64 Sudbury Avenue, Wembley, HA0 3BE

Application Details

Applicant & Agent

Planning Application Dates

Planning Decision

Why it was refused

1. 1.The proposed development, by reason of its poor overall design quality, incoherent architectural treatment and failure to respond positively to the established suburban character of the surrounding area, would result in an incongrious and unacceptable form of development. The proposal does not demonstrate the high standard of design required and fails to respect local character or adopt an appropriate contemporary approach. The development is therefore contrary to Policy D4 of the London Plan (2021), Policies DMP1 and BD1 of the Local Plan (2019-2041) and the provisions of Brent's Deign Guide SPD1.
2. 2.The proposed internal layout results in a poor standard of residential accommodation. The arrangement of family-sized units at upper floors with insufficient and poorly functioning amenity spaces, combined with private amenity spaces lacking adequate daylight and ventilation, fails to meet the standard of high-quality housing required. The proposal fails to accord with the Residential Amenity Space and Place Quality SPD, which explains expectations for high-quality private and communal amenity space. It also conflicts with Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policies DMP1, BH13 and BD1 of the Local Plan (2019-2041) regarding internal layout, outlook, daylight, and amenity provision. The proposed development would result in a substandard quality of accommodation for future occupiers. Flats 1 and 2 would comprise deep-plan living areas with limited fenestration, resulting in poor levels of daylight. Flat 3 would provide a bedroom with a sole window in close proximity to the adjoining flank wall, resulting in poor outlook. Flat 4 would experience poor levels of daylight and outlook due to limited and constrained fenestration, including reliance on rooflights and recessed openings. Collectively, this would result in an unacceptable standard of residential amenity. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021), Policy DMP1 of the Brent Local Plan and Brent SPD1 (2018).
3. 3.The proposed refuse and cycle storage arrangements would result in a poor quality site layout. The excessive provision of refuse storage would lead to an unjustified loss of usable amenity space, while the reliance on vertical cycle storage would not be usable by all residents, particularly those with limited mobility or strength. Insufficient detail has been provided in respect of front boundary treatments, resulting in a layout that fails to adequately protect the visual amenity and character of the street scene. As a result, the proposal fails to achieve a high standard of inclusive, functional and well-designed development, contrary to Policies DMP1, BD1 and BT2 of the Brent Local Plan (2019–2041), Policy T5 of the London Plan (2021) and Brent's Design Guide SPD1.
4. 4.The application fails to demonstrate that the proposed development would achieve an Urban Greening Factor (UGF) of at least 0.4, as required for minor developments. No UGF calculation or supporting evidence has been submitted to demonstrate compliance with this policy requirement. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy BH4 of the Brent Local Plan (2019–2041) and Policies G1 and G5 of the London Plan (2021).
5. 5.The proposal fails to demonstrate compliance with the statutory requirement to achieve a minimum 10% net gain in biodiversity, as required by Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. This should be demonstrated on site, unless it is robustly justified that this cannot be achieved, and should be supported by the submission of the statutory Biodiversity Metric (or any successor metric) calculating the pre-development and post-development biodiversity value of the site. The submitted information fails to provide this justification. The application is contrary to the requirements of Policy G6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policies DMP1 and BGI1 of the Local Plan (2019-2041).
6. 6.The submission fails to demonstrate that the proposed development will achieve an appropriate standard of fire safety and the proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D12A of the London Plan (2021).

From the council's decision notice.

Publicity

Appeal

Additional Information