial impact on the views from the Canons Park Conservation Area, it would still have a noticeable effect due to the height of the 29-storey tower.

DECISION:  Report was NOTED.

The Committee wished it to be recorded that the decision to object against the application was unanimous.