Commercial swimming lessons at 30 Allandale Avenue, Finchley, London N3

What was proposed

The application sought to regularise commercial children’s swimming lessons in an existing ancillary pool building, with limited class sizes and scheduled hours.

“This application seeks to regularise the use of the existing ancillary swimming pool building for commercial operations. The commercial operations in question are children's swimming lessons.”

“The applicant has noted in the Planning Statement that lessons are 1:1 or 1:2 (max 4 children in the pool at any one time), staggered, and restricted to the hours of 14.00 to…”

Officer report

The site and its history

The site is a detached house with a lawful pool enclosure, driveway parking and previous approved or lawful building works.

“The application site is located at 30 Allandale Avenue and is a detached house on the northern side of Allandale Avenue, opposite College Farm. The site benefits from an existing, lawfully constructed pool enclosure (F/01441/14) and a driveway with on-site parking for several cars. The area is residential in character, with private gardens forming an important element of local character and tranquillity.”

“Reference: F/01441/14 Address: 30 Allandale Avenue, London, N3 3PJ Decision: Lawful Decision Date: 3 April 2014 Description: Erection of new swimming pool enclosure, following the demolition of existing storage shed.”

Officer report

Public views and consultation

Most comments supported the facility’s community and SEND benefits, while objections focused on traffic, parking, noise, disturbance and residential character.

“- Increased traffic, parking congestion, and highway safety risks from drop-offs. - Noise and disturbance from lessons, instructors, and occasional parties. - Loss of residential amenity and tranquillity; impact on immediate neighbours. - Concerns about commercial use in a quiet residential area and proposed hours of operation.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the business use harmed the residential character of the street and neighbouring living conditions through noise and activity.

“AND the Committee grants delegated authority to the Service Director – Planning and Building Control to make any minor alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions/obligations or reasons for refusal as set out in this report and addendum provided this authority shall be exercised after consultation with the Chair (or in their absence the Vice-Chair) of the Committee (who may request that such alterations, additions or deletions be first approved by the…”

“1 The introduction and continued operation of commercial swimming lesson activity within the private garden and pool outbuilding has resulted in a material change of character on the site, through regular comings and goings, the congregation of visitors and a commercialised pattern of activity.”

Officer report

The main planning concerns

Officers considered the repeated customer visits, vehicle movements, poolside noise and extended evening and Sunday hours unacceptable in a quiet residential area.

“The proposed hours of operation, including evening use until 8:00 PM on weekdays and nearly full-day use on Sundays, are considered unacceptable given the close proximity of neighbouring residential properties. The Environmental Health Officer argues that such extended hours would prevent residents from enjoying peace and quiet in their homes and gardens, especially during evenings and weekends when external noise levels are more noticeable.”

“In conclusion, the proposal fails to adequately address the concerns raised regarding noise impact, particularly from poolside activities, arrivals and departures of users, and plant equipment. The proposed operational hours are not suitable for a densely populated residential area and would significantly harm the amenity of neighbouring residents, particularly during evenings and weekends.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A speaker addressed the committee in objection, while a supporter and the applicant spoke in support.

Questions and decision

Members questioned officers before the chair put the recommendation to refuse to a vote.

“The Committee then had the opportunity to ask questions of the officers.”

“The Chair moved to vote on the Officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee voted four to two for refusal, with no abstentions, and refused the application.

“3 RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED.”

Minutes