The plans by Regal to redevelop Great North Leisure Park were strongly opposed by residents and a local MP, reports Grace Howarth, Local Democracy Reporter

The plans for Great North Leisure Park (credit Regal)

Plans to build up to 1,500 homes and a new leisure centre in North Finchley have been rejected by councillors following fears raised the scheme would be “overbearing”.

The “comprehensive redevelopment” of Great North Leisure Park was proposed to include 20 buildings, the tallest of which would reach 25 storeys tall, as well as incorporating a new leisure centre.

The proposal, put forward by Regal London, designated 25% of the new homes as affordable by total habitable rooms, equating to 341 homes.

However, a petition this summer calling for a halt to the development received nearly 8,000 signatures.

Labour member and Woodhouse ward councillor Anne Hutton gave a deputation during a strategic planning committee held last Thursday (4th) to determine the application.

She described the tower blocks as “overbearing on the landscape” and said the application would be “more suited to a town centre”.

Cllr Hutton acknowledged “some residential” would be suitable but currently the plan was “too dense”.

She said: “We need the housing, when I first looked at this a year ago I did say we need the housing, but not at any cost. Like I’ve said, the density, the environment and also the poor transport links lead me to think this is too much on this particular site.”

A representation from Sarah Sackman, the Labour MP for Finchley and Golders Green, was also read out at the meeting. She said more housing was needed but as it stood the proposal “wasn’t satisfactory”.

Sackman said more “genuinely” affordable housing was needed, public transport and services should be upgraded to meet the “anticipated demand” and the scheme also had to avoid “loss of provision”.

As part of plans, the existing Hollywood Bowl and Vue Cinema would be demolished with “no comparable replacements” provided on the site. However, a different development with a new cinema and bowling alley was approved by councillors for a nearby site in June.

Nick Alston, an agent from Avison Young and Steve Harrington, a planning director at Regal, spoke on behalf of the applicant. Nick said the site was a “textbook example” that planning policies “encourage us to optimise to meet the housing and other needs of Londoners”.

He said the design for the new leisure centre represented “a significant improvement over the existing facility including an increase in water area”and the scheme’s aim was to create a new “health and wellbeing destination”.

Homes were “desperately needed” and the scheme was providing “25% more affordable housing than required by policy” according to Nick. He explained the maximum amount of affordable housing the scheme could support was zero and that was confirmed by the council’s independent vitality assessor.

Clarion Housing will manage the scheme’s affordable housing and Regal will increase the proportion of affordability to 40% should grant funding from the Greater London Authority become available.

Committee member Phil Cohen asked whether the applicant was “conscious” of the scheme’s density or did it want to “maximise the number of units”.

Nick said planning policies “set a challenge” to “optimise the potential of all sites” and highlighted that it was “different to maximise”.

He said the applicant’s team had ensured homes were “to a high quality” and wind and daylight and sunlight assessments “supported” the scheme.

Following the over two-hour discussion, despite officer recommendations to grant the application, eight committee members voted to reject the application, with one member abstaining.

Committee chair Nigel Young said the reasons for refusal stemmed from the belief “harm” would be caused as a result of the development.

He summarised the proposals as “out of character with the surrounding area” and claimed its “height, bulk, mass and density” would “result in over development of the site”, impacting public transport levels and “creating harm to the proposed environment and surrounding area”.

No news is bad news

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts.

The audiences they serve know less, understand less, and can do less.

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, yearly or one-off donation.

Choose the news. Don’t lose the news.

Monthly direct debit

Annual direct debit

£5 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else, £10 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else and a print copy posted to them each month. £50 annual supporters get a digital copy of each month's paper before anyone else. £84 annual supporters get a print copy by post and a digital copy of each month's before anyone else.