Post on 16-Jan-2022
GL Hearn Page 361 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
influenced the historical geomorphology of the site. At the current time, however, the
study area is relatively flat and contains very few geomorphological features, as any
that were present are likely to have been removed or covered by the development
activities.
The study area is underlain by superficial deposits identified by Dollis Hill Gravel
Formation. The Dollis Hill Gravel Formation consists of gravel, sandy and clayey in
part, with some laminated silty beds. The six exploratory holes drilled/excavated as
part of the 2018 ground investigation at the site encountered Dollis Hill Gravels only
in holes here made ground was thinnest. This suggests that in places made ground
has replaced the Dollis Hill Gravel member. Where present the member is between
1.7m and 4.2m thick, lying beneath a layer of made ground. No organic material was
present in the material and it comprised either orange brown sandy gravelly clay or
clayey very gravelly sand or a stratified sequence of both these soil types.
The London Clay Formation underlies the superficial deposits, which is an over-
consolidated clay containing horizons of pyrite rich minerals. The London Clay
Formation may contain horizons of sandy clay and includes a few thin beds of shells
and fine sand partings or pockets of sand, which commonly increase towards the
base and towards the top of the formation. The six boreholes proved the London
clay to extend beyond the maximum 5.45 m depths investigated. As part of the
MUGA pitch university site investigation in 2014 the London Clay was proved to
extend beyond 20m depth bgl. Between the top of the formation and the 5.45m the
material was reddish brown and contained occasional gravel suggesting that the
stratum may have a head deposit starting layer at the top.
GL Hearn Page 362 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Surface water
There are no water courses which intersect with the study area. Drainage is
anticipated within the site boundary which may include soakaway. The Dollis Brook
is the closest water feature to the site, but this is located approx. 850m east and
such is unlikely to be affected by any disturbance caused by the development during
construction or operation.
Hydrogeology
The hydrogeological properties of the study area have been identified using
information from hydrogeological maps and BGS data.
The hydrogeological conditions vary depending on the encountered strata. The
superficial deposits are classified as Secondary A (Dollis Hill Member). The bedrock
(London Clay) is classified as an Unproductive Strata.
There are no Source Protection Zones or catchment areas within the study area or
within close proximity of the study area. There are no abstraction wells located within
the study area or within close proximity of the study area.
According to mapping in the Groundsure Report it shows the study area is at a very
low risk from flooding from rivers. The report also identified a risk of groundwater
flooding within 50m of the study area.
Four groundwater dipping visits were made in 2018/2019, looking at the findings,
one well was dry (to 4.45m depths) and the other wells had water dip levels between
1.14m and 2.01 m bgl, though typically 0.3-0.5m of variation was seen between
successive visits.
GL Hearn Page 363 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Water quality information is available for the Dollis Hill Gravel member aquifer unit
as testing was undertaken as part of the MC ground investigation in 2018. This found
a restricted range of slightly elevated determinands comprising dissolved nickel and
selenium. It was considered that these metals may be a background issue as there
was no matching elevation of these metals in the soil samples tested.
Mineral Workings and Reserves
The study area is identified as not being within any historical or current mining or
quarrying areas.
Radon and other Ground Gas
The Groundsure Report records that the area falls into a Lower probability radon
area (less than 1% of homes are estimated to be at or above the Action Level). Four
ground gas monitoring visits were undertaken between 3 November 2018 and 2
January 2019 covering four shallow gas wells. The findings were that very low gas
levels were recorded (methane -maximum 0.2% v/v non detect and maximum
carbon dioxide of 3.6% all combined with low gas floes -maximum 0.2 l/hr).
Natural contamination
According to the Groundsure background soil chemistry levels for metals mapped
by the BGS were not available for the study area.
Contamination
A summary of the baseline CSM is provided in Table 10.16. The potential impacts
and baseline risks quoted are those before any mitigation is applied.
GL Hearn Page 366 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Assessment of Effects (Construction and Operational)
Effects During Construction
This section looks at the predicted effects during construction and takes account of
the advantages applied when working in accordance with a Construction Phase
Management Plan and Site Waste Management Plan.
Ravensfield and Fenella
Made Ground
Any Made Ground encountered during the works will be dealt with according to
current standards and best practices and when supplementary investigations are
completed the GIR will outline the most appropriate remediation techniques to
remove or cap or render contamination inactive. The type of contamination is likely
to arise from tarmacadam pieces and this will, due to its bound nature, likely be of
low environmental availability. In this setting a removal or capping solution could be
applied and these are well proven techniques.
Man-Made Features
A number of man-made features have been identified within the study area. The
features are mostly associated with the development of commercial and residential
buildings and their associated infrastructure. No buried tanks have been identified
at the sub site and so the demolition of structures should be a routine activity. Prior
to removal/ or any over surfacing of existing hardstands a programme of sampling
and testing surfacing materials for coal tar will be undertaken and materials then
handled as directed by the coal tar contents.
GL Hearn Page 367 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Topsoils
A quantity of topsoil will be removed as part of the works. It is expected that the
majority of excavated material will be reused.
Geology and Geomorphology
The study area is located within an area which was influenced by one of the
tributaries associated with the River Thames, where fluvial processes have
influenced the historical geomorphology of the site. At the current time, however, the
study area is relatively flat and contains very few geomorphological features, as any
that were present are likely to have been removed or covered by the development
activities. In the same way there is no geological exposures present.
Hydrogeology
The superficial deposits are classified as Secondary A (Dollis Hill Member) but there
are no abstractions close to the site and baseflow to streams may occur some 800m
or so down gradient of the site but the attenuation over this large distance will be
substantial and measured water quality is only marginally impacted based on 2019
water testing. The bedrock (London Clay) is classified as an Unproductive Strata. It
is recognised that additional testing will be conducted as part of planned
supplementary ground investigation. The drainage strategy for the site uses
attenuation and piped drainage as opposed to soakaway chambers and this will
avoid flushing effects and locally raised water levels.
GL Hearn Page 373 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Contaminated Soil
Site Users
Particulate inhalation / dermal contact
Low Medium 3
Vapour inhalation Low Medium 3
Adjoining site users
Particulate inhalation / dermal contact
Unlikely Medium 2
Construction / maintenance workers
Particulate inhalation / dermal contact / ingestion
Low Medium 3
Vapour inhalation Low Medium 3
Property (Future Landscaping)
Root Uptake Low Medium 3
Controlled Waters -Secondary A Aquifer
Leaching to ground then movement to water / aquifer
Low Medium 3
Contaminated water
Site Users Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Adjoining site users
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Construction / maintenance workers
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Controlled Waters -Secondary A Aquifer
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Sulphate presence in soil and groundwater
Property Foundations
Leaching to ground then movement to ground water causing chemical attack on foundations
Likely Medium 4
Ground Gas
Site Users Vapour inhalation Unlikely Medium 2
Construction / maintenance workers
Vapour inhalation Low Medium 3
Property Foundations
Structural damage due to explosion of combustible gas
Unlikely Medium 2
GL Hearn Page 375 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Public green spaces Minor Minor Negligible
B9
Made Ground
Any Made Ground encountered during the works will be dealt with according to
current standards and best practices and when investigations are completed the GIR
will outline the most appropriate remediation techniques to remove or cap or render
contamination inactive, should it be present. The type of contamination is likely to
arise from ash from the local boiler house and this will due to its bound nature likely
be of low environmental availability. In this setting a removal or capping solution
could be applied, and these are well proven techniques.
Man-Made Features
A number of man-made features have been identified within the study area and the
most significant are the foundations of existed listed buildings. It is planned that the
ground investigation at B9 will reveal and document the configuration of existing
foundations so that these can be retained without damage or excessive loading as
a result of the placement of new foundations (principally piles)
Topsoils
A quantity of topsoil will be removed as part of the works. It is expected that the
majority of excavated material will be reused.
Geology and Geomorphology
The study area is located within an area which was influenced by one of the
tributaries associated with the River Thames, where fluvial processes have
influenced the geomorphology of the site. At the current time, however, the study
GL Hearn Page 382 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Public green spaces Minor Minor Negligible
Ground Gas (vapours / asphyxiation)
New and existing buildings Minor Minor Negligible
Construction / maintenance workers Moderate / Minor Moderate / Minor Negligible
Public green spaces Minor Minor Negligible
Meritage Centre
Made Ground
Any Made Ground encountered during the works will be dealt with according to
current standards and best practices and when supplementary investigations are
completed the GIR will outline the most appropriate remediation techniques to
remove or cap or render contamination inactive, should it be present. The
contamination found to be present at the site is localised and shallow and is likely to
be of low environmental availability. In this setting a removal or capping solution
could be applied, and these are well proven techniques.
Man-Made Features
A number of man-made features have been identified within the study area. The
features are mostly associated with the development of commercial and residential
buildings and their associated infrastructure. No buried tanks have been identified
at the sub site and so the demolition of structures should be a routine activity. Prior
to removal/ or any over surfacing of existing hardstands a programme of sampling
and testing surfacing materials for coal tar will be undertaken and materials then
handled as directed by the coal tar contents.
GL Hearn Page 383 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Topsoils
A quantity of topsoil will be removed as part of the works. It is expected that the
majority of excavated material will be reused.
Geology and Geomorphology
The study area is located within an area which was influenced by one of the
tributaries associated with the River Thames, where fluvial processes have
influenced the historical geomorphology of the site. At the current time, however, the
study area is relatively flat and contains very few geomorphological features, as any
that were present are likely to have been removed or covered by the development
activities. There are no geological exposures present at the site.
Hydrogeology
The hydrogeological conditions vary depending on the encountered strata. The
superficial deposits are classified as Secondary A (Dollis Hill Member). but there are
no abstractions close to the site and baseflow to streams may occur some 800m or
so down gradient of the site but the site but attenuation over this large distance will
be substantial. The bedrock (London Clay) is classified as an Unproductive Strata.
Additional testing will be conducted as part of planned ground investigation. The
drainage strategy for the site uses attenuation and piped drainage as opposed to
soakaway chambers and this will avoid flushing effects and locally raised water
levels.
GL Hearn Page 389 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Made Ground (dust inhalation/ soil ingestion/water table reduction/leaching with flow)
Students and shared living residents Minor Moderate / Minor Negligible
Secondary A Aquifer (Superficials) Moderate / Minor Moderate / Minor Negligible
Construction / maintenance workers Moderate / Minor Moderate / Minor Negligible
Public green spaces Minor Minor Negligible
Ground Gas (vapours / asphyxiation)
new buildings Minor Minor Negligible
Construction / maintenance workers Moderate / Minor Moderate / Minor Negligible
Public green spaces Minor Minor Negligible
Effects Once the Proposed Development is Operational
Ravensfield and Fenella
Made Ground
The GIR for the sub site will outline remediation requirements and the earthworks
contractor will prepare a combined option report and remediation strategy and also
a method statement. Imported materials will be validated chemically as set out in the
remediation strategy as will the condition of all cover soils or the upper 0.5m depths
of any soils in soft landscaping left in-situ. In this way operational effects will result
in an acceptable land condition. New storm drainage is proposed to utilise an
attenuation system and piped drainage to the existing stormwater network and
flushing of low contaminants will not be enhanced compared to the baseline.
Man-Made Features
New water pipes will be designed to avoid taint to water supplies and if necessary,
may include multi-walled designs with a foil core. The basement structure and floors
will be designed to resist the ingress of carbon dioxide ground gas and the measures
will be outlined in the remediation strategy and method statement.
GL Hearn Page 390 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Topsoil
A quantity of topsoil will be removed as part of the works. It is expected that only a
portion of excavated material will be reused as contamination is proven at very
shallow depths.
Geology and Geomorphology
The site has no measurable value in terms of geological expose and is relatively flat
and contains very few geomorphological features, and this setting will not change in
the operational phase.
Hydrogeology
The hydrogeological conditions vary depending on the encountered strata. The
superficial deposits are classified as Secondary A (Dollis Hill Member). In the same
way that damming effects on groundwater flows is not considered an issue during
construction due to a combination of the gravel deposits being patchy and
discontinuous and the basement small then the same minimal effects are assessed
for the operation phase. New piles will not penetrate close to the principal Lambeth
group/chalk aquifer as the layer is thought to be at least 70m thick. Supplementary
ground investigation will confirm that London Clay aquiclude strata extends at least
5m below the base of piles.
The water quality situation in operational, once temporal construction disturbance is
over, is likely to match the existing situation and 2018 ground investigation suggests
that there is no water impact requiring remediation.
Potential Impacts During Operation
A summary of the baseline CSM is provided in Table 10.27. The potential
impacts and baseline risks quoted are those before any mitigation is applied.
GL Hearn Page 393 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Adjoining site users
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Unlikely Medium 2
Maintenance workers
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Controlled Waters -Secondary A Aquifer
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Sulphate presence in soil and groundwater
Property Foundations
Leaching to ground then movement to ground water causing chemical attack on foundations
Likely Medium 4
Ground Gas
Site Users Vapour inhalation Unlikely Medium 2
Maintenance workers
Vapour inhalation Unlikely Medium 2
Property Foundations
Structural damage due to explosion of combustible gas
Unlikely Medium 2
*Risk reduction on baseline shown in green highlight, red highlight is worsening
Any travelling of vehicles will, through tyre and brake wear, cause heavy metals to
be deposited on the pavements which is then washed off in rainwater to collect in
roadside drains and gullies. The effects and mitigation of this are discussed in the
water resources chapter. Minor leakage of lubricating oils or fuel could occur at
breakdown areas. However, such leakage or spillage is expected to be very small
and unlikely to result in significant contamination.
Human Health and Environmental Impacts
A summary of potential human health and environmental impacts for the operational
stage of the development is presented in Table 10.29.
GL Hearn Page 395 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
will be designed to resist the ingress of carbon dioxide ground gas and the measures
will be outlined in the remediation strategy and method statement.
Topsoil
A quantity of topsoil will be removed as part of the works. It is expected that only a
portion of excavated material will be reused as contamination is proven at very
shallow depths.
Geology and Geomorphology
The site has no measurable value in terms of geological expose and is relatively flat
and contains very few geomorphological features, and this setting will not change in
the operational phase.
Hydrogeology
The hydrogeological conditions vary depending on the encountered strata. The
superficial deposits are classified as Secondary A (Dollis Hill Member). In the same
way that damming effects on groundwater flows is not considered an issue during
construction due to a combination of the gravel deposits being patchy and
discontinuous and the basement small then the same minimal effects are assessed
for the operation phase. New piles will not penetrate close to the principal Lambeth
group/chalk aquifer as the layer is thought to be at least 70m thick. Supplementary
ground investigation will confirm that London Clay aquiclude strata extends at least
5m below the base of piles.
The water quality situation in operational, once temporal construction disturbance is
over, is likely to match the existing situation and 2018 ground investigation suggests
that there is no water impact requiring remediation. Potential Impacts During
Operation
GL Hearn Page 398 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Contaminated water
Site Users Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Adjoining site users
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Unlikely Medium 2
Maintenance workers
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Controlled Waters -Secondary A Aquifer
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Sulphate presence in soil and groundwater
Property Foundations
Leaching to ground then movement to ground water causing chemical attack on foundations
Likely Medium 4
Ground Gas
Site Users Vapour inhalation Unlikely Medium 2
Maintenance workers
Vapour inhalation Unlikely Medium 2
Property Foundations
Structural damage due to explosion of combustible gas
Unlikely Medium 2
*Risk reduction on baseline shown in green highlight, red highlight is worsening
Any travelling of vehicles will, through tyre and brake wear, cause heavy metals to
be deposited on the pavements which is then washed off in rainwater to collect in
roadside drains and gullies. Minor leakage of lubricating oils or fuel could occur at
breakdown areas. However, such leakage or spillage is expected to be very small
and unlikely to result in significant contamination.
Human Health and Environmental Impacts
A summary of potential human health and environmental impacts for the operational
stage of the development is presented in Table 10.32.
GL Hearn Page 400 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
will be designed to resist the ingress of carbon dioxide ground gas and the measures
will be outlined in the remediation strategy and method statement.
Topsoil
A quantity of topsoil will be removed as part of the works. It is expected that only a
portion of excavated material will be reused as contamination is proven at very
shallow depths.
Geology and Geomorphology
The site has no measurable value in terms of geological expose and is relatively flat
and contains very few geomorphological features, and this setting will not change in
the operational phase.
Hydrogeology
The hydrogeological conditions vary depending on the encountered strata. The
superficial deposits are classified as Secondary A (Dollis Hill Member). In the same
way that damming effects on groundwater flows is not considered an issue during
construction due to a combination of the gravel deposits being patchy and
discontinuous and the basement small then the same minimal effects are assessed
for the operation phase. New piles will not penetrate close to the principal Lambeth
group/chalk aquifer as the layer is thought to be at least 70m thick. Supplementary
ground investigation will confirm that London Clay aquiclude strata extends at least
5m below the base of piles.
The water quality situation in operational, once temporal construction disturbance is
over, is likely to match the existing situation and 2018 ground investigation suggests
that there is no water impact requiring remediation. Potential Impacts During
Operation
GL Hearn Page 403 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Controlled Waters -Secondary A Aquifer
Leaching to ground then movement to water / aquifer
Low Medium 3
Contaminated water
Site Users Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Adjoining site users
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Unlikely Medium 2
Maintenance workers
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Controlled Waters -Secondary A Aquifer
Movement of contaminated groundwater
Low Medium 3
Sulphate presence in soil and groundwater
Property Foundations
Leaching to ground then movement to ground water causing chemical attack on foundations
Likely Medium 4
Ground Gas
Site Users Vapour inhalation Unlikely Medium 2
Maintenance workers
Vapour inhalation Unlikely Medium 2
Property Foundations
Structural damage due to explosion of combustible gas
Unlikely Medium 2
*Risk reduction on baseline shown in green highlight, red highlight is worsening
Any travelling of vehicles will, through tyre and brake wear, cause heavy metals to
be deposited on the pavements which is then washed off in rainwater to collect in
roadside drains and gullies. The effects and mitigation of this are discussed in the
water resources chapter. Minor leakage of lubricating oils or fuel could occur at
breakdown areas. However, such leakage or spillage is expected to be very small
and unlikely to result in significant contamination.
GL Hearn Page 405 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
handling, transportation, storing and reinstatement/re-use of soils to maintain soil
viability and biological activity.
Topsoil should be stripped from any impacted areas of the Proposed Development
and stockpiled for re-use in the landscaping works, except at RFC where
contaminated zones will be excavated and disposed off- site to suitable licenced
facility. The soils be stripped, stockpiled and replaced in accordance with the
Construction Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of soils in construction
(DEFRA, 2009) and the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) Good
Practice Guide for Handling Soils by Machine (2000).
The following actions should be avoided during construction:
• Cross contamination of soil • mixing of topsoil with subsoils • over-compaction or running over emplaced topsoil • incorporation of vegetation in soil stockpiles.
The following actions are recommended during construction:
• decompaction and aeration of soil prior to placement • use of tracked plant to excavate, transport and replace soil • implementation of designated haul routes to avoid damaging in-situ soils • excavation and deposition during dry conditions.
Topsoil should not be removed from below the spread of trees that are to be retained
and restoration plans for areas temporarily required during construction will be
developed.
Drainage shall be by attenuation and piped to the drainage network. In addition the
2m to 4m deep ‘basemented’ attenuation tanks will be lined with impermeable
GL Hearn Page 406 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
membranes meaning that leakage into the aquifer will not occur. In this way, and
pavement draining waters that may carry a dissolved fraction of metals and organic
compound will be kept separated from the aquifer water body and so preserve it
chemical condition
The completion of a supplementary site investigation within the study will allow the
development of risk assessments and appropriate mitigation measures to deal with
any contamination identified within the study area and this will include ground gas
categorisation.
The risks to construction workers during the construction phase of the project will be
mitigated by implementation of Health and Safety measures. This will include
suitable working methods and the correct use of Personal Protective Equipment
(PPE). These measures will be developed as part of the Construction Environmental
Management Plan (CEMP) for the Proposed Development.
As a minimum the CEMP will include the following methods and permit application
to effectively manage work in contaminated areas and avoid releases of harmful
substances to the environment and/or the unwanted movement of dust, waters and
gases. These measures will include:
• methods to control noise, waste, dust, odour, gases and vapours; • methods to control spillage and prevent contamination of adjacent areas; • the management of human exposure for both construction workers and people
living and working nearby; • methods for the storage and handling of excavated materials (both contaminated
and uncontaminated), or this information may be contained in a sister SWMP document;
• management of any unexpected contamination found during construction via a watching brief; and
GL Hearn Page 407 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
• storage requirements for hazardous substances such as diesel;
A Ground Investigation Report (GIR) should be prepared once all on-site ground
investigation is completed and the results assessed against UK soils and
groundwater standards. The report will need to take account of the existing studies
at MS and RFC. The GIR will include risk assessment to be undertaken to determine
what, if any, site specific remediation measures are required to break contaminated
land linkages as well as removing topsoil/most shallow Mage Ground in areas of
RFC. The GIR will confirm the scale of gas protection measures required as part the
basement/floor construction at RFC.
At this stage, no additional measures are considered necessary to mitigate risks
from land contamination during the construction stage beyond those that will be
instigated as part of the earthwork design. These measures would ensure that risks
to people, fand flora and property from contaminants in the ground would be
controlled such that they would not be significant.
Mitigation Once the Proposed Development is Operational
Adherence to measures to protect the integrity of any cap applied as provided in the
health and safety file so that any cover layers are not damaged by future works in
the ground
Roof and car parking drainage should not be allowed to discharge groundwater in
an uncontrolled manner. Highway drains should discharge into either combined
sewers or into controlled attenuation crates designed for drainage.
Drainage shall be installed no deeper than the minimum required depth to minimise
lowering of the groundwater level within the aquifer.
GL Hearn Page 408 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
At this stage, no additional measures are considered necessary to mitigate risks
from land contamination during the operational stage beyond those that will be
instigated as part of the earthwork design. These measures would ensure that risks
to people, fand flora and property from contaminants in the ground would be
controlled such that they would not be significant.
Residual Impacts and Monitoring
With regards to geology and geomorphology no significant residual effects are
anticipated associated with the Proposed Development.
With regards to topsoil and soils no significant residual effects are anticipated
associated with the Proposed Development.
With regards to hydrogeology no significant residual effects are anticipated
associated with the Proposed Development.
With regards to contamination no significant residual effects are anticipated
associated with the Proposed Development, and specifically for RFC, locally slightly
beneficial effects should arise where contaminated existing topsoil/very shallow
made ground is treated or removed.
Additional requirements for monitoring are not required based on the existing ground
investigations but could potentially arise as part of the planned supplementary
investigation, remediation watching brief. The validation report for the site, which will
be prepared by the main contractor will stipulate any monitoring requirements which
result from unforeseen changes in ground conditions.
GL Hearn Page 409 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
On review of the information available it is assessed that there are no residual
impacts arising from the Proposed Development on the geology and soils aspects
for any of the three development areas assessed in this report.
Cumulative Effects
As part of the assessment for geology and soils the cumulative effects of the
Proposed Development and other known developments within the vicinity have been
considered with regards to the overall impact on the geology and soils aspects.
Twelve other developments have been identified within the surrounding area to the
Proposed Development. The identified planning applications considered include:
• 19/2517/FUL: Fosters Estate • 18/7495/FUL: Westhorpe Gardens and Mills Grove • 20/5081/FUL: Hendon Post Office • 21/3396/FUL: 3-3A Burroughs Parade • 20/2105/FUL: 6 Church Terrace • 21/2731/FUL: 2 Egerton Gardens • 20/4902/FUL: Church House • 20/5179/PNV: Raffles House • 18/7001/FUL: 9 Burroughs Gardens • 21/3077/S73: Mulberry Close • 20/1111/FUL: 46 Watford Way • 20/1898/PNO: 65 Watford Way
A further five development areas which form part of the wider Hendon Hub
regeneration scheme but were scope out of the Environmental Statement have also
been considered in terms of cumulative effects. These identified areas include:
• Fuller Street Car Park • Prince of Wales Estate
GL Hearn Page 410 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
• Daniel Almshouses • Linear Woodland • The Former Quinta Club.
Given the urban setting of the site and the prevalence of concealment of the geology
and geomorphological features, current and future projects in the area are unlikely
to be of a scale and nature that would significantly affect the geology and soils of the
area.
On review of the available information and considering the Proposed Development
and the twelve other developments identified within close proximity, any cumulative
effects on the geology and soils are considered to be low. This assessment is based
on the type of underlying geology, ALC assessments, current land uses, known
contamination sources and in some cases distance from the Proposed Development
and size of the proposals. In addition, the aquifers within the superficial deposits are
unlikely to be connected over large distances due to their distribution or being
interbedded with strata of low permeability so any hydrogeological connectivity is
likely low.
The assessment has considered the likely significant effects of the Proposed
Development both collectively and as a single project and have concluded that the
finding of no significant residual effects still applies and any cumulative effects on
the geology and soils are considered to be low
Summary
The Proposed Development forms part of a project to regenerate Hendon Town
Centre. The proposals involve bringing forward the redevelopment and landscape
improvements on the following sites: Ravensfield and Fenella, Building 9 and the
Meritage Centre.
GL Hearn Page 411 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
There are no geological or geomorphological features of scientific interest or
importance within or adjacent to the study area.
There are no areas of significant contamination identified with the available
information.
The Agricultural Land Classification for the Proposed Development is assessed as
Non-Agricultural Land – Urban.
If the correct procedures and guidance are followed, and appropriate techniques are
adopted during construction and operation, the potential effects can be controlled
and managed, such that the significance of negative effects on the geology, soils,
hydrogeology and contamination of the study area can be limited to a minor to
negligible adverse level.
A summary of residual impacts is provided in Table 36.
GL Hearn Page 413 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Construction activities impacting upon Topsoil
Low Temporary Local scale Moderate Minor Adverse (Not
Significant)
Topsoil should not be removed from below the spread of trees that are to be retained and
restoration plans for areas temporarily required during construction will be developed
Negligible (Not Significant)
Hydrogeology – changes in groundwater quality due to construction activities.
Low Temporary Local scale Minor Negligible Adverse
(Not Significant)
Supplementary groundwater monitoring will be undertaken as part of planned ground
investigations
Negligible (Not Significant)
Contamination within the soils Negligible Temporary
Local scale Moderate Negligible Adverse (Not Significant)
Supplementary sampling and testing as part of planned ground investigation with remediation
action finalisation. Earthworks managed as part of a remediation method statement and with
monitoring as provided if by the method statement in applying topsoil/shallowest made
ground treatment or removal at RFC property at already identified contamination areas
Negligible (Not Significant)
Operational Effects
Contamination within the soils Negligible
Short to Long Term, Direct, Permanent
Moderate Negligible Adverse (Not Significant)
Adherence to measures to protect the integrity of any cap applied as provided in the health and
safety file so that any cover layers are not damaged by future works in the ground
Negligible (Not Significant)
GL Hearn Page 414 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Hydrogeology (Secondary A aquifer) contamination entering the groundwater system
Low Short to Long Term, Direct, Permanent
Minor Negligible Adverse (Not Significant)
Roof and car parking drainage should not be allowed to discharge groundwater in an
uncontrolled manner. Highway drains should discharge into either combined sewers or into
controlled attenuation crates designed for drainage
Negligible (Not Significant)
Hydrogeology – lowering of groundwater local groundwater table
Low Short to Long Term, Direct, Permanent
Minor Negligible Adverse (Not Significant)
Drainage shall be installed no deeper than the minimum required depth to minimise lowering of
the groundwater level within the aquifer.
Negligible (Not Significant)
GL Hearn Page 415 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
11 ARCHAEOLOGY Introduction
Mills Whipp Projects, in collaboration with Pre-Construct Archaeology, has been
appointed to undertake an archaeological assessment of the Proposed
Development to accompany the planning applications that the Applicant, the LBB, is
bringing forward as part of the Hendon Hub.
This chapter is supported by a series of technical appendices comprising:
• Appendix 11.1: Hendon Hub Building 9 Desk Based Assessment: Archaeology • Appendix 11.2: Hendon Hub Meritage Centre, Desk Based Assessment:
Archaeology • Appendix 11.3: Hendon Hub Regeneration, Ravensfield & Fenella Centre, Desk-
Based Assessment: Archaeology
Legislation and Policy Context
With regards to the potential effect of the Proposed Development upon the
archaeological resource, the following legislation and planning policy applies.
Legislation
The principal legislation is the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act
1979108. It protects Scheduled Ancient Monuments from accidental or deliberate
damage. Scheduled Monuments are maintained on a list held by the Secretary of
State for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. The legislation demands that
changes to Scheduled Monuments require Scheduled Monument Consent in
advance of any alterations or works. The Act also furnishes the Secretary of State
and local authorities with powers to designate areas of archaeological importance,
based upon non-statutory criteria regarding the significance of the archaeological
108 HMSO 1979, Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act
GL Hearn Page 416 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
receptors within those areas. The legislation stipulates that any operations that may
disturb or damage the archaeological resource within such areas are not permitted
without prior consent from the relevant planning body.
Further legislation is offered by the National Heritage Act (1997, 2002 & 2005) which
provides for the conservation and preservation of heritage and the Treasure Act
(1996) which defines which objects are classified as treasure and the obligation of
the finder to report their find.
National Policy: National Planning Policy Framework (2021)
Planning policy in the UK is governed by the National Planning Policy Framework
(NPPF), originally published in 2012 and revised in July 2021109 Chapter 16 of the
NPPF advises that planning considerations should: require an applicant to describe
the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by
their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance
and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on
their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should
have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise
where necessary. Where a site on which development is proposed includes, or has
the potential to include, heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning
authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based
assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation
Regional Policy: The London Plan (adopted March 2021)
Policy HC1 of the London Plan, Heritage Conservation and Growth110, recognises
the importance of heritage assets, including any below-ground archaeological
resource, in terms of improving access, interpretation and preservation. The
legislation also recognises that development proposals affecting heritage assets and
their settings should conserve their significance through sympathetic design and
appreciation of their setting, as well as recognising that cumulative impacts of
109 Department for Communities and Local Government, (2021); National Planning Policy Framework 110 GLA, (2021); The London Plan: The Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London
GL Hearn Page 417 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
development on heritage assets and their settings should be actively managed.
Furthermore, it states that development proposals should avoid harm and identify
enhancement opportunities by integrating heritage considerations early on in the
design process. Development proposals should identify assets of archaeological
significance and use this information to avoid harm or minimise it through design and
appropriate mitigation. Where applicable, development should make provision for
the protection of significant archaeological assets and landscapes. The protection of
undesignated heritage assets of archaeological interest equivalent to a scheduled
monument should be given equivalent weight to designated heritage assets.
Local Policy: LBB (LPA) Local Plan (Core Strategy)
The LBB (LPA) Development Plan Document (2012), Section 7.4 ‘Archaeological
Heritage’, sets out the specific criteria against which planning applications for the
development and use of land and buildings will be considered and provides local
standards for the development of sites. It states that where there is good reason to
believe that there are remains of archaeological importance on a site, we will
consider directing applicants to supply further details of proposed developments,
including the results of an archaeological desk-based assessment and field
evaluation.
Nineteen ‘Local Areas of Special Archaeological Significance are identified in the
plan. Development proposals in these areas will need to provide detail in
consultation with GLAAS of how they will investigate, catalogue and where possible
preserve the remains in situ or in a museum as part of any application. The bulk of
the Proposed Development lies within a ‘Local Area of Special Archaeological
Significance: Area 15 Hendon’ which covers The Burroughs, Parson Street, Hendon
Place and Golders Green. The Ravensfield and Fenella Site is adjacent to the
eastern boundary of that designated area, whereas the Building 9 Site and the
Meritage Centre Site sit within it.
GL Hearn Page 418 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Policy DM06 of the LBB (LPA) Development Plan Document (2012) states:
All heritage assets will be protected in line with their significance. All development will have regard to the local historic context. Development proposals must preserve or enhance the character and appearance of 16 Conservation Areas in Barnet. Proposals involving or affecting Barnet’s heritage assets…should demonstrate the following:
• the significance of the heritage asset • the impact of the proposal on the significance of the heritage asset • the impact of the proposal on the setting of the heritage asset • how the significance and /or setting of a heritage asset can be better revealed • the opportunities to mitigate or adapt to climate change • how the benefits outweigh any harm caused to the heritage asset
There will be a presumption in favour of retaining all 1,600 Locally Listed Buildings in Barnet and any buildings which makes a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the 16 Conservation areas. Archaeological remains will be protected in particular in the 19 identified Local Areas of Special Archaeological Significance’ and elsewhere in Barnet. Any development that may affect archaeological remains will need to demonstrate the likely impact upon the remains and the proposed mitigation to reduce that impact.
The following standards and guidance have been adopted in preparing this
methodology:
• Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) standard and guidance: historic environment desk based assessment (2019) and CIfA code of conduct (2017)
• The Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) • Historic England Good Practice Advice Documents (2015 & 2017) • Historic England Guidelines for Archaeological Projects in Greater London (April
2015) • English Heritage, 2015 - Management of Archaeological Recording Projects in
the Historic Environment • DMRB LA 106- Cultural Heritage Assessment (2020).
GL Hearn Page 419 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria
This section presents the methodology used to assess the potential effects of the
Proposed Development in relation to archaeology.
Consultation
Mills Whipp Projects undertook a pre-application consultation with Historic England’s
Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS) for Building 9,
Ravensfield and Fenella Centre and Meritage Centre Sites.
Building 9 Site
In summary, comments from Historic England on the DBA submitted in November
2020 (Appendix 11A) have been received (Historic England ref: CLO32641).111
They indicate that a review of existing impact against proposed plans (once known)
would be needed in order to determine if any mitigation would be warranted. If
mitigation is needed then a watching brief may be the most appropriate strategy.
Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site
Historic England have indicated (Historic England ref: CLO32600) that a detailed
assessment of development impact should be carried out in order to determine what
further archaeological works are required.112 This would most likely comprise an
evaluation to test archaeological potential and survival in order to determine if further
mitigation is warranted. They state that any archaeological evaluation and mitigation
can be caried out in accordance with a planning condition.
Meritage Centre Site
111 Pre-application advice issued by Laura O’Gorman, planning officer at Historic England (GLAAS) to Mills Whipp Projects Ltd regarding a pre-application consultation for the Hendon Hub Regeneration: Building 9, 8 December 2020. 112 Pre-application advice issued by Laura O’Gorman, planning officer at Historic England (GLAAS) to Mills Whipp Projects Ltd regarding a pre-application consultation for the Hendon Hub Regeneration: Ravensfield and Fenella Centre, 2 December 2020.
GL Hearn Page 421 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Assessment Methodology
This section presents the methodology used to assess the potential effects of the
construction and operation phases of the Proposed Development in relation to
Archaeology.
The assessment has considered the effects of the Proposed Development on any
pre-modern deposits. Any identified effects would arise from the construction of new
foundations, the construction of which may remove the pre-modern deposits. This
has been undertaken by assessing the baseline conditions to predict the probable
presence or otherwise of archaeological receptors, the sensitivity of which are then
assessed. The magnitude of change of the Proposed Development upon those
receptors has then been established. Those two criteria have been combined to
determine the scale of the effect in terms of construction and operation phases of
the Proposed Development. Consideration of the nature of the impact (direct or
indirect) and the likely duration of the impact (permanent or temporary) has been
considered.
Impact Areas
The impact area of the construction phase archaeological assessment is shown in
Figures 1, 10 and 11 within Appendices 11A, 11B and 11C (Building 9, Ravensfield
and Fenella Centre and Meritage Centre).
The impact of the Proposed Development in terms of construction and existence
effects upon the archaeological resource include:
• direct effects on buried archaeological remains • indirect effects on the settings of buried archaeological remains
The magnitude of change has been assessed through an evaluation of how and to
what extent the Proposed Development would directly or indirectly impact upon any
GL Hearn Page 426 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Due to restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, in person visits to libraries
and archive centres could not be undertaken, however a thorough search of online
resources, including cartography, pertinent grey literature and online publications,
was carried out.
Baseline Conditions
The baseline conditions presented here represent the combined results of three
desk-based studies for Building 9 (Appendix 11A), the Ravensfield and Fenella
Centre (Appendix 11B) and the Meritage Centre (Appendix 11C). All historic maps
referenced in this section can be found in Appendices 11A to 11C. The following
represents a synopsis of those desk-based studies, the results of which are
presented in full in the aforementioned appendices, along with full bibliographic and
GLHER references for the data contained in this summary.
Geology and Topography
The Proposed Development is underlain by London Clay, which in the Hendon area
is partly covered by drift deposits of Thames Terrace Gravel, specifically the Dollis
Hill Gravel of Pleistocene date114. The Dollis Hill gravel is one of the oldest of the
gravel terraces, pre-dating the diversion of the Thames to its approximate position
during the Anglian glaciation c.450,000 years ago.
The Proposed Development sits on an area of higher ground, the Hendon Plateau,
at an elevation of c.80m OD.
Both the London Clay and Dollis Hill Gravel was recorded during an archaeological
evaluation in 2002 at MDX at a depth of between 0.60m and 1.0m below ground
level. Just to the south a further evaluation in 2007 recorded ‘natural sandy gravel’
(Dollis Hill Gravel) at an elevation of 83.23m OD. At Church End it was recorded at
114 British Geological Survey, Sheet 256.
GL Hearn Page 427 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
89m OD, representing some of the highest ground in the vicinity of the Proposed
Development. In the vicinity of Hendon Hall Hotel to the north-east of the Hendon
Hub scheme, London Clay was recorded at an elevation of 68.73m OD. To the north
on Sunningfields Road mottled clays (London Clay) were record at a depth of 0.5m.
These areas lay off the Hendon Plateau to the north and beyond the vicinity of early
settlements.
It is important to note that the Dollis Hill Gravels of the Hendon Plateau would have
provided an attractive area for semi-permanent or permanent settlement of all
periods from the arrival of farming in the Bronze Age onwards due to the fertile, well-
drained, lighter soils that characterise such gravel terraces.
Cary’s map of 1786 also shows the two water courses in the study area before the
natural topography was obscured by the modern suburb. The Dollis Brook runs along
the eastern side of the higher ground, approximately 1.0km east of the development
plots. Approximately 750m west of the Proposed Development the Silk Stream runs
along the western side of the high ground. Both lie at an elevation of around 40m
OD and drain into the Welsh Harp Reservoir and in turn the River Brent before
discharging into the River Thames at Brentford.
Prehistoric
The GLHER does not list any Palaeolithic artefacts within the study area, however
43 Mesolithic flints pertaining to the period c.10,000–4,000 BC have been found in
the vicinity of St Mary’s Church. A worked flint from Hendon Lane just over 1km to
the east of the Proposed Development is noted, while at Greyhound Hill, just north
of the Church Farm Museum, several scattered struck flints were found. There is
also limited evidence for Mesolithic occupation activity across the broader area,
including two find spots near the upper reaches of the Silk Stream over 3km to the
north; a pick from Edgwarebury Lane, a flint assemblage from Bury Farm and
GL Hearn Page 428 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
numerous prehistoric flints from the headwaters of the Dollis Brook. These finds are
thought to represent evidence of sporadic visitations to the area by Mesolithic hunter-
gatherers.
The excavations at St Mary’s Church retrieved struck flints and burnt flint perhaps
pertaining to the Neolithic, while struck flints were also retrieved from Church Terrace,
although many were poor quality making dating difficult. Further afield, a flint axe
was found approximately 1km east of the Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site in
Kings Close and a flint artefact from the upper reaches of the Silk Stream was found
approximately 3km to the north.
A general lack of Bronze and Iron Age finds in the vicinity of the Proposed
Development on the GLHER suggest that the claylands of north London offered
difficult conditions for an agricultural economy to flourish. The Dollis Hill Gravels
would have been more attractive but little evidence for their settlement at this time
has been found. Only two Bronze Age find spots are listed in the Greater London
assessment for LB Barnet, a barbed and tanged arrowhead from Lawrence Street
approximately 2km to the north and a cremation jar from Ashford Common found
approximately 1km to the south-west. In broad terms, this evidence seems to
indicate a lack of intense activity in the later prehistoric period on the Hendon Plateau
and there is no evidence for a focus for settlement activity in the study area.
Roman
The Hendon Plateau is situated in the hinterland of the Roman town of Londinium
and approximately 1.25km east of Watling Street, the main Roman road to the north
via Verulamium (St Albans). On the Dollis Hill Gravels of the Hendon Plateau there
is a cluster of Roman finds at Church Terrace, Church Farm Museum, Church End
Farm and as far west as Sunny Hill. Excavations at Church Terrace produced mainly
3rd and 4th century pottery (135 sherds) and building materials with some earlier
GL Hearn Page 429 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
pottery, which together suggest the former presence of settlement and a masonry
building of uncertain function. Lesser quantities of Roman sherds were also retrieved
from Church Farmhouse and Church Farm Museum, while a coarse pottery lamp of
late 3rd to 4th century date was found at 20 Sunny Hill.
The Hendon Archaeology Priority Area (APA) also notes an assemblage of Roman
finds including pottery, mortaria, a tessellated pavement, cinerary urns, bricks and
millstones that suggest a villa may have lain in the gardens of Grove House in the
vicinity of The Burroughs approximately 500m south-west of the Meritage Centre
Site. A further ‘cinerary urn’ and a coin of the Emperor Hadrian were reportedly
discovered in Sunny Gardens to the north of the Roman finds concentrations around
Church End while almost 1km to the southwest several sherds of Roman pottery
were retrieved from Hendon School at Golders Rise.
Further afield, a settlement on Watling Street to the north of Londinium is proposed
at Brockley Hill, c.7km to the north-west. Watling Street was the main road north-
west from Londinium to Verulamium (St Albans). It lay approximately 1.25km west
of the Meritage Centre Site and was the antecedent to the A5 Edgware Road. A
further Roman road may have run northwards toward Verulamium from the Hendon
Plateau just east of Church Terrace and the Meritage Centre site. A possible Roman
road surface was also identified at the southern end of Brent Street, over 65m to the
south-east of the Proposed Development.
Saxon
A post-Roman ‘British’ population may have remained in the vicinity of Hendon
during the post-Roman and Saxon periods. This is suggested by the name of the
River Brent, which may derive from the Celtic word Brigantia, perhaps meaning ‘high’
or ‘holy’ river. This is yet to be confirmed archaeologically, however.
GL Hearn Page 430 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The earlier Roman settlement in the vicinity of Church End may have continued or
been re-founded during the Saxon period. This is demonstrated by the presence of
a Saxon ditch to the immediate east of the Meritage Centre Site at Church Terrace,
which contained Saxon chaff-tempered pottery, a spiral headed pin and numerous
pig bones. Saxon pottery was also discovered at Church Farm, while early
mediaeval pottery, possibly of Saxon or later date, was retrieved from an excavated
posthole at Hendon School, Bell Lane (c. 750m to the east of the Proposed
Development).
St Mary’s Church, just north of the Meritage Centre Site, may have been founded in
the Saxon period, although this question remains unresolved. What can be said with
certainty is that the boundaries of Hendon parish were largely fixed by the late 10th
century. It is possible that two ditches excavated at Church Terrace could represent
the boundary ditches of a church enclosure, although the dating is not very secure.
The excavations did, however, record one of the largest Saxon pottery assemblages
from the London region, 198 sherds of cooking pots and jars, confirming a settlement
in the vicinity of St Mary’s Church. Fragments of Saxon quern stone and a Saxon
copper-alloy spiral-headed pin of 7th to 8th century date were also found.
Excavations at The Burroughs recovered 397 sherds of late Saxon to mediaeval
pottery dating from the 10th to the 14th century. This suggests a further settlement
core at the Burroughs approximately 500m to the south.
‘Hendon’ may have derived from the Anglo Saxon Hean-dune meaning the ‘high
down’ or high hill’ and ‘Burroughs’ may derive from burg or ‘fort’. Charters dating
from the 7th century suggest that Watling Street (Edgware Road, approximately
1.25km to the west) formed a land boundary for an early estate. The road is likely to
have remained in used after the Roman period forming the main route between
Mercia and its major seaport at London. An early route south-westward from Hendon
to The Hyde on Watling Street may have formed the antecedent to Brent Street and
GL Hearn Page 431 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The Burroughs. The study area lay within the Gore Hundred of Middlesex and the
manor of Hendon. The manor was granted by King Edgar and Dunstan (Bishop of
London) to the abbey of Westminster in AD 959. A church is first mentioned in AD
1080, succeeded by the parish church of St Mary’s.
Mediaeval
In Domesday (1086) the manorial estate was assigned to Westminster Abbey’s St
Peter’s Church and assessed at 20 hides. It had 46 people living in a heavily wooded
area farming pigs, cattle and cultivating arable land. Settlement nuclei lay across the
manorial estate at Church End, Brent Street and to the south off The Burroughs. The
settlement of Hendon itself is recorded as having a priest, 26 villagers with land for
16 ploughs, a meadow for two oxen and woodland for 1,000 pigs.
This documentary evidence is supported by various excavations on the western side
of the Burroughs and Hendon Town Hall, which yielded mediaeval material including
397 sherds of 10th to 14th century pottery and 12th to 14th century pottery. A little
further west of The Burroughs a single sherd of mediaeval pottery was retrieved.
St Mary’s Church is first mentioned in AD 1157 and has a late Norman stone font.
The extant church has a 13th century nave, chapel and north aisle with major
rebuilding in the 15th, 16th and 20th centuries. It is Grade II* listed and lies on the
northern side of Church End adjacent to the northern side of the Meritage Centre
Site, while its churchyard adjoins Sunny Hill Park. Many of the headstones are Grade
II listed.
St Mary’s probably formed the core of the mediaeval settlement at Church End. In
keeping with this, excavations at Church End revealed the churchyard’s perimeter
ditch, which yielded 385 sherds of 12th century grey-ware. Other settlement
evidence included two ditches, three post holes and three or four graves found just
south of the Clerk’s House (St Mary’s Cottage) within a probable mediaeval
GL Hearn Page 432 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
extension to the graveyard. Finds of pottery indicate continued settlement into the
15th century while examples of decorated jugs suggest a reasonable standard of
living. Coins dating from the early 14th century were also retrieved and numerous
sheep and pig bones were recorded.
Further mediaeval pottery was retrieved from Church End during excavations in
1961-66 and at Church Farmhouse Museum gardens in 1993. The latter was
associated with a ditch which contained much burnt wood with later Saxon and
mediaeval pottery and mediaeval building material. A number of gullies and post
holes were also excavated indicating structural remains. An extension to the
mediaeval ditch was excavated in 1996 just to the north and mediaeval pottery is
also recorded from the southern side of Church Road at Church End Farm.
In 1326 a new country house ‘The Rectory’ was built in Parson Street, called Hendon
Place, by the Abbot of Westminster on demesne land at Parson Green. This became
the first manor house during the direct administration by the Abbey becoming the
focus for manorial activity. In 1593 it became known as Hendon House.
Hendon Manor was retained and managed by the abbey of Westminster until the
Dissolution. In 1551 it was granted to the earl of Pembroke whose family held it until
1650 when it was sequestrated by parliament. From then on it passed through a
number of private hands. The Hendon Hub development plots lie within the demesne
lands of Hendon Manor. Accounts of the 14th century list 469 acres of arable land,
35 acres of meadow and an unspecified amount of woodland.
By 1597 there was a cross-roads at the Burroughs where a workhouse and other
buildings later stood around a pond. This general settlement pattern was still there
in the late 18th century and is shown on Cary’s map of 1786.
Edgware Road continued in use as one of the main routes north. A second important
route north was via Hampstead and Golders Hill joining Edgware Road north of the
GL Hearn Page 433 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Hyde after passing through The Burroughs. In 1593 it was described as ‘ancient
highway now unaccustomed’ suggesting it had formerly been preferred to Edgware
Road. A network of minor roads crossed the area. Parson Street, the northward
continuation of Brent Street was in 1321 part of the route to the north of the parish.
Burroughs Lane (later Station Road) lead from Edgware Road south of the Silk
Bridge to Burroughs and Church Road. Hall Lane ran north from the St Mary’s and
Ashley Lane ran roughly parallel to it about 750m further east.
Post-mediaeval
During the 16th–18th centuries the Proposed Development lay within an agricultural
landscape. Its character is illustrated on ‘A Prospect of Copped Hall’ c. 1725 looking
south. Hendon is illustrated in the distance set within surroundings of fields bounded
by hedges.
Several of the farmhouses in the vicinity of the Proposed Development were rebuilt
in the 16th and 17th centuries, Church End Farm’s farmhouse dates to c.1650 and
is the sole survivor and one of the most complete examples of Middlesex vernacular
architecture. It was restored in 1954 and lies just west of the Meritage Centre Site.
Archaeological evidence for the 16th and 17th centuries comes from the excavations
at Church Terrace where pottery, decorated floor tiles, coins and clay pipes indicate
domestic activity. Extensions to St Mary’s Church were undertaken in the late 15th
and 16th centuries and excavations revealed demolition debris from earlier timber
buildings. Stone footings, tile and a possible hearth suggest a 17th-century phase of
building and Church House became an inn and meeting place for the Vestry making
Church End the hub of the settlement and core of settlement of Hendon. Additional
evidence for 17th to 18th-century occupation in the area can be found to the west on
Brent Street, where boundary ditches, perhaps associated with tenement blocks,
were recorded below an 18th-century soil horizon.
GL Hearn Page 434 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
By the early 18th century Church End still formed the heart of a small community
that included St Mary’s Church, The Greyhound and Church House, Church End
Farm and Church Farm farmhouse as well as a small, unnamed cluster of buildings.
The layout of the village was depicted on Crow’s survey of 1754-6. The Church
Terrace Excavations revealed the brick foundations of a timber building and brick
and tile drains. By the late 18th century these had been replaced by foundations
trenches for Hearn’s House. The Church Farmhouse Museum occupies the original
mid-17th century ‘L’ plan farmhouse, brick faced and with a tile roof. It is a Grade II
Listed Building.
On the western fringe, Grove House, one of the largest seats in the parish stood in
extensive grounds to the northwest of The Burroughs. Built in 1753, it was
demolished in 1934 and the grounds became a public park. Excavations in 2007 for
MDX’s Hatchcroft Development recorded two 18th century ditches and a post-
mediaeval pond thought to be associated with landscaping for Grove House.
Settlement also continued into the post-mediaeval period at The Burroughs.
Excavations at the former Hendon Bus Garage revealed a red brick wall and small
arch, perhaps Ravensfield House, an 18th-century structure.
In 1756, Hendon Place in Parsons Green lay at the corner of Ashley Lane and
Parson Street to the north of the Meritage Centre Site. Excavations in 2019 at
Hendon Hall Hotel recorded masonry structures and drainage associated with
Hendon Hall, a mid-18th century Manor House with extensive grounds.
By the 19th century suburban building approached and parts of Hendon ‘became
conveniently placed for dairy farming’. One substantial dairy farm lay near Church
End in the vicinity of the Proposed Development.
Soon after Hendon Railway Station was opened in 1868 Church End was developed
with houses forming a residential area. Fuller Street and the terraces of Heading
GL Hearn Page 435 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Street and Prince of Wales Road were built in the late 19th century. The northern
limit of housing was marked by Sunny Gardens Road and Sunningfields Road.
Sunningfields Crescent was laid out in 1882. The Midlands Railway line ran west of
the development plots and its impact was mainly limited to that part of the parish i.e.
Cricklewood, Hyde, Colindeep and Hale. In 1921 Sunny Hill Park was created by
Hendon local council following the purchase of 16 acres of land that previously
belonged to Church Farmhouse, being enlarged in 1929.
Suburban creep northwards was halted after the Second World War by the
imposition of the Green Belt allowing fields to survive north of Mill Hill and Highwood
Hill. East of Edgware Road and south of the Proposed Development,
suburbanisation was stimulated by the extension of the Underground through
Hendon Central to Edgware and the building of arterial roads. By 1935 houses had
covered the whole area to the south and the urban district became the Municipal
Borough of Hendon. In 1965 the LBB was founded replacing the Municipal Borough
and a year later the M1 was opened.
Map Regression: Building 9 (Appendix 1: Figures 1–9)
Rocque’s map of 1757 and Cary’s map of 1786 (Appendix 11A: Figures 3 and 4)
shows the Building 9 site sitting in-between the settlements at Church End to the
north and The Burroughs to the south in an area that may have been occupied by
the grounds of Grove House. A similar situation is shown on the Ordnance Survey
maps of 1877 and 1895 although the house has been renamed ‘Hendon Grove’
(Appendix 11A: Figures 5 and 6). By 1912 the OS map shows council offices
adjacent to the southern side of the site (Appendix 11A: Figure 7).
The OS map of 1935 shows two large buildings now occupying the Building 9 Site,
the eastern one being the new library (Appendix 11A: Figure 8). The town hall is now
shown on the southern side of the site and the Fire Station on the northern side. By
GL Hearn Page 436 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
1955 the OS map shows that a further building has been added to the western end
of the site (Appendix 11A: Figure 9). On the later OS maps this building is shown to
have been replaced by the larger building currently occupying this part of the site
(Appendix 11A: Figure 1).
Map Regression: Ravensfield and Fenella Centre (Appendix 2: Figures 1–9)
Like the Building 9 Site, the Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site lies in an area of
fields between the two ancient settlement cores from the publication of the Rocque
map up to and beyond the compilation of the OS map of 1877 (Appendix 11B:
Figures 3–5). The site occupies an open field with a north-south boundary near its
eastern side.
By the end of the 19th century the field had been divided into housing plots (Appendix
11B: Figure 6). The chapel of Our Lady of Dolours’ lies just beyond the southern side
of the site. By 1912 the OS map indicates that three more terraced houses had been
built on the southern part of the site (Appendix 11B: Figure 7). This situation is still
shown on the OS maps of 1935 and 1955 (Appendix 11B: Figures 8 and 9).
Map Regression: Meritage Centre (Appendix 3: Figures 1–9)
The Meritage Centre Site (Appendix 11C: Figure 1) lies on the north eastern side of
the junction of The Burroughs and Church End in an area shown to be occupied by
several buildings, at least some of which pre-date the publication of the Rocque map
of 1757 (Appendix 11C: Figure 3).
The mid-18th century layout of the settlement at Church End is illustrated on Crows
Map of 1754 (Appendix 11C: Figure 4). The Meritage Centre site’s central area lies
on the northern part of The Croft in the vicinity of a possible Coach House, while its
northern area is occupied by cottages, the timber framed Clerk’s House and a brick
GL Hearn Page 437 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
house called Rankin’s House. At the rear lies an orchard and just to the north lay the
Greyhound Inn.
The OS map of 1877 (Appendix 11C: Figure 5) shows the Site to be occupied by
buildings on the eastern side of Church End. The site’s central area is shown to be
occupied by a large house and its grounds and its northern area is occupied by
houses, cottages and gardens.
By the end of the 19th century this part of Hendon had been redeveloped with the
establishment of new streets lined with terraced houses to the north of Church Lane,
later Church Road (Appendix 11C: Figure 6). The central area of the site is now
occupied by a number of small houses and gardens and the northern area by both
terraced housing and larger houses on its northern half. By 1912 these larger houses
had been replaced with terraced housing (Appendix 11C: Figure 7). This situation is
still shown on the OS maps of 1935 and 1955 (Appendix 11C: Figures 8 and 9). The
residential area was mostly demolished to make way for the buildings currently
occupying the site.
Previous Impacts: Building 9
As set out in full in Appendix 11A, archaeological survival in Hendon is generally
considered to be poor as deposits are typically found at shallow depths between
0.5m and 1m below modern ground level. This is supported by excavations
undertaken to the immediate north of the Building 9 Site, which demonstrated that
large parts of the site were disturbed.
The Building 9 Site is currently occupied by three modern large-scale buildings;
Building 9, the Hendon Library, the Hendon Town Hall Annexe and Hendon Town
Hall. The existing modern building foundations associated with these building will
have removed any archaeological resource in their footprint. Survival of the
archaeological resource on the Building 9 site is therefore considered to be very low.
GL Hearn Page 438 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Previous Impacts: Ravensfield and Fenella Centre
The Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site is currently occupied by three Victorian
terraced properties, 1-3 Burroughs incorporating shops, outbuildings and a carpark
and No.3 Egerton Gardens in the southern part of the Site. The northern and central
parts are occupied by two large-scale modern buildings, Ravensfield House and the
Fenella Building, leased to MDX. As the predicted depth of any archaeological
receptors in the Hendon area is shallow (c. 0.5m to 1m), it is expected that
foundations and services associated with these building will have severely truncated
and fragmented any substrata on the site. Potential archaeological survival is
therefore likely to be limited to yards and car parks.
Previous Impacts: Meritage Centre
Currently the Meritage Centre Site is mostly occupied by large modern buildings
(Appendix 11C: Figure 1). The central area is occupied by 2-6 Church Terrace and
28-30 Church End. The northern area is occupied by Meritage Club and 32-46
Church End. The southern part of the site is occupied by 13-21 Prince of Wales
Close (also known as 13-21 Church End). As the predicted depth of any
archaeological receptors is shallow (c.0.5m to 1m), it is expected that foundations
and services associated with these buildings will have severely truncated and
fragmented any substrata on the site. Additionally, the north-western quarter of the
Site was excavated by HADAS in 1973–4, an undertaking that may have removed
all archaeological receptors in that location. Beyond those areas, for example in
open areas such as car parks and yards, archaeological survival is predicted to be
better.
Receptors and Receptor Sensitivity: Building 9
The potential occurrence of below-ground archaeological receptors and their
sensitivities on the Building 9 Site is presented in Table 11.5. The assessment is
GL Hearn Page 441 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Assessment of Effects (Construction and Operational)
Building 9: Effects During Construction
No nationally significant archaeological receptors lie within 250m of the Building 9
Site. Despite being situated within a Local Area of Special Archaeological
Significance: ‘Area 15 Hendon: The Burrows, Parson Street, Hendon Place and
Golders Green Road’ as defined by the LBB (LPA), there is low potential for non-
designated archaeological receptors within the confines of the Building 9 Site due to
extensive truncation across the bulk of the Site in the recent past.
The Proposed Development within the confines of the Building 9 Site includes the
demolition of the former Medical Clinic and 1973 rear library extension and erection
of a four-storey teaching block including east and west connections to Hendon
Library and Hendon Town Hall Annex. Although the final foundation design has not
yet been finalised, the proposed building is not anticipated to possess a basement
storey, while the project’s structural engineer has advised that the foundations are
likely to be piled.
Any below-ground works associated with this, for example foundations or service
runs, would cause permanent, direct impacts upon any surviving archaeological
receptors, however this is mitigated by the fact that the bulk of the Site was
previously subject to truncation in the recent past, which will have removed most or
all archaeological receptors.
An evaluation of the predicted direct impacts and subsequent nature, scale and
significance effects of the Construction Phase of the Proposed Development upon
archaeological receptors within the Building 9 Site has been undertaken and is
reported in Table 11.8.
GL Hearn Page 443 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
No direct impacts to archaeological receptors are anticipated during the Operational
Phase of the development within the Building 9 Site.
The continued presence of below-ground elements of the Proposed Development
during the Operational Phase could induce ongoing, long-term changes in ground
conditions, for example hydrological changes or oxidation reactions, that could
cause indirect, permanent impacts in the form of the gradual deterioration of any
archaeological receptors in the vicinity of the Building 9 Site (beyond the site
boundary). This is, however, deemed unlikely given the hydrological conditions
induced by the free-draining geology. Indirect effects on known below-ground non-
designated archaeological receptors surviving outside the Building 9 Site are
therefore deemed to be negligible (not significant) for the Operational Phase.
In summary, the scale of effect of the Operational Phase of the Building 9 Site on
below-ground archaeological receptors of all periods will be non-existent for direct
effects and permanent but negligible for indirect effects (not significant).
Ravensfield and Fenella Centre: Effects During Construction
Despite sitting to the immediate east of a Local Area of Special Archaeological
Significance: ‘Area 15 Hendon: The Burrows, Parson Street, Hendon Place and
Golders Green Road’ as defined by the LBB (LPA), there is low potential for non-
designated archaeological receptors within untruncated sections of the Ravensfield
and Fenella Centre Site due to the nature of known historic land use and known
distributions of archaeological receptors in the vicinity of the Site.
The Proposed Development within the confines of the Ravensfield and Fenella
Centre Site includes the demolition of the existing buildings (Ravensfield House,
Fenella Building, nos. 1–3 Burroughs Parade and 3 Egerton Gardens) and the
erection of a building with a part 4, 6 and 7 storey block and freestanding 5 storey
rotunda. This will be constructed over the cleared site and the existing car park and
GL Hearn Page 446 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
receptors surviving either inside or outside the Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site
are therefore negligible (not significant) for the Operational Phase and are not
considered further.
In summary, the scale of effect of the Operational Phase of the Ravensfield and
Fenella Centre Site on below-ground archaeological receptors of all periods will be
non-existent for direct effects and permanent but negligible for indirect effects (not
significant).
Meritage Centre: Effects During Construction
The Meritage Centre Site lies within a Local Area of Special Archaeological
Significance: ‘Area 15 Hendon: The Burrows, Parson Street, Hendon Place and
Golders Green Road’ as defined by the LBB (LPA)’. In keeping with this there is
variable potential for non-designated archaeological receptors within untruncated
sections of the Site, ranging from low to high, based upon the nature of known
historic land use and known distributions of archaeological receptors in the vicinity
of the Site (Table 10).
The Proposed Development within the confines of the Meritage Centre Site consists
of the demolition of existing structures; Meritage Centre, nos. 32–46 Church End,
nos. 28–30 Church End, nos. 2–6 Church Terrace, nos.13–21 Prince of Wales Close,
(also known as 13–21 Church End), followed by the erection of 4 blocks ranging over
two, three and four storeys comprising 181 x purpose built student accommodation
units, 33 purpose-built shared living accommodation units and 1 x C2 Unit (125 sqm),
Health and Wellbeing Centre under Use Class E (470 sqm), including 7 x blue badge
parking spaces and 6 x car parking spaces. Although the final foundation design has
not yet been finalised, the proposed building is not anticipated to possess a
basement storey, while the project’s structural engineer has advised that the
foundations are likely to be piled.
GL Hearn Page 448 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
effects on known below-ground non-designated archaeological receptors surviving
either inside or outside the Meritage Centre Site are therefore deemed negligible
(not significant) for the Construction Phase.
In summary, the scale of direct effects of the Construction Phase of the Meritage
Centre Site on below-ground archaeological receptors will be permanent but minor
for Bronze and Iron Age receptors (not significant) and permanent and minor to
moderate for all other periods (significant). The scale of indirect effects of the
Construction Phase will be permanent but negligible for all periods (not significant).
Meritage Centre: Effects Once the Proposed Development is Operational
The Operational Phase of the Proposed Development could induce ongoing
permanent or temporary changes in ground conditions on the Meritage Centre Site,
for example hydrological changes or oxidation reactions. These could cause indirect,
permanent impacts upon any surviving archaeological receptors both within and in
the vicinity of the Site due to a permanent or temporary change in preservation
conditions. However, given the free-draining nature of the geology, such changes
are unlikely. Indirect effects on known below ground non-designated archaeological
receptors surviving either inside or outside the Meritage Centre Site are therefore
negligible (not significant) for the Operational Phase.
In summary, the scale of effect of the Operational Phase of the Meritage Centre Site
on below-ground archaeological receptors of all periods will be non-existent for direct
effects and permanent but negligible for indirect effects (not significant).
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation During Construction: Building 9 Site
On the Building 9 Site, direct and indirect impacts of the Construction and
Operational Phases of the Proposed Development were assessed as not significant
GL Hearn Page 449 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
for archaeological receptors of all periods. That said, comments from Historic
England on the DBA submitted in November 2020 (Appendix 11A) have been
received (Historic England ref: CLO32641) 115. They indicate that a review of existing
impact against proposed plans (once known) would be needed in order to determine
if any mitigation would be warranted. If mitigation is needed then a watching brief
may be the most appropriate strategy.
Mitigation During Operation: Building 9 Site
The scale of direct and indirect Operational Phase effects was assessed as not
significant on the Building 9 Site. As such, no mitigation is required for the
Operational Phase.
Mitigation During Construction: Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site
On the Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site, direct and indirect impacts of the
Construction and Operational Phases of the Proposed Development were assessed
as not significant for archaeological receptors of all periods. That said, Historic
England have indicated (Historic England ref: CLO32600) that a detailed
assessment of development impact (when available) should be carried out in order
to determine what further archaeological works are required 116 . If deemed
necessary this would most likely comprise an evaluation to test archaeological
potential and survival in order to determine if further mitigation is warranted.
Mitigation During Operation: Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site
The scale of direct and indirect Operational Phase effects was assessed as not
significant on the Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site. As such, no mitigation is
required for the Operational Phase.
115 Pre-application advice issued by Laura O’Gorman, planning officer at Historic England (GLAAS) to Mills Whipp Projects Ltd regarding a pre-application consultation for the Hendon Hub Regeneration: Building 9 Site, 8 December 2020. 116 Pre-application advice issued by Laura O’Gorman, planning officer at Historic England (GLAAS) to Mills Whipp Projects Ltd regarding a pre-application consultation for the Hendon Hub Regeneration: Ravensfield and Fenella Centre Site, 2 December 2020.
GL Hearn Page 450 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Mitigation During Construction: Meritage Centre Site
On the Meritage Centre Site, the scale of Construction Phase direct effects upon
archaeological receptors pertaining to the Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Roman through
to post-mediaeval periods were assessed as significant.
From the evidence examined during the preparation of this document, there is no
indication that archaeological deposits are present on the Meritage Centre Site that
merit preservation in situ.
Due to the shallow nature of the archaeological resource in the area more generally,
areas of the Meritage Centre Site that were subject to truncation in the recent past
do not require mitigation as any archaeological receptors in those locations will have
been destroyed. However, untruncated areas of the Meritage Centre Site that will be
impacted upon by the Proposed Development will require archaeological mitigation
in advance of redevelopment, as any below-ground works would remove any
archaeological receptors in full or in part. The scale of Construction Phase direct
effects upon archaeological receptors pertaining to the Mesolithic, Neolithic, and
Roman through to post-mediaeval periods are therefore assessed as significant.
However, once the mitigation measures proposed herein are applied, all
Construction Phase direct effects to archaeological receptors of all periods are not
significant.
Appropriate mitigation would take the form of an archaeological trial trenching
exercise, the specifics of which would need to be agreed in advance with Historic
England GLAAS and outlined in an approved written scheme of investigation (WSI).
The evaluation would investigate evidence for all periods. Should the evaluation yield
a positive result, a programme of further archaeological investigation would be
agreed with GLAAS if required.
GL Hearn Page 451 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
These conclusions accord with pre-application recommendations previously set out
by Laura O’Gorman of Historic England’s Greater London Archaeological Advisory
Service (GLAAS).117
Mitigation Once the Proposed Development is Operational
The scale of direct and indirect Operational Phase effects was assessed as not
significant on the Meritage Centre Site. As such, no mitigation is required for the
Operational Phase.
Residual Impacts and Monitoring
The residual impacts arising from the Proposed Development are summarised in
Table 11.11 above. All residual construction and operational phase impacts of the
Proposed Development have been collectively assessed. It can be concluded that,
once the above mitigation measures are applied, there is no finding of significant
effects of the Construction and Operational Phases of the Proposed Development
upon archaeological receptors of all periods.
Cumulative Impact Assessment
Selected sites have been assessed with reference to the archaeological baseline
data and the potential of any shared resources and receptors which may experience
cumulative effects has been considered. Archaeological deposits and their relative
survival are unique to each property on the Hendon Plateau and in the case of all of
the sites addressed (see Chapter 2 for a list of developments considered and for
those scoped out of the Environmental Impact Assessment) archaeological impacts
have either been mitigated, are in the process of being mitigated or will be mitigated
in the future. Consequently, the cumulative effects of the agreed list of cumulative
117 Pre-application advice issued by Laura O’Gorman, planning officer at Historic England (GLAAS) to Mills Whipp Projects Ltd regarding a pre-application consultation for the Hendon Hub Regeneration: Meritage Centre, 8 December 2020.
GL Hearn Page 452 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
developments have been assessed and have been found not to lead to incremental
changes that would result in a finding of significant cumulative effects.
GL Hearn Page 457 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
12 BUILT HERITAGE, TOWNSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT
Introduction
Montagu Evans LLP has been appointed to undertake this ES Chapter to assess the
likely significant environmental effects of the Proposed Development on built
heritage and townscape and visual amenity. The assessment has been carried out
in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact
Assessment) Regulations 2017 (as amended) (‘the EIA Regulations’) and in line with
other relevant legislation, planning policy and guidance. A summary of the
Legislation and Policy Context is set out below.
The (built) heritage assessment considers the heritage value of heritage assets,
(including their setting) and the impact of the Proposed Development upon that
heritage value. This analysis is in line with the statutory provisions set out at Sections
16(2) and Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)
Act 1990 (‘the 1990 Act’). These provisions relate to the direct impact on listed
buildings and conservation areas directly.
The heritage assessment has identified heritage assets in the area surrounding the
Site which may experience an effect to their heritage value arising from a change to
their setting as a result of the Proposed Development. This analysis is in line with
the statutory provisions set out at Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (‘the 1990 Act’).
The townscape assessment considers the Proposed Development within its urban
context, including the buildings, the relationships between them, the different types
GL Hearn Page 458 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
of urban open spaces, including green spaces and the relationship between
buildings and open spaces. The townscape assessment is based on 5 townscape
character areas which are identified at baseline stage on the basis of shared
characteristics.
The visual assessment considers the impact of the Proposed Development upon
visual receptors. The assessment relates to how people will be affected by changes
in views and visual amenity at different places, including publicly accessible locations.
Visual receptors are always people (although usually visual receptors are defined
according to use e.g. residential, business, road, footpath etc.), rather than
landscape features.
The assessment is informed by 20 Accurate Visual Representations (‘AVRs’ or
‘verified views’). The location of the viewpoints has been informed by architectural
and historic accounts of the area, an appraisal of the existing Site and surroundings,
and relevant policy designations. The location of these viewpoints has been agreed
with the Council during the pre-application and EIA Scoping process.
This chapter is support by a series of technical appendices comprising:
• Appendix 12.1: Meritage Centre Heritage, Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment
• Appendix 12.2: Building B9 Heritage, Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment • Appendix 12.3: Fenella and Ravensfield Heritage, Townscape and Visual Impact
Assessment
Legislation and Policy Context
This section sets out the relevant planning policy context for the redevelopment of
the Site, including national and local guidance and other material considerations.
This section also sets out the context of the assessment process.
Legislative Framework
GL Hearn Page 459 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The applicable legislative framework to this assessment includes the following:
• The Town and Country Planning Act 1990; • The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004; and • The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (“the 1990
Act”).
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
The statutory duties of the decision-maker, when considering applications which
affect designated heritage receptors, are set out in the Planning (Listed Buildings
and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. This requires local planning authorities to have
special regard to the desirability of preserving the special interest of listed buildings,
conservation areas and their respective settings.
The Proposed development will directly affect the listed library and the Meritage
Centre is situated partially within the Church End Conservation Area.
There are also statutorily listed buildings within the study area which may experience
a change to their setting, and therefore heritage value, as a result of the Proposed
Development.
In this case, the relevant statutory provisions are Section 16(2) of the 1990 Act which
states:
In considering whether to grant listed building consent for any works the local planning authority or the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
Also relevant is Section 66(1) of the 1990 Act, which states:
‘In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural and historical interest which it possesses.’
GL Hearn Page 460 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
And Section 72(1), which states:
‘In the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area, of any [functions under or by virtue of] any of the provisions mentioned in subsection (2), special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.’
Having regard to the above, the statutory provision is satisfied if development
proposals preserve the setting of a listed building. The meaning of preservation in
this context is taken to be the avoidance of harm.
Development Plan
Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 stipulates that
where in making any determination under the Planning Acts, regard is to be had to
the development plan, and the determination must be made in accordance with that
plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The following documents comprise the statutory development plan:
• The London Plan 2021; • Core Strategy DPD (September 2012); and • Development Management Policies DPD (September 2012). • Barnet’s Local Plan replaces the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) (adopted in
May 2006).
London Plan (2021)
The following policies of the London Plan are relevant to the assessment of the built
heritage, townscape and visual impact of the Proposed Development.
Policy D3 (Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach) states that:
A All development must make the best use of land by following a design-led approach that optimises the capacity of sites, including site allocations. Optimising site capacity means ensuring that development is of the most appropriate form and land use for the site. The design-led approach requires consideration of design options to determine the most appropriate form of development that responds to a site’s context and capacity for growth, and
GL Hearn Page 461 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
existing and planned supporting infrastructure capacity (as set out in Policy D2 Infrastructure requirements for sustainable densities), and that best delivers the requirements set out in Part D.
B Higher density developments should generally be promoted in locations that are well connected to jobs, services, infrastructure and amenities by public transport, walking and cycling, in accordance with Policy D2 Infrastructure requirements for sustainable densities. Where these locations have existing areas of high density buildings, expansion of the areas should be positively considered by Boroughs where appropriate. This could also include expanding Opportunity Area boundaries where appropriate.
C In other areas, incremental densification should be actively encouraged by Boroughs to achieve a change in densities in the most appropriate way. This should be interpreted in the context of Policy H2 Small sites.
D Development proposals should: Form and layout
1) enhance local context by delivering buildings and spaces that positively respond to local distinctiveness through their layout, orientation, scale, appearance and shape, with due regard to existing and emerging street hierarchy, building types, forms and proportions;
2) encourage and facilitate active travel with convenient and inclusive pedestrian and cycling routes, crossing points, cycle parking, and legible entrances to buildings, that are aligned with peoples’ movement patterns and desire lines in the area
3) be street-based with clearly defined public and private environments
4) facilitate efficient servicing and maintenance of buildings and the public realm, as well as deliveries, that minimise negative impacts on the environment, public realm and vulnerable road users.’
Policy D4 (Delivering Good Design) states:
‘A Masterplans and design codes should be used to help bring forward development and ensure it delivers high quality design and place-making based on the requirements set out in Part B of Policy D3 Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach.
B Where appropriate, visual, environmental and movement modelling/ assessments should be undertaken to analyse potential design options for an area, site or development proposal. These models, particularly 3D virtual reality and other interactive digital models, should, where possible, be used to inform
GL Hearn Page 462 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
plan-making and decision-taking, and to engage Londoners in the planning process. Design scrutiny
C Design and access statements submitted with development proposals should demonstrate that the proposal meets the design requirements of the London Plan.
D The design of development proposals should be thoroughly scrutinised by borough planning, urban design, and conservation officers, utilising the analytical tools set out in Part B, local evidence, and expert advice where appropriate. In addition, boroughs and applicants should make use of the design review process to assess and inform design options early in the planning process. Development proposals referable to the Mayor must have undergone at least one design review early on in their preparation before a planning application is made, or demonstrate that they have undergone a local borough process of design scrutiny, based on the principles set out in Part E if they:
1) include a residential component that exceeds 350 units per hectare; or
2) propose a building defined as a tall building by the borough (see Policy D9 Tall buildings), or that is more than 30m in height where there is no local definition of a tall building.’
Policy HC1 (Heritage conservation and growth) states at part ‘C’ that:
‘Development proposals affecting heritage assets, and their settings, should conserve their significance, by being sympathetic to the assets’ significance and appreciation within their surroundings. The cumulative impacts of incremental change from development on heritage assets and their settings should also be actively managed. Development proposals should avoid harm and identify enhancement opportunities by integrating heritage considerations early on in the design process.’
The Site does not appear within any strategic views identified within the LVMF. HC3
(Strategic and Local Views) states at part ‘G’:
‘Boroughs should clearly identify local views in their Local Plans and strategies. Boroughs are advised to use the principles of Policy HC4 London View Management Framework for the designation and management of local views. Where a local view crosses borough boundaries, the relevant boroughs should work collaboratively to designate and manage the view.’
GL Hearn Page 463 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Development Management Policies DPD (September 2012)
The Development Management Policies DPD sets out the policy framework for
decision-making on planning applications. The policies pertinent to heritage and
townscape considerations are presented below.
The relevant parts of Policy DM01 (Protecting Barnet’s character and amenity) state
that:
• All development should represent high quality design which demonstrates high levels of environmental awareness and contributes to climate change mitigation and adaptation;
• Development proposals be based on an understanding of local characteristics. Proposals should preserve or enhance local character and respect the appearance, scale, mass, height and pattern of surrounding buildings, spaces and streets;
• Development proposals should retain outdoor amenity space having regard to its character.
The latter sections of the policy refer to landscaping, stating that:
• Development proposals will be required to include hard and soft landscaping that: • is well laid out in terms of access, car parking and landscaping • considers the impact of hardstandings on character • achieve a suitable visual setting for the building • provide an appropriate level of new habitat including tree and shrub planting • make a positive contribution to the surrounding area • contributes to biodiversity including the retention of existing wildlife habitat and
trees • adequately protects existing trees and their root systems.
Policy DM06 (Barnet’s heritage and conservation) states that proposals affecting
Barnet’s heritage assets should demonstrate accordance with the NPPF and seeks
to retain buildings which are locally-listed or positively contribute to CAs. The policy
also states that:
• All heritage assets will be protected in line with their significance.
GL Hearn Page 464 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
• All development will have regard to the local historic context. • Development proposals must preserve or enhance the character and appearance
of 16 Conservation Areas in Barnet.
Policy DM06 states that proposals should demonstrate how the benefits of the
development outweigh any harm caused to the heritage asset.
Barnet Core Strategy (2012)
Policy CS5 (Protecting and enhancing Barnet’s character to create high quality
places) requires that development in Barnet respects local context and distinctive
local character creating places and buildings of high quality design. With regard to
heritage and character, it states:
‘We will work with partners to proactively protect and enhance Barnet’s heritage,
including conservation areas, listed buildings, locally listed buildings, registered
parks and gardens, scheduled monuments, areas of archaeological significance and
London’s only battlefield site.
We will require proposals within or affecting the setting of heritage assets to provide
a site assessment which demonstrates how the proposal will respect and enhance
the asset. Policy CS13 addresses the adaptation of heritage assets to reduce carbon
emissions and ensure efficient use of natural resources.
We will ensure through our programme of Conservation Area Character Appraisals
that these areas are protected and enhanced.
We will ensure through our Green Infrastructure SPD that the key characteristics of
Barnet’s landscape (Barnet Plateau and Finchley Ridge) are protected and
enhanced.
The Barnet Characterisation Study forms the baseline for the identification of places with a
consistent and coherent architectural character. Within the typologies identified in the
GL Hearn Page 465 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Characterisation Study we will through our Development Management Policies DPD and
Residential Design Guidance SPD develop a framework to protect and enhance those high
quality suburbs in Barnet not protected by Conservation Area designations.’
National Policy
National Planning Policy Framework (2021)
The new NPPF was republished in July 2021 and supersedes previous national
planning guidance contained in the previous NPPF (2012), NPPF (2019) and various
Planning Policy Guidance and Planning Policy Statements. The NPPF sets out the
government’s approach to planning maters and it is a material consideration in the
determination of planning applications.
Design
Chapter 12 outlines the policy regarding design. At paragraph 126 it is emphasised
that ‘good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places
in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities’.
Paragraph 130 states planning policies and decisions should ensure that
developments:
• will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development;
• are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping;
• are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovating or change (such as increased densities);
• establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit;
GL Hearn Page 466 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
• optimise the potential of the Site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development (including green and other public space) and support local facilities and transport networks; and
• create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users; and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.
Paragraph 134 promotes sustainable development and appropriate design and
states that significant weight should be given to:
a) development which reflects local design policies and government guidance on
design, taking into account any local design guidance and supplementary planning
documents such as design guides and codes; and/or
b) outstanding or innovative designs which promote high levels of sustainability, or
help raise the standard of design more generally in an area, so long as they fit in
with the overall form and layout of their surroundings.
Taken together, it is clear that Paragraphs 126, 130 and 134 support the creative
design of buildings incorporating the highest standards of sustainable design and
technology. Thus the NPPF encourages LPAs to look for opportunities to permit
development which promotes high quality design incorporating the highest level of
sustainable construction and operation.
Heritage
Chapter 16 of the NPPF sets out the policies relating to the conservation and
enhancement of the historic environment. At the outset, paragraph 194 specifies
that:
“In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be
GL Hearn Page 467 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.”
The NPPF defines significance as:
‘The value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. The interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting.
Paragraph 199 states that:
“When considering the impact of a Proposed Development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.”
In essence, great weight should be given to the conservation of heritage assets.
Conservation is defined as ‘managing change’.
Paragraph 202 has regard to less than substantial harm. It states that:
“Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.”
Similarly, in relation to non-designated heritage assets, paragraph 203 states that:
“The effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that directly or indirectly affect non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.”
Emerging Policy Barney Draft Local Plan (Reg. 18) (Jan. 2020)
At the time of writing, Barnet’s website states that they are updating the Regulation
18 draft of the emerging Local Plan in advance of preparing the Regulation 19
GL Hearn Page 468 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
version. Regulation 22 (submission of the Local Plan to the Secretary of State) is
anticipated to take place in autumn 2021.
Emerging Policy CDH01 (Promoting High Quality Design) states:
‘a) in order to make the most efficient use of land residential proposals must be
developed at an optimum density. A design-led approach to determine capacity
should deliver an optimum density. This approach should consider local context,
accessibility by walking and cycling and existing and planned public transport as well
as the capacity of infrastructure.
b) all new development should be of a high architectural and urban design quality
and be in compliance with the Residential Design Guide SPG and the Sustainable
Design and Construction SPD.
The Council will expect development proposals to:
i. Respond sensitively to the distinctive local character, building form, patterns
of development, scale, massing, roof form and height of the existing context.
ii. Use materials of a suitable quality and appearance to respect local character
and setting.
iii. Ensure attractive, safe and, where appropriate, vibrant streets and active
frontages that provide visual interest, particularly at street level. […]’
The salient parts of emerging Policy CDH08 (Barnet’s Heritage) state:
B) development that leads to less than substantial harm to the significance of a
designated heritage asset will be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal,
including where appropriate, securing the optimum viable use. All development
proposals affecting the significance of a designated heritage asset should:
GL Hearn Page 469 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
i. have regard to the local historic context.
ii. Have regard to the character, appearance, scale, mass, height, materials, urban
grain and layout of existing buildings, streets and spaces.
iii. Retain architectural detailing and traditional features, including historic shopfronts,
which contribute positively to the appearance of a building or an area.
iv. Be accompanied by a Heritage Impact Assessment and any harm to a designated
heritage asset shall require clear and convincing justification.
v. In exceptional circumstances, where the loss of any heritage asset is permitted,
the Council will require a programme of works to ensure the new development will
proceed after the loss has occurred.
c) Proposals for the demolition of non-designated heritage assets (including locally
listed buildings) will be resisted. The effect of an application on the significance of
an asset will be taken into account in determining the application and the scale of
any harm or loss will need to be balanced against the significance of the heritage
asset.
d) Development proposals affecting non-designated heritage assets should
conserve, reveal and enhance the significance of the assets and their settings, as
well as comply with part (b) above.
e) The Council may identify any potential non-designated heritage asset as a
consideration of development proposals.’
Material Considerations
Here it is important to state that the importance of conserving the significance of the
heritage assets both where they are affected directly and where the lie within the
GL Hearn Page 470 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
setting of the Site has been fundamental to the development and design approach
of the Proposed Development.
In addition to legislation and policy, the assessment has taken into consideration
relevant planning guidance and any material considerations, including:
• National Planning Practice Guidance (online); • Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Third Edition (GLVIA)
(2013); • An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (2014); • Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact assessment:
Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11; • Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2: Managing
Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment (Historic England, 2015);
• Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (Historic England, 2017);
• Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 4: Tall Buildings (2015);
• The Burroughs Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Proposals (2012); and
• Hendon Church End Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Proposals (2012).
Weight to be attached to the desirability of preserving the special interest of a listed building
In preparing our analysis we are mindful of the considerable weight attached to the
preservation or enhancement of the setting of heritage assets, which was clarified
by the Court of Appeal judgement in Barnwell Manor Wind Energy vs East
Northamptonshire et al [2014]. The Court held that in enacting section 66(1) of the
1990 Act Parliament intended that the desirability of preserving the settings of listed
buildings should not simply be given careful consideration by the decision-maker for
the purpose of deciding whether there would be some harm, but should be given
"considerable importance and weight" when the decision-maker carries out the
balancing exercise.
GL Hearn Page 471 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Substantial harm
The Bedford Judgement 120 clarified how the decision maker should consider
whether a development would lead to substantial or less than substantial harm. Of
particular relevance to the approach to determining this application is the below
paragraph:
“25. Plainly in the context of physical harm, this would apply in the case of demolition or destruction, being a case of total loss. It would also apply to a case of serious damage to the structure of the building. In the context of non-physical or indirect harm, the yardstick was effectively the same. One was looking for an impact which would have such a serious impact on the significance of the asset that its significance was either vitiated altogether or very much reduced.”
Thus, the courts have made clear that substantial harm is a very high test, such that
the significance of an asset would have to be vitiated all together or very much
reduced. We make clear in our assessment that the proposals do not meet this high
test and accordingly cannot be considered to cause substantial harm. That being
said, this judgement is helpful as a guide when assessing the degree of harm within
the less than substantial category.
Clear and convincing justification
Paragraph 200 allows that the strong presumption against harm can be rebutted on
the basis of a ‘clear and convincing justification’. This phrase is sometimes taken to
signal the requirement for an options analysis or explanation based in viability.
The judgment in Pugh v SSCLG [2015] EWHC 3 (Admin) has clarified that the clear
and convincing justification is no more than the tests set out in paragraphs 133 and
134 (now 201 and 202 of the 2021 NPPF), thus effectively the balance of benefits.
It is only in cases of substantial harm that one needs to show works are necessary
to deliver public benefits.
120 Bedford Borough Council vs Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and another [2013] EWHC 2847
GL Hearn Page 472 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
“Internal Heritage Balance”
The “internal heritage balance” is derived from an interpretation of a Court of Appeal
judgment that considered paragraph 66 (1) known as Palmer ([2016] EWCA Civ
1061).
Practically this has meant that paragraphs 201 or 202 would only be engaged if there
was “net” harm after the internal heritage balance (or weighing heritage harms and
heritage benefits). The approach has been accepted at many appeals by all parties
but not at others.
The recent Court of Appeal judgement known as Bramshill ([2021] EWCA Civ 320)
found that the Palmer judgement does not lead to an “internal heritage balance” as
a matter of course [71]. There are different ways that a decision maker can apply the
balance of harm versus benefits [74], and some of these are summarised in the
judgment [78].
Another, and the most recent planning appeal that considered this issue of the
approach to the balancing act is the Whitechapel Bell Foundry appeal (refs.
APP/E5900/V/20/3245430 and APP/E5900/V/20/3245432). That decision confirmed
that the Palmer approach of an “internal heritage balance” is a legitimate one to
follow in undertaking the balancing act, confirmed by both the Inspector reporting on
the case and the Secretary of State i.e. That as long as the great weight provision is
applied, either approach is valid.
Emerging Policy Barnet Draft Local Plan (January 2020)
The LB Barnet recently published its Draft Local Plan (Regulation 18 document) for
public consultation. The Regulation 19 document is scheduled for publication in
Autumn 2020. Due to its early stage in the adoption process, the Barnet Draft Local
Plan is considered to be of limited weight.
GL Hearn Page 473 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria
This section presents the methodology used to assess the potential effects of the
Proposed Development in relation to built heritage, townscape and visual impact.
The method is the product of legislation, policy and best practice guidance as set
out above. This section describes the overarching assessment framework and the
different methodologies which apply to heritage, townscape and visual receptors.
Whilst every ES should provide a full factual description of the development, the
emphasis at Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations (2017) is on the main or
‘significant’ environmental effects to which a development is likely to give rise to. The
ES should be proportionate and not be any longer than is necessary to assess
properly those potential likely effects.
Scoping
This assessment is based on the EIA Scoping Report which was submitted to the
local planning authority and agreed in the Scoping Opinion provided by LB Barnet
on 16th July 2021.
The EIA Scoping process identified the heritage, townscape and visual receptors
which would be assessed in the ES.
Site observations, a manual desk-based review of OS maps, characterisation
studies and relevant heritage receptors were used to determine the scope of
assessment through a study area. The study area, often determined on the basis of
a radius, has been informed by building locations and heights, topography and
townscape features, and an understanding of the scale of the Proposed
Development.
A study area of 500m from the Site boundary has been identified for heritage,
townscape and visual receptors. Site surveys and accurate visual representations
GL Hearn Page 474 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
support this study area radius and have enabled heritage receptors to be scoped out
of further assessment as they confirm the Proposed Development would not be
discernible within the setting of these assets.
The heritage receptor plan at Appendix 4 shows all of the receptors identified in the
study area. This includes:
• All designated heritage receptors, including:
o Listed buildings;
o Conservation areas;
o Registered Parks and Gardens;
o Scheduled Ancient Monuments;
• Non-designated heritage receptors within a 500m radius of the Site boundary
(including locally-listed buildings and any other feature identified as having some
local heritage interest during design development or pre-application consultation);
and
• Townscape character areas.
The Viewpoint Plan is also included at Appendix 4. The viewpoints to be assessed
were agreed with the Council through the pre-application process.
Site Visits
A Site survey of the baseline situation was undertaken by Montagu Evans during
summer 2020 to understand the immediate setting of the Site, the setting of the
surrounding heritage receptors, the townscape character and appearance, and key
viewpoints.
Assessment Methodology
The overarching assessment framework for all topics follows a four step process
which are discussed below:
GL Hearn Page 475 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
1. Baseline Assessment of Value; 2. Assessment of Sensitivity; 3. Assessment of Magnitude; and 4. Assessment of Likely Effects
Baseline Assessment of Value
Heritage
The term ‘heritage receptor’ is used within this assessment to describe a designated
heritage asset (e.g. World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, Listed Building,
Protected Wreck Sites, Registered Park and Garden, Registered Battlefield or
Conservation Area) or non-designated heritage assets (such as locally listed
buildings).
This ES chapter does not assess below-ground archaeological receptors, including
Scheduled Monuments which have no upstanding remains.
Paragraph 194 of the NPPF states:
In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.
‘Significance’ (for heritage policy) is defined in the NPPF (Annex 2) as:
the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting.
This is supported by Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2:
Managing Significance in Decision-Taking in the Historic Environment (2015).
Value is assessed against the criteria contained in Table 2.1 below. The assessment
of heritage value is ‘graded’ from Exceptional to Very Low. It is agreed that World
GL Hearn Page 476 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Heritage Sites and Grade I listed buildings are of ‘exceptional’ and ‘particularly
important’ interest; therefore these are generally afforded a higher heritage value.
This differentiation is best summarised by the drafting of paragraph 194 of the NPPF,
which states that the:
level of detail [to describe the significance of heritage assets] should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.
Thus, the value ‘grading’ of heritage assets is appropriate. Non-designated heritage
receptors are recognised as having local value. Due and proportionate regard has
been had to all heritage receptors identified.
Where a proposal may have an effect on the surroundings in which the heritage
asset is experienced, a qualitative assessment is made of whether, how and to what
degree setting contributes to the significance of heritage assets. Setting is defined
in the NPPF as:
The surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.
The assessment of setting is informed by the check-list of potential attributes outlined
by the Historic England guidance document Historic Environment Good Practice
Advice in Planning Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (2017) (hereafter ‘GPA3’).
GPA3 identifies five steps towards assessing the implications of the Proposed
Development which may affect the setting of heritage assets (and is consistent with
other guidance):
a. Identify the assets affected; b. Assessing the contribution setting makes to significance; c. Assessing the effect of the Proposed Development; d. Maximising enhancement and minimising harm; and e. Making and documenting the decision and monitoring outcomes.
GL Hearn Page 478 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
(Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment,
2013) (‘GLVIA3’). The assessment has regard to the methodology set out in An
Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (2014) prepared by Natural England.
The two components of townscape and visual assessment are:
1. The assessment of townscape effects: assessing effects on the townscape as a resource in its own right; and
2. The assessment of visual effects: assessing effects on specific views and on the general visual amenity experienced by people.
Townscape
Townscape is defined in GLIVIA3 as the “built-up area, including the buildings, the
relationships between them, the different types of urban open spaces, including
green spaces, and the relationship between buildings and open spaces”.
The initial assessment defines the distinct and recognisable patterns of elements, or
characteristics that make one area different from another, rather than better or worse.
This process, defined as townscape character assessment, is the process of
identifying and describing variation in the character of townscape.
The assessment is informed by both field survey and desk-based research of
secondary sources, with reference to existing character assessments where
applicable.
The assessment allows the description of character areas/types, their key
characteristics and for them to be mapped with boundaries. The mapped boundaries
suggest a sharp change from one townscape area. On Site, however, this often
represents a zone of transition. Townscape character areas are identified and
assessed according to townscape receptor value (in relation to their built form,
materials, maintenance, and statutory and non-statutory designations), using criteria
contained in Table 12.2 below.
GL Hearn Page 481 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Frequent dominant detracting features; and Disturbed or derelict land requires treatment.
Townscape Receptor Value Criteria
Visual
Visual impact assessment relates to how people will be affected by changes in views
and visual amenity at different places, including publicly accessible locations. Visual
receptors are always people, although usually visual receptors are defined according
to use e.g. residential, business, road, footpath etc., rather than landscape features.
The aim of the visual baseline is to establish the area in which the development may
be visible, the different groups of people who may experience views of the
development, the places where they will be affected and the nature of the views and
visual amenity at those points.
The baseline study identifies individuals and/or defined groups of people within the
area who will be affected by changes in the views, ‘visual receptors’. The following
visual receptors are identified by GLVIA3 as being likely to be the most susceptible
to change:
• Residents and other frequent users of the area; • People, whether residents or visitors, who are engaged in outdoor recreation,
including use of public rights of way, attractions or those whose attention or interest is likely to be focused on the landscape and on particular views; and
• Communities where views contribute to the landscape setting enjoyed by residents in the area.
It should be noted that the assessment does not comprise a ‘residential amenity
assessment’, which considers private viewpoints from residential properties. This is
separate from townscape and visual assessment (refer to GLVIA3, paragraph 6.17).
GL Hearn Page 482 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Assessment viewpoints are identified based on a comprehensive review of the
surrounding area, including the following criteria:
• Heritage receptors; and/or • Townscape character; and/or • Where the development may be prominent; and/or • Be visible from concentrations of residential areas; and/or • Open spaces (parkland, publicly accessible space); and/or • Potentially sensitive receptors (e.g. schools); and/or • Accessibility to the public; and/or • The viewing direction, distance and elevation; and/or • Townscape and transport nodes.
The identification of viewpoints also considers any viewpoints identified by the local
planning authorities or other relevant bodies and, in London, strategic views as
determined by the adopted London View Management Framework (LVMF) (2012).
The visual assessment is supported by Accurate Visual Representations (AVRs)
which provide the basis for the assessment of a Proposed Development and its
effect on the identified views.
The objective of a photomontage is to simulate the likely visual changes that would
result from a Proposed Development, and to produce printed images of a size and
resolution sufficient to match the perspective in the same view in the field.
Accurate visual representation is two-dimensional and cannot capture the
complexity of the visual experience. It is an approximation of the three-dimensional
visual experience the observer would receive on Site. Neither do they capture
transient significant effects arising from noise or traffic on perception, or that wider
range of expectations and associations that anyone in an urban scene may have.
Details of the methodology for preparation of the AVRs is set out at Appendix 1.0 to
the three HTVIAs at Appendices 1-3 to this document.
GL Hearn Page 491 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
on the combined effects of all the past, present and future proposals together with the new project
This assessment takes the first approach, which is to focus on the additional effects
of the proposed development on top of the cumulative baseline. It is considered that
this approach is best suited to an urban environment, in which the cumulative effects
between the proposed development and other cumulative schemes may be complex
(including situations in which the effect of the proposed development could be
lessened or removed entirely by cumulative schemes) and because, as also
acknowledged in the GLVIA3, it may not be considered reasonable to assess the
effect of many complex schemes other than the proposed development in the
manner required by the ‘combined effects’ approach.
Of the schemes identified, none are likely to have any cumulative effects on heritage,
townscape or visual receptors due their scale or location. This is because there is
no intervisibility between the Proposed Development and identified schemes for
cumulative assessment
A cumulative impact is also undertaken in relation to those aspects of the Proposed
Development that have been scoped out of the EIA at the following sites. These are
the subject of separate planning applications which have not yet been determined.
• Fuller Street Car Park; • Prince of Wales Estate Landscape Improvements; • Daniel Almshouses Landscape Improvements • Linear Woodland landscape improvements • Former Quinta Club, Mays Lane.
Consultation
The Applicant has engaged in pre-application consultation with the Council and
Historic England and the scheme has evolved to address comments raised with
respect to heritage and townscape impacts. Details of how the Proposed
GL Hearn Page 492 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Development has evolved through iterative design are set out in Chapter 4
“Alternatives”.
Mitigation
Mitigation measures proposed to prevent, reduce or offset any significant likely
adverse effects have been identified and developed as part of the pre-application
design process. The primary mitigation measures have become embedded into the
project design, commonly referred to as embedded mitigation. The mitigation arising
from design development and consultation responses is also identified where
appropriate in the assessment.
The likely effects of the Proposed Development include embedded mitigation. As a
result, there is no requirement for additional mitigation and thus likely residual effects
remain the same as the likely effects, unless otherwise stated.
Climate Change
The likely effects of the Proposed Development are defined under the current climate
conditions, which may alter under a future climate scenario. The EIA Regulations
require that the change in impact magnitude and a receptor’s ‘vulnerability’ (i.e.
susceptibility or resilience to change) are considered in respect of a future climate
condition.
The vulnerability of the receptors to climate conditions has been assessed according
to the definitions provided in the guidance, and it has been judged that all of the
heritage, townscape and visual receptors have low vulnerability.
The likely projected future conditions for each of temperature, precipitation, wind
speed and cloud cover have been considered. It is considered that the magnitude of
impact and resultant nature and scale of the effects of the Proposed Development
during the operational phase will not be changed under the future climate conditions.
GL Hearn Page 493 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Overall, the likely effects of the Proposed Development are unlikely to change as a
result of climate change.
Baseline Conditions
This section sets out the effects of the Proposed Development, cross referring to the
three HTVIAs where relevant. These relate to each of the three sites (Meritage
Centre, Building 9 and Fenella and Ravensfield). For clarity, this ES considers the
development as a whole.
Historic Development
An overview of the historic development of Hendon is set out at Section 4.0 of
Appendices 1-3. For clarity, this is not repeated here.
Built Heritage Baseline
The identification of heritage assets has been based on the methodology set out in
Section 7.2. The search included all listed buildings, conservation areas, registered
parks and non-designated heritage assets within the study area. Professional
judgement has been used to select those which may experience change to their
setting. Hendon Library is included also owing to the direct effect resulting from the
works to Building 9.
The heritage receptors are identified below with a short description.
Listed Buildings St Mary’s Church (grade II*)
The church is listed Grade II* (NHLE no 1359029) and can be assigned very high
heritage value. This derives from its overall heritage interest under a number of
headings.
The commanding hilltop location of the Church is suggestive of a very long history
of human occupation. The presence of Norman fabric in the church indicates an
GL Hearn Page 494 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
early date for the building, which may well be a replacement of a pre-Conquest
structure. The churchyard has been used for burials for a millennium or more.
Architectural: St Mary’s is of very high value for its surviving medieval fabric (dating
from the 13th and early 16th centuries) and also for the extensive enlargement of
1911-1915, designed by the distinguished church architect Temple Moore (1856-
1920), described in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography as ‘England’s
leading ecclesiastical architect from the mid-Edwardian years’. In the words of The
Buildings of England. London 4: North (by Bridget Cherry and Nikolaus Pevsner,
1998, p157), ‘This addition, obviously the work of a sensitive as well as a bold
architect…[is] one of the rare cases in which a Gothic revival architect, by respecting
old work and adding frankly new work to it, has considerably enriched the original
effect.’
Artistic: the church is of high value for its fittings which have accumulated over time.
The items of highest aesthetic merit are the church monuments, some of them
created by noted masons of national renown, such as John Flaxman and Grinling
Gibbons (attributed).
Historical: St Mary’s has been the centre of the parish of Hendon for a millennium or
more. It reflects the progressive development of the community: it has been the place
of baptism, marriage and burial for parishioners, and some of the individuals are
recorded with monuments inside and outside the church. More generally, the church
is a very valuable as the sole reminder of the early centuries of the village’s history.
In historical terms, it possesses very high heritage value.
Heritage value: High
The assessment of heritage value is reached by applying the matrices at Section
7.2.
GL Hearn Page 495 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Setting and Group Value
The church is at the heart of the small group of historic buildings which form
Hendon’s historic core. The parish has undergone profound change since the mid-
19th century, and the church’s setting is characterised by the change brought about
by the encroachment of suburbanisation from the late 19th Century and then later
insensitive development in the late 20th Century close to its boundary. Thus the
wider setting of the church when experienced from the south is characterised by
change, and the appearance of this later development.
The church’s principal setting is that of its churchyard with its intact historic
boundaries. This retains a tranquil atmosphere. The churchyard is thickly planted in
areas, creating an enclosed setting for the church. There are some views of later
phases of development outside of the boundary in views out of the churchyard,
including the Meritage Centre. The most significant of these is the long view to the
north which retains a largely ‘rural’ character.
St Mary’s Churchyard
From outside the boundaries of the church, the western approach and entrance is
important, between No. 43 Church End and the Greyhound Pub. A visitor has a full
view of the form of the church, its Nave, southern Aisle, tower and church yard
vegetation. The approach from the east through the Church Yard from Church
Terrace makes a similarly positive contribution to the heritage value of the church.
The ensemble value of the church, with other listed or period buildings close by, is
high: the group is a coherent one, closely grouped together. Its value is compounded
by its hilltop location which makes the church visible from some distance away.
The ensemble value and inter-relationship between the other assets in church end
are principally experienced when approaching from the west on Church End. The
GL Hearn Page 496 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
rising topography and open character of the approach and ‘reveal’ of the church
adds interest to the position of the church. The back drop to the latter stage of this
approach formed by the existing Meritage centre detracts slightly.
Views from the south along Church End are more substantially affected by the latter
stages of development. As set out above, this area has been subject to significant
change from the Victorian Era onwards. This would have had the effect of
substantially obscuring views of the church on the northward approach. .However,
the current late 20th Century development in this area detracts more significantly
from the setting of the church by forming an unattractive and obtrusive foreground
element that does not relate to the wider character of the view. Once a northbound
traveller passes the Meritage Centre, a viewer can view the full western entrance of
the church without incursion from the later 20th Century development (and thus
these closer views from the south make a more positive contribution to the heritage
value of the church.
In summary, the principal contribution made to the heritage value of the church is
contained within its immediate setting to the church yard, close views to the church
from the east and west approaches and approach from Greyhound Hill which allows
an appreciation of the ensemble value.
The heritage value of the church is somewhat harmed by later unsympathetic 20th
C development to its south in the form of the Meritage Centre within the development
Site.
The large churchyard is of very high heritage value. It provides the setting to the
church, and it possesses a large number of historic memorials, some of which are
of particular special interest. Nine are listed, each at Grade II. These are listed below,
with their NHLE number:
• Thomas Thatcher (1375652): early C18 headstone to south of south porch.
GL Hearn Page 497 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
• Chest tomb (1375653): mid C18 tomb 15m south-east of east end of church. • John Haley (1375645): mid C18 tall monument of triangular form, 18m east of
church. • Philip Rundell mausoleum (1375649): late Georgian Egyptian-influenced
structure. • Henry Joynes (1375648): pedestal tomb of c1754 to the builder of Blenheim
Palace. • Susannah Frye (1375651): elaborate Baroque chest tomb north of church. • Sir Joseph Alyloffe (1375650): Gothick late C18 chest tomb north-east of church. • John Jones (1375647): repaired marble pedestal tomb north-east of church,
c.1720. • Conquest Jones (1375646): unusual 1770s chest east north-east of church.
Cumulatively, taken alongside the many other tombs, these memorials possess high
heritage value in terms of architectural, artistic and historical interest. They also
provide strong group value to the setting of St Mary’s church.
The contained churchyard clearly contributes to the heritage value of these assets
experienced in their original church yard setting.
Heritage value: Medium
Church Farm House (grade II*)
This Grade II* listed 17th century house (NHLE 1188513) is now used by the
University of Middlesex; it was previously a local museum (closed 2011). It is a
building of high heritage value as a fine example of a mid-17th century Middlesex
farm house. Such survivals are quite rare, and this one is of further interest as it has
retained some of its open setting, and there is another historic farm building surviving
close by. It is described in The Buildings of England as ‘a delightful survival from
rural Hendon’.
Architectural: the building possesses high heritage value as a well-preserved and
little altered mid-17th century brick farmhouse. While it does not reflect leading
GL Hearn Page 498 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
tendencies in polite design, it is nonetheless a very good example of the middling
sort of house, showing the growing use of brick as a building material in rural
Middlesex. Restored in 1954, it survives in good condition.
Artistic: the building reflects the construction techniques of early bricklayers but
otherwise is of moderate artistic heritage value.
Historical: the house is of high heritage value as a survival of a rural farm house
which has retained some of its open setting. The building’s past use as a local
museum (acquired in 1944) demonstrates its local value. Given the suburbanisation
of Middlesex, survivals such as these have a particular resonance. As the only
historic domestic building close to the church, it embodies the origins of the
settlement.
Heritage value: High
Setting and Group Value
The house has strong group value with St Mary’s Church and with the listed Milking
Parlour across the road. The Greyhound Public House (1896) is locally listed (ref
HT00094) and contributes to the quality of the group121. The interest of Church
Farm House is increased by its location: with historic open space preserved to the
rear, the house’s position near the top of the hill makes it a prominent building.
Similar to the Church, there is an ensemble value with the other assets at the crest
of the hill, and the approach from the west
The principal setting for the house is from the front. The development site is not
within that setting and therefore does not make any particular contribution to the
heritage value of the listed building.
121 An application was made to the Hendon Magistrates in June 1896 by A.R. Barker, architect of 11 Buckingham Street, Strand to build a pub named The Greyhound in Hendon: London Metropolitan Archives, LMA/40470/03/00906. Whether this is the same building is unclear.
GL Hearn Page 499 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Model Farm: the Milking Parlour (grade II)
This Grade II structure (NHLE 1359074), dated to 1889, is of high heritage value on
architectural and historical grounds. As a purpose-built agricultural building it
embodies the long-since-lost agricultural past of this area of Greater London.
Architectural: the building was designed by the firm of J.T. Wimperis and Arber, a
busy commercial firm of late Victorian architects responsible for some significant
buildings across the country (such as the Grafton Galleries, New Bond St, 1892 and
the Palace Theatre, Blackburn, 1898). John Thomas Wimperis FRIBA (1829-1904)
was in partnership with William Henry Arber (1849-1904) from 1889, the year of this
building. It is boldly conceived, a narrow apsidal-ended structure in brick and tile,
with an elaborately treated taking-in door to the upper hayloft. It reflects the
tendencies of later Victorian architecture in its domestic application of mixed motifs
and materials, aligned in a logical and boldly planned form. It is unusual for its date,
location and style.
Artistic: the building’s high heritage value derives from its architectural quality rather
than artistic.
Historical: a structure of high historical interest. The quality of this agricultural
building is all the more surprising as it was built in an area which was starting to
become a suburb. It was built for C.F. Hancock of Hendon Hall, Ashley Lane, and a
wealthy London jeweller and thus has cultural interest as a model farm building built
by a wealthy patron, and a late example of the type in an unusual Middlesex location.
Heritage value: Medium
Setting and Group Value
GL Hearn Page 500 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The building has some group value with the listed (and locally listed) buildings across
the road and reinforces the sense of this being the historic core of the original
settlement.
There is very limited intervisibility between the milking parlour and the development
site which does not therefore make any contribution to our understanding of the
heritage value of the listed building. Thus, the development site does not contribute
to the value of the receptor as it is not part of its setting.
Hendon Library (grade II)
This Grade II library (NHLE 1390057) was opened in 1929 for the Hendon Urban
District Council. Its architect was TM Wilson FRIBA. The building, although altered
internally, is of high heritage value for its frontage, aspects of the interior, and its part
in a fine group of civic buildings122.
Architectural: of high heritage value. Wilson’s design is an impressive exercise in
Neo-Georgian library design and it belongs among the better inter-war libraries of
this style. Its appearance in the Architects Journal (27 May 1931) suggests that
contemporaries regarded the building with interest. It is more ambitious than many
other branch libraries, and this is reflected in its imposing façade and its principal
internal spaces. These are the two main grounds on which the building’s heritage
value derives. The frontage, of very high quality construction, is Neo-Georgian in
character but with some freedom in the approach: the very tall columns in antis which
flank the entrance are extremely slender and far removed from the proportions of
the classical canon. The interior was considerably altered in 1973 when the rear
extension was added, but the principal spaces remain intact, including the top-lit
staircase hall. The reading rooms have undergone some alteration since 1931, with
the replacement of fitted furniture and other elements such as doors. The
architectural interest falls away rapidly once the sides are examined, and the rear is
122 See AJ 27/05/31
GL Hearn Page 501 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
much compromised. Overall, one of the best Neo-Georgian libraries in Greater
London, marking the more traditional approach to library design just before the
impact of modernism began to be felt.
Artistic: the building is finely constructed of quality materials, but it is hard to ascribe
particular value to it on these grounds.
Historical: of moderate heritage value. As noted above, it is of some interest that it
was featured in the Architects Journal in 1931. It certainly embodies the social role
of libraries in 20th century society, and shows the seriousness with which library
provision was regarded by local authorities at this time.
The internal heritage value can be determined by (1) an inspection of the present
configuration; by (2) a comparison with other interwar public libraries; and by (3) an
interrogation of the list entry. Overall the Library has been assigned a level of high
heritage value, but this is not evenly distributed throughout the building.
The front of the building survives in very good condition externally, and broadly
speaking the front areas are recognisable and of evident heritage value. However,
the rear areas and areas altered in the 1973 phase are of much less interest. The
staircase hall has a Neo-Georgian elegance which matches the exterior but which is
compromised by the new entrance arrangements within. The wrought ironwork of
the staircase is particularly pleasing, and it incorporates a monogram referring to the
council. Elsewhere, quite a high degree of alteration has taken place. This reflects
in part the changes in library provision in recent decades, and in part the building’s
joint use by Barnet Council and by Middlesex University. As is often encountered in
public libraries, very few original fittings remain in place. At Hendon, some rooms
have been knocked together (such as the former Children’s Library and the main
reading room) and the creation of a mezzanine level to the rear has had a negative
impact on the spatial experience of the interior. However, the main upper reading
GL Hearn Page 502 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
rooms retain their characterful glazed ceilings and display how important the
provision of light was in such spaces. What does survive inside the library is
representative of Neo-Georgian design: nothing internally is particularly novel, but
that is not the way with this idiom. The difference in quality between the 1929
elements and the later ones is readily apparent.
Historic England brought to our attention an archive photograph showing a ground
floor space illuminated by a large dome. This is evidently no longer in existence and
we speculate that it must have a room located between the rear wings, now lost to
the 1970s extension.
Hendon Library was listed as a particularly good example of an inter-war Neo-
Georgian library. It was a preferred style for such buildings, bringing with it
appropriate messages of culture, tradition and authority. Hendon Library is a
particularly ambitious example for a suburban London library, and its having been
published in the Architects Journal in May 1931 suggests that it was seen at the time
as a library out the usual run of such buildings, which were being erected in large
numbers at this of rapid suburban expansion. Much more characteristic of the norm
is Grade II-listed East Finchley Library, 226 High Road, which was opened in 1938
to the designs of the Finchley borough architect and engineer, Percival Harrison.
Hendon Library was externally ambitious, and this extends internally into the
generous provision of reading rooms and the unusually opulent staircase. The upper
reading rooms are generously scaled but not of special note when seen against other
contemporary examples. Glazed ceilings are commonly found in contemporaneous
libraries: that at the Keats Grove Library in Hampstead (1931, Grade II) has a more
spectacular example with coloured glass. The Grade II-listed Wormhol Library,
Hemlock Road, Hammersmith (1930) is smaller than Hendon’s but shares a striving
for the picturesque in a new civic setting, and it too used the language of Sir
Christopher Wren to create this effect.
GL Hearn Page 503 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Hendon Library was listed in 2002. The list description describes fully the
appearance of the frontage and points out that ‘Back of library largely rebuilt during
a 1973 campaign of alterations’. At this date a new three-storey concrete and steel
framed, flat roofed, extension at the central open space to the rear of the building,
placed between the two original two storey rear wings. This provided a public ground
floor general reading library, and freed space in the historic part of the building for a
public café area in one and a children’s library in the other. The height of the floors
in this extension was limited in order that it could accommodate three storeys at the
same level of the eaves of the original building. The ceiling heights of the new
mezzanine and upper floors and in stark contrast to the more spacious historic parts
of the building that have higher ceilings.
The refurbishment work also provided a controlled entrance area: two sets of double
folding doors contained within a glass lobby enclosure, providing a level of security
for the building as well as a draught lobby to the main foyer of the building. The
original decorative balustrading to the stair and upper landing remained in place
unaltered, being a significant historic asset; as a result, the lobby was limited in
height to below the mid landing level in order to minimize any impact on the staircase.
The major campaign of alterations of 1973 affected the interior, but left the frontage
intact.’ It was not then customary practice in writing list entries to exclude areas: the
drafting at the time was intended to stress the importance of the 1929 elements.
Were it to be re-listed, there is no question that the modern extensions would be
excluded.
In summary, the heritage value of the interior of Hendon Library can be assigned
with some precision to the external frontage, first and foremost; the staircase hall
and circulation space shares some of this heritage value, along with the first floor
reading rooms.
GL Hearn Page 504 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Heritage value: Medium
Setting and Group Value
The Library is in the centre of Hendon’s group of civic buildings, and matches them
in materials and (to some degree) style.
The grouping of building share certain characteristics such as their civic function,
general mass and alignment within their plots, materials, relationship to the street
and landscaping. Thus the three buildings together when viewed from the Burroughs
contributes to our understanding of the development of this core of civic buildings in
the first third of the 20th Century.
While the buildings were not developed as a specific planned composition (and differ
in architectural styles), the development of each building has had regard to buildings
already there (the library coming later than the town hall) Thus the primary
appreciation of the heritage value of the town hall and the group of buildings of which
it is a part is from the Burroughs, viewed from the fronts of the buildings, appreciating
the buildings within their generously proportioned landscaped front areas.
Thus, the principal contribution made by the setting of the library (and wider group)
excludes the Fenella and Ravensfield Sites which make no more than a neutral
contribution to the heritage value of the group of assets, or even detract where they
are incidentally visible due to their poor architectural qualities.
Views from the front of the buildings allow views through to the rears of the buildings.
It is evident that the settings of the rears of the buildings have been much changed
by later development. This includes the 1960s town hall annex (at three storeys plus
roof level) and other modern teaching spaces at up to four storeys. Where these
buildings are visible from the front elevation, they form a backdrop of similarly scaled
buildings that largely reflect the materiality of the principal grouping of civic buildings.
GL Hearn Page 505 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Building B9 itself is lower in height and so the views between the frontage buildings
to the rear have an open character at present.
However, the gaps between the buildings do not invite exploration and interest as
the side elevations of the buildings and routes between appear as service or back of
house areas. This is particularly the case with respect to the rear of the B9 clinic
building which is dominated by bin stores, cycle racks and the fenced in fires station
car park opposite. Along with other informal parking spaces. While this is a
secondary element of the setting of the group of three civic buildings, it does detract
from our understanding of the heritage value of the library (and an appreciation of
the fire station to the north).
The B9 site does not represent an important element of the setting of the library
given that the rear of the civic buildings makes a lesser contribution to our
understanding of the heritage value of the group. Elements of the B9 site detract
from the setting of all three buildings to a degree.
There is no intervisibility between the group of civic buildings and the Meritage
Centre Site which does not form part of the setting of these buildings.
Former Hendon Town Hall (grade II)
The Grade II listed former Town Hall (NHLE 1294762) dates from 1900 and was
designed by the architect T. H. Watson (1839-1913). It is of high heritage value partly
arising from the quality of its frontage, and partly because of its part in a fine group
of civic buildings. It is, however, a much extended building and the degree of heritage
value is uneven overall.
Architectural: the building is of high heritage value. A competition was held for the
building: the chosen design, by Thomas Henry WiIson FRIBA, was selected for its
affordability as well as its quality. Wilson was a well-established architect who had
served as president of the Architectural Association in 1870-7; by 1904 he was in
GL Hearn Page 506 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
practice with his son, A.M. Watson. Wilson’s design mixed various historical periods
together: as the architect explained at the unveiling, he was keen to combine
medieval motifs with Renaissance ones, to refer to Hendon’s early origins as well as
to embody the period in which notions of government had developed. It is therefore
not surprising that the building has an eclectic quality. Internally, the building has
undergone considerable alteration as well as extension. The most important interior
is the Council Chamber which occupies the central part of the first floor frontage: this
retains its classical panelling. The frontage is by some way the most architecturally
significant aspect of the building. The building was featured in several architectural
magazines of the day, indicative of its status.
Artistic: it is worth noting the presence of a sculpture in front of the building by Israeli
Sculptor Itzhak Ofer entitled ‘The Family of Man’ (1980), erected to mark the
borough’s twinning with the town of Ramat Gan, Israel. The decorative carving on
the front elevation of the building is of good quality, and the overall craftsmanship of
construction is of good quality. The bronze galleon weathervane adds a pleasing
note.
Historical: the building is of high heritage value. The Town Hall was first called
‘Hendon Municipal Buildings’ and it embodies the growth of the area at the end of
the 19th century. Hendon acquired Urban District Council status in 1895 and soon
set about providing itself with suitable premises from which to govern. Concern over
costs restricted the embellishment to the key public and civic areas. The building
was extended in 1934 and 1960, and these have greatly increased the building’s
footprint.
Hendon Town Hall, originally designed by T. H. Watson and built in 1900, is a multi-
phased building. Our understanding of it is enhanced by the 1990s report written by
the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England: this is of particular
utility, given that current circumstances prevent any archival research. The building’s
GL Hearn Page 507 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
enlargement embodies the growth of the borough and the increasing responsibilities
of local government during the 20th century. However, its heritage value in
architectural and historic terms is unequally distributed throughout the complex.
The architectural interest is concentrated to a high degree in the 1900 frontage block
by T.H. Watson FRIBA. The building was first listed during the re-survey of the
London Borough of Barnet in 1983: as was customary with listings at this time, the
entry only makes reference to the frontage building and does not attempt to explain
the relative merits of the different component parts of the complex. However, it can
be asserted with some confidence that the listing overwhelmingly relates to this 1900
phase, and the issue of the relative merits of the later additions was not addressed.
The town hall was considerably extended in 1929 and again in 1960. Map evidence
shows this growth clearly enough, although the distinguishing of the phases is
complicated by the contextual approach taken to the building’s extension which was
deliberately done in order to adhere to the red brick traditional appearance of the
civic group.
A report prepared in 2016 as part of a listed building consent application
16/7686/LBC to the London Borough of Barnet noted that the Town Hall was later
extended to the rear by the addition of two wings in 1929. These were of two-storey
plain brick construction beneath pitched slate roofs, similar in style and appearance
to the rear of the original Town Hall, but without the detail and architectural
ornamentation that the front of the original building has. The two wings of the Town
Hall Extension were connected at their western end at first floor level by a covered
footbridge which allowed for access beneath it to the courtyard between the two
wings of the extension. The footbridge link was enclosed by matching brick walls
with rectangular windows beneath a flat roof, and was supported by two pairs of brick
columns. That link is annotated as a '‘footbridge" on Ordnance Survey maps from
GL Hearn Page 508 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
1936 onwards, and the ground floor has remained unenclosed retaining the original
footbridge and access arrangement.
The Town Hall Annex was constructed over 30 years later, sometime in the 1960s.
The Annex is a three-storey building with a fourth storey set within a mansard roof.
It is of brick construction with fenestration and detailing to match that of the 1929
Town Hall Extension. As part of this construction a footbridge was constructed linking
the northern wing of the Town Hall Extension to the new Town Hall Annex at first
floor level. This was designed to be similar in appearance to the 1929 Extension
footbridge, and was enclosed by matching brick walls with arched windows beneath
a flat roof, and was supported by two pairs of brick columns. It allowed for pedestrian
access beneath it from the Council car park to the west to the PCT clinic, library and
The Burroughs to the east. The area beneath the footbridge was subsequently filled
in at ground floor level to create a two-storey link between the Town Hall Extension
and the Annex. The later infilling is visibly discernible, with the brick infill panels being
of similar but not identical brick and with different colour of mortar jointing.
It has not been possible to date the annex extension or the infilling of the footbridge
at ground floor level. We have reviewed historic mapping and have visited the
Hendon Local Studies library but have been unable to obtain information to date the
building more accurately than 1961-1969. It does not appear on the 1961 OS plan,
but the 1969 OS plan shows the Town Hall Annex and the link building, with the latter
annotated as a “footbridge”. It can be deduced therefore, that the infilling of the
ground floor to create a two-storey link, rather than a footbridge, occurred some time
after 1969, possibly in the 1970s.”
Heritage value: Medium
Setting and Group Value
GL Hearn Page 509 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The Town Hall is the southernmost of the impressive group of civic buildings which
stand on the western side of The Burroughs.
As set out in the assessment of the setting of the library, it is views of the front
elevation and the group value with the library and fire station that is the most
important contribution made by the setting of the town hall to its heritage value.
Conversely, the quality of the setting is somewhat compromised by the presence of
large extensions to the rear of (and sometimes adjoining) the frontage buildings. The
rear extension itself and the annex are not of any particular architectural or historic
interest. Thus it follows that the ‘settings’ of these particular elements do not make
any meaningful contribution to the heritage value of the principally listed Town Hall
‘core’, although they do illustrate the history of development of the civic complex
The rear area generally makes a much lesser contribution to the understanding of
the heritage value of the building and is characterised by larger scaled buildings (up
to four storeys) of similar materials (none of which are of particular merit themselves).
Thus the B9 site (or the open views that it affords of the Town Hall Annex) does not
make a very important contribution to our understanding of the heritage value of the
town hall.
Similarly, the Fenella and Ravensfield sites make only a very limited contribution to
the setting the Town Hall (no more than neutral).
The Clinic
The small health clinic located behind the Library dates from the same inter-war
period as that building, but was designed in a very different idiom, being more
‘moderne’ on style. It was built as a detached and separate structure and is shown
as such on the 1936 25 inch Ordnance Survey map. The buildings are linked by a
wall but are in no other way physically linked. Nor does the clinic contribute to the
GL Hearn Page 510 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
group value of the area. The clinic forms a secondary part of the Edwardian and
interwar civic group of local authority buildings at The Burroughs, but is not a
curtilage structure and not one of special interest or of particular heritage value.
The Daniel Almshouses (grade II)
This Grade II complex (NHLE 1188528) dates from 1729 and is of high heritage
value on architectural and historical grounds.
Architectural: the Almshouses are of high heritage value. They comprise a tripartite
design in brick, with two storey pedimented blocks to the centre and ends, linked
with single storey ranges. The centrepiece has a tripartite Venetian window
arrangement with a blind central arch: beneath is a Portland stone inscription tablet
on brackets. The Diocletian windows to the end blocks reinforce the Palladian nature
of the composition. The building (currently being renovated) is externally little altered.
The east wing was opened as a school in 1766. The interior is believed to have been
altered on several occasions. While this needs verifying, it is very likely that the
architectural heritage value of the building derives from its street frontage.
Artistic: the building has limited claims to artistic interest, beyond its architectural
design.
Historical: the building is of high heritage value. The alms houses were endowed by
Robert Daniel, ‘Merchant of London’ who bequeathed land in Oxfordshire for the
purpose. Almshouses are always of interest for reflecting past patterns of local
philanthropy. According to The Gentleman’s Magazine vol 59 (1786), p100 the
almshouses supported six women and four men, selected by the vicar.
Heritage value: Medium
Setting and Group Value
GL Hearn Page 511 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The building stands some distance from other listed buildings and thus does not
have Group Value. It occupies a prominent position aligned on the southern end of
Church End.
The setting of the alms houses has plainly changed significantly since its
construction and is now characterised by the suburban development close to its
boundaries on all sides. While there are long views of the building in a southerly
direction along Church End, where the profile of the building can be read against the
sky, this is now experienced within the context of a suburban environment, and
framed by the residential block on the corner of Church End and Church Road.
The setting of the alms houses therefore makes a limited contribution to our
understanding of the heritage value of the building. Accordingly the development site
in its undeveloped form makes no material contribution to the heritage value of the
alms houses.
Hendon Fire Station (grade II)
The Fire Station is listed Grade II (NHLE 1352682) and is a good example of an
outer London fire station of the Edwardian period. The building was designed by
Herbert Welch (1884-1953), an architect of some renown. It is of high heritage value.
Architectural: this is a building of high heritage value. The competition brief for the
building insisted that the design harmonised with the recently erected Town Hall.
Welch, an architect who had recently been working with the noted firm of Parker and
Unwin in Hampstead Garden Suburb, would go on to design much of the centre of
Golders Green to the south. He won with a design which used harmonious materials
and a historicist style, but which also introduced clear echoes of the contemporary
London County Council fire stations, which applied an Arts and Crafts approach to
these civic buildings. Welch’s design blends Neo-Georgian elements with mullioned
windows; the off-centre alignment of the engine portals qualifies the otherwise
GL Hearn Page 512 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
strongly symmetrical impact of the front. There is interest also in aspects of the
interior (the List entry is precise in identifying these). The building has been
extended to the rear and a drill tower added on the southern flank. Modern buildings
encroach upon the northern elevation, and the front walls with railings are of modern
date. Extensions to the rear are of low heritage value; the oldest of the buildings in
this area is the mortuary.
Artistic: save for the carving of the Hendon UDC arms on the front, there is little of
artistic interest here.
Historical: the building embodies the provision of municipal resources for the growing
suburb of Hendon. Overall, as part of a noted trio of council buildings, this is of high
heritage value.
Heritage value: Medium
Setting and Group Value
The building has considerable heritage value, standing alongside the Library and
Town Hall. The presence to the north of the unlisted University of Middlesex building
(locally listed: ref. HT01206), a further 20th century municipal building (erected by
Middlesex County Council as a technical college), adds to this ensemble value.
As set out in the assessment of the setting of the library, it is views of the front
elevation and the group value with the town hall and fire station that is the most
important contribution made by the setting of the library to its heritage value.
Conversely, the quality of the setting is somewhat compromised by the presence of
large extensions to the rear of (and sometimes adjoining) the frontage buildings.
Thus it follows that the ‘settings’ of these particular elements do not make any
meaningful contribution to the heritage value of the fire station. The appearance of
GL Hearn Page 513 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
the rear of the B9 clinic and the fire station parking area and modern extensions and
facilities detract somewhat from the appearance to the rear.
Thus, the rear area generally makes a much lesser contribution to the
understanding of the heritage value of the building and is characterised by larger
scaled buildings (up to four storeys) of similar materials (none of which are of
particular merit themselves).
Thus the B9 site (or the open views that it affords of the Town Hall Annex) does not
make a very important contribution to our understanding of the heritage value of the
town hall.
Similarly, the Fenella and Ravensfield sites make only a very limited contribution to
the setting the Town Hall (no more than neutral).
As set out above, there is no intervisibility between the group of civic buildings and
the Meritage Centre Site which does not form part of the setting of these buildings.
Church House, 49 Church End (Locally Listed)
This building comprises a circa 1890 two storey rendered building with an eaves
cornice and clay tile roof. It was refurbished for use by St Mary’s Church in 2016,
and is included on the Local List for its intactness, aesthetic merit and landmark
quality.
The Development Site falls within the setting of the building in that there is a degree
of intervisibility between the building and the site, but does not contribute the heritage
value of the receptor. The existing Meritage Centre building forms an unattractive
backdrop to the building when approach from the west along Greyhound Hill.
Heritage value: Low
GL Hearn Page 514 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Rose Cottage, Church End (Locally Listed)
Rose Cottage is a detached house with three projecting gables with wooden barge
boards. The date 1908 is marked on the front elevation, and it has a large chimney
with pots. The building is included on the Local List for its intactness, aesthetic merit
and landmark quality.
The Development Site falls within the setting of the building in that there is a degree
of intervisibility between the building and the site. While the Development site itself
does not contribute to the heritage value of Rose Cottage, the existing Meritage
Centre detracts from views of Rose Cottage looking north along Church End and
forms an unattractive backdrop to the building when approach from the west along
Greyhound Hill.
Heritage value: Low
The Chequers Public House, 20 Church End (Locally Listed)
The Chequers Public House (now a nursery) dates from the late 19th century with
alterations. It is of two storeys with stucco render and a dentillated eaves cornice. It
originally formed the end of a terrace of houses which was demolished in the 1970s.
It is included on the Local List for its intactness, aesthetic merits and landmark quality.
The Development Site forms part of the setting of the Greyhound Public House but
does not contribute to the significance of the asset. The existing Meritage Centre
building forms an unattractive backdrop to the building when approach from the west
along Greyhound Hill.
Heritage value: Low
The Greyhound Inn Public House (Locally Listed)
The Greyhound Public House was been a pub since 1878, before which it was used
for vestry meetings. It replaced an earlier Greyhound Inn in 1896. The inn is owned
GL Hearn Page 515 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
by a trust of the Church, and has a commandment board hanging in the bar. It is
white painted brick, with a dormer protruding from the front elevation and a steeply
pitched clay tile roof. The building is included on the Local List for its social and
communal value, landmark quality, intactness and aesthetic merits.
The setting of the building at the centre of the former hamlet contributes to the
heritage value of the building. The Development Site has limited intervisibility with
the building and so does not contribute to the heritage value of the building.
Heritage value: Low
28 Church End (Non-designated heritage receptor)
The Conservation Appraisal also identifies No. 28 Church End as a building that
contributes positively to the character and appearance of the conservation area (see
the map at Page 52 of the Conservation Area Appraisal) and states (p34):
“…beyond The Chequer’s carpark, are a pair of semi-detached residential properties, Nos. 28 and 30 Church End. No. 30 overpowers No. 28, by virtue of its more impressive expanse. Both two storeys high, No. 30 is composed of two, two-storey bay windows at the front with a centralised door, two gable projections to the rear and a hipped clay tile roof with pebbledashed walls. No. 28 is built in a more traditional Victorian style, of London stock brick, with only three sash windows and a front door on its principal elevation, and a slate tiled roof. Both buildings share a central chimney stack but No. 30 has two separate chimneys to its northern elevation.”
No. 28 Church End is the end of a former terrace of three houses, dating from about
the 1850s. The northernmost two of the terrace were demolished and replaced with
No 30, built in 1930s. It possesses a low level of heritage value as a remnant of the
earlier streetscape in this part of the Conservation Area.
The building is not locally listed.
GL Hearn Page 516 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Heritage value: Very Low
Conservation Areas Hendon Church End Conservation Area
Hendon Church End Conservation Area was first designated in 1983, and is the
subject of an Appraisal and Management Proposals document adopted in 2012.
The Conservation Area has a linear form, focussed on a north-south stretch of
Church Road, extending to the south of the junction with the latter.
The Conservation Area broadly covers the area which was formerly the settlement
of Church End, which focussed upon a well-watered promontory where the Church
of St Mary was constructed. This focussed space at the north of the CA is its area of
principal interest, with a cluster of historic buildings contributing to the village
atmosphere, including the Greyhound Pub and Church Farmhouse.
Whilst this core is legible as a historic village, the character of the Conservation Area
as a whole has changed as a result of creeping suburbanisation; the settlement has
coalesced with the previously separate village at The Burroughs to the south, and to
the north-west and south the surrounding environment is characterised by late 19th
and 20th century residential development of varying quality.
In particular, the area along Church Terrace, to the west of the church, has a back-
of-house feel, with the poor quality elevation of the Meritage Centre its tall boundary
fence and large expanses of car parking creating an unattractive, utilitarian character.
The Meritage Centre
Whilst excluded from the CA boundary, the existing building at 13-21 Church End is
understood as part of the linear experience of Church End, and is an unattractive
GL Hearn Page 517 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
feature which detracts from its character. The unsympathetic mid-20th century
building is a prominent, detracting element in views north towards the Church.
Church Farm House, to the east of Church End, is now the sole remnant of the 16th
and 17th century farm houses which once characterised the area.
The Parish Church of St Mary, included on the statutory list at grade II*, is a landmark
building in the Conservation Area, which also forms the focal point of the historic
settlement. The churchyard is a defined area of open space, characteristic of the
village environment, which has an established feel, and contributes to the character
and appearance of the area as a whole.
A number of important local views contribute to the heritage value and appreciation
of the Conservation Area, including:
• The view north-west along Church End towards the Greyhound Inn; • From outside the Greyhound Inn, west along Greyhound Hill; • Views out from St Mary’s Churchyard and Church Field through the tree line; • The vista looking out of the CA to the north-west from the edge of Sunny Hill Park;
and • From Church End, looking north along Church Road.
These are identified in the Conservation Area Appraisal.
To the south, the open land east of Church End enables views towards the larger,
more civic and institutional development at The Burroughs.
Within the setting of the CA, the coalescence of the formerly separate settlement at
The Burroughs, and an increased density in modern infill development have
detracted from its historic village character.
The historic character remains, principally, in the immediate environs of the Church,
where the ensemble of the Church Farmhouse, Church itself, historic monuments
GL Hearn Page 518 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
within the churchyard and other features such as the Greyhound Public House can
be appreciated collectively.
Thus the heritage value of the Church End Conservation Area can be summarised
as:
• The ensemble of historic buildings at the north of the CA which are redolent of an historic village;
• The high quality of some of the buildings, in particular the highly graded assets included on the statutory list;
• The linear views of this space along Church End.
Heritage value: Medium
The Burroughs Conservation Area
The Burroughs Conservation Area has a linear form, lying to the south of the listed
civic cluster focussed on Hendon Town Hall, Fire Station and Library. It is the subject
of an appraisal adopted in 2012.
The Appraisal identifies two key views; one from the junction of Watford Way, at its
southern extent, oriented north; the second looking east along Brampton Grove.
These views do not presently take in the Site.
Its character is described in the Conservation Area Appraisal as ‘one of a busy
thoroughfare connecting other areas in the west of the Burroughs. The residential
terraces accessed off Burroughs Gardens have a quieter, more suburban feel.’
The Conservation Area derives its special character from its historic use as a
principal route to and from the centre of Hendon.
Built form primarily comprises terraced residential dwellings, with a collection of
offices, shops and a former Public House. It is noted as being a highly used route
for students coming to and from Hendon Station.
GL Hearn Page 519 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The Fenella and Ravensfield Site at present is an unattractive feature in the setting
of the Conservation Area. The northernmost extent of the CA lies adjacent to the car
park at the south of the Site, which is an unattractive, unrelieved expanse of
hardstanding. The blank elevation of the Victorian terraced development beyond is
similarly unattractive.
There is therefore scope to improve the Site’s appearance in views north from the
Conservation Area.
Heritage value: Medium
The built heritage baseline is summarised in Table 12.9 below, which also identifies
those assets which have the potential to experience a significant effect as a result of
the Proposed Development, and which are therefore scoped in to further
assessment. The table identifies for the avoidance of doubt which heritage assets
are scoped out for assessment.
Table 12.9: Built Heritage Baseline
Map Ref
Name Grade Heritage Value
Full Assessment Required
Listed Buildings 1 Parish Church of St Mary II* High Yes 2 Church Farmhouse Museum II* High No 3 Tombs in St Mary’s Churchyard of:
Conquest Jones, John Jones, Sir Joseph Ayloffe, John Haley, Henry Jaynes, Susannah Frye
II Medium Yes
4 Mausoleum of Philip Rundell in St Mary’s Churchyard
II Medium Yes
GL Hearn Page 520 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
5 Unidentified Chest Tomb 15 metres south east of Church in St Mary’s Churchyard
II Medium Yes
6 Headstone of Thomas Thatcher in St Mary’s Churchyard
II Medium Yes
7 Model Farm, the Milking Parlour II Medium No 8 Daniel Almshouses II Medium No 9 The Vicarage II Medium No 10 Hendon Fire Station II Medium Yes 11 Montfort House II Medium No 12 Milestone (London 7) on Wall of No.
161 Brent Street between Church Road and Lodge Road
II Medium No
13 Hendon Library II Medium Yes 14 Hendon Town Hall II Medium Yes 15 Ice House at St Joseph’s Convent
School II Medium No
16 47 and 55, The Burroughs NW4 II Medium Yes 17 44-52, The Burroughs NW4 II Medium Yes 18 Burroughs House II Medium Yes 19 15 The Burroughs NW4 and Ivey House II Medium No 20 9 and 11 The Burroughs NW4 II Medium No 21 Hendon War Memorial II Medium No Conservation Areas
A Hendon Church End CA N/A Medium Yes
B The Burroughs Hendon CA N/A High Yes
Locally Listed Buildings
Church House, 49 Church End N/A Low Yes
Rose Cottage, Church End N/A Low Yes
The Chequers Public House, 20 Church End
N/A Low Yes
The Greyhound Public House N/A Low Yes
Non-Designated heritage receptors (not locally listed)
28 Church End N/A Very Low Yes
GL Hearn Page 521 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Townscape Baseline
The study area includes five areas of distinct character, with Character Area 4 split
into three identified sub-areas, which share the same character but are physically
distinct.
An appraisal of their character is set out below.
Character Area 1: Civic and Institutional Centre
This character area is focussed on the southern part of Church End, which is
characterised predominantly by 20th century large footprint public developments.
The Town Hall is a landmark on the west side, and is experienced as part of an
attractive ensemble with the library and fire station.
The character area sits at the juncture of the historic settlements at Hendon (to the
north) and The Burroughs (to the south), and therefore has an infill character; with
modern development characterising the space between the two enclaves. The area
is a popular pedestrian route through the town centre, as well as a destination for its
civic and institutional uses.
Buildings in this area are generally detached, with large footprints and a rectilinear
arrangement focussed on The Burroughs. Their height is greater than the domestic
scale seen in character areas 4b and 4 to east and west, which marks the area as a
civic focus.
In terms of materiality, red brick is a prominent feature, though this is varied in quality;
the brickwork at the Town Hall is an attractive feature which contributes to the historic
ensemble at the area’s core, whilst the modern brickwork at the Fenella and
Ravensfield site has a utilitarian quality due to its uniformity of tone.
GL Hearn Page 522 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Stone dressings are another feature of the area, seen in particular to the ground floor
elevation of the Fire Station.
Set back from the frontage, the character area is less formal, and in places, such as
in the environs of building B9, has a back-of-house, service character, which is
unwelcoming to pedestrians. Wayfinding through the area is also poor- principally a
linear corridor for people passing by unless they are engaged in university activity.
The buildings east and west of The Burroughs are unified through their association
with the university; the road itself has an open character, with wide pavements and
established, mature vegetation.
The area of landscaping to the western side of The Burroughs provides some relief
from the urban environment.
The Site falls within Character Area 1. The site itself at the rear of the library is
relatively enclosed and visible only in oblique views from the Burroughs Frontage.
Character Area 2: Church End Historic Settlement
The boundaries of this character area are broadly consistent with those of the
Church End Conservation Area. It covers the former village at Church End, which
while it retains its village character has been substantially altered through the
addition of infill development of varying quality.
The Church forms the focal point of the area, due to its distinctive tower and its
position at the northern extent, on the area of highest land. It is closely associated
with historic buildings in its immediate vicinity, including the Greyhound Public House,
and Church Farmhouse, now a museum. Collectively, these read as an historic
village ensemble, though this character is best appreciated in views north-west from
Church End.
GL Hearn Page 523 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Towards the south, the character of the area is more varied, with lower quality
development including the large 20th century building at 16-22 Church End.
Development, whilst varied in terms of its use and period, is unified through a number
of identifiable characteristics, including pitched tiled roofs, gables, and the prevailing
use of red brick and render. The mature trees which intersperse the built form also
make an important contribution.
The Meritage Centre falls within this character area, but forms a jarring contrast with
its prevailing character. The building appears underscaled in its context, being
largely of a single storey with a shallow pitched roof and irregular fenestration leaving
large expanses of brick. Its generic mid-20th century expression is at odds with the
better considered ensemble to the west.
The use of the road for car parking contributes to a hostile pedestrian environment.
Church End itself and Greyhound Hill is a busy traffic environment.
The use of the Meritage Centre is varied, but in keeping with the village centre
character. The building accommodates a nursery, as well as some residential
accommodation, and flexible space used by the university as well as the church.
This sense of destination, and integration with the surrounding community, is an
important aspect of the character of the historic settlement area.
Views out of this character area are also an important part of the way it is
experienced; from the churchyard at its northern extent, the views across Sunny Hill
Park contribute a rural setting which is befitting of an historic settlement.
Character Area 3: The Burroughs
GL Hearn Page 524 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
This character area encompasses The Burroughs Conservation Area, and
comprises the former historic settlement to the south of Hendon, including some infill
development of varied quality.
The character area has a linear structure, focussed on the north-south route of the
road. Historic buildings, some of which are included on the statutory list, are
interspersed with more recent development, and many buildings have shop fronts at
ground level. The Burroughs car park, to the west, is an unattractive townscape gap,
and spaces between buildings provide some limited views of service areas behind
the primary frontages.
The portion of the character area which also lies within the CA is more recognisable
as a historic residential area, though this character has been eroded by the busy
road, and the retail and commercial uses in the area.
Character Area 4: Wider Residential Development
Character Area 4 is a very large character area, comprising the suburban
development arranged in the vicinity of Hendon. The area is split into three identified
sub-areas (a,b and c) which are physically distinct but have a common character.
The character area typically comprises two storey domestic development, which
varies in style between historic terraces, which are generally finer grain and date
from earlier in the area’s development, and later 20th century semi-detached and
some detached properties.
Houses are generally set behind front gardens, and a range of boundary treatments
are evident.
The character areas are understood separately from areas 1 and 2, but are
interrelated; through the existence of the historic centres, and the surrounding
GL Hearn Page 525 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
residential development, the story of Hendon’s expansion and population growth is
legible.
This is reinforced through the uniformity of scale and materiality in this area, the latter
comprising predominantly brick, render and tile roofs.
Character Area 5: Open Space
This character area comprises the open space at Sunny Hill Park which falls partially
within the study area to the north.
The park predominantly comprises grassland, and offers significant views to the
north and west owing to its high elevation.
Towards the south-east of the park, and area formerly within the St Mary’s
Churchyard is now part of the public open space, and forms a transitional area
between the two.
The open spaces is bordered by residential development to the east and west–
mostly terraced or semi-detached in nature and dating from the late-C19 and early-
C20. This sense of enclosure is further emphasised by boundary walls, fencing and
vegetation, which filters and/or screens views south.
The townscape baseline is summarised in Table 12.10 below, which also identifies
those receptors which have the potential to experience a significant townscape effect
as a result of the Proposed Development, and which are therefore scoped in to
further assessment.
GL Hearn Page 526 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Table 12.10: Townscape Baseline
Map Ref
Name Townscape Value
Full Assessment Required
Townscape Character Areas 1 Civic and Institutional Centre Medium Yes 2 Church End Historic Settlement Medium Yes 3 The Burroughs Medium Yes 4 Wider Residential Development Low Yes 5 Open Space Medium Yes
Visual Baseline
As part of the visual assessment, 20 AVRs have been considered, and are set out
at Section 9 of the three HTVIAs at Appendices 1-3.
For the reader’s ease, the visual baseline and visual assessment are set out together
at the visual assessment section below.
Assessment of Effects (Construction and Operational)
This section sets out the effects of the Proposed Development on the identified
heritage, townscape and visual receptors, cross referring to the three HTVIAs where
relevant.
Effects During Construction
Heritage Receptors
The construction phase of development comprises the necessary steps to enable
the operation of the Proposed Development. More information on the construction
programme is set out in Chapter 5.
GL Hearn Page 527 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The Construction Management Plan sets out the anticipated programme of works
and the key activities that would be undertaken on the Sites during demolition and
construction necessary to facilitate the Proposed Development. The construction
period is to be phased which will help mitigate any potential effects on heritage
receptors.
The Sites would be enclosed with tall hoarding during Demolition and Construction,
which will provide a visual buffer from the immediate environment. . Equipment and
heavy machinery will also be a common feature of the Site for the anticipated
construction programme.
The demolition and construction phase will also result in increased noise, vibration,
dust and traffic in the surrounding area.
The magnitude of this impact will be mainly experienced within the Site, with much
of the construction activity occluded from view by hoardings.
The Transport Chapter provides mitigation measures to reduce the disruption
caused by traffic movements associated with construction and Site preparation. The
logistic management team would organise and plan prescribed delivery times to
ensure that busy roads do not become congested with frequent material deliveries.
The standard environmental controls required under legislation and best practice
guidance are met as a matter of course. In order to further mitigate the impact of
demolition and construction to the immediate area the Applicant may enter into a
‘Considerate Constructors’ scheme to ensure best practice.
Direct impacts of the construction phase on designated heritage receptors will be
experienced by Hendon Library, the Town Hall, and the Church End Conservation
Area. This would comprise visual influences from construction activities themselves
as well as noise.
GL Hearn Page 528 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The following heritage receptors are located within closed proximity of the site and
therefore the activities at this stage of the proposed development would introduce
construction activities to their more immediate setting. This would comprise new
visual influences, as well as noise:
• Parish Church of St Mary; • Tombs in St Mary’s Churchyard of: Conquest Jones, John Jones, Sir Joseph
Ayloffe, John Haley, Henry Jaynes, Susannah Frye; • Mausoleum of Philip Rundell in St Mary’s Churchyard; • Unidentified Chest Tomb 15m southeast of Church; • Headstone of Thomas Thatcher in St Mary’s Churchyard • Daniel Almshouses; • Hendon Fire Station; • Church House, 49 Church End; • Rose Cottage, Church End; • The Chequers Public House, 20 Church End; • The Greyhound Public House;
There would be no permanent change to the way the heritage value of the receptors
identified in the baseline is appreciated or understood arising from this phase of the
proposed development. The appearance of construction activity and its impact to the
sensory experience of the receptor would be over a limited duration. It is not
considered to have any effect on the long-term conservation of the receptor or its
overall heritage value.
Due to the scale of the proposed development, it is envisaged that the demolition
and construction works would be completed in phases – as confirmed in Chapter 5,
the proposed development will be constructed over three phases commencing in
2022.
In this case, the demolition and construction activities would mainly be appreciated
within a very localised context and so the main likely impacts would involve the
visibility of tall construction equipment such as cranes. It is considered that the
GL Hearn Page 529 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
majority of heritage receptors would have a Low susceptibility to this type of direct
change or change to their setting and the magnitude of impact would be Low on
their heritage value. This results in a likely effect of short-term, temporary, minor adverse.
Townscape and Visual Impact during Construction
This stage of the proposed development would introduce construction activities to
the wider townscape in which the receptors are appreciated. It is noted that this type
of activity is not uncommon, where the area is undergoing redevelopment and
regeneration. The appearance of this type of activity would be considered to change
the baseline situation, but to a Very Low magnitude of impact on the sensitivity of
the receptors. This is considered to be short-term, temporary Negligible Adverse
likely effect because the activities are unattractive and degrade the townscape
setting to a degree, and the overall way in which the receptors are experienced. This
likely effect is not significant.
We summarise the operational effects of the Proposed Development on the
identified heritage, townscape and visual receptors below.
Built Heritage
Owing to the scale and nature of the proposals, the street layout and orientation, and
existing interposing development and vegetation, we find that there would be no
effect on the setting of the following heritage assets, which are thus scoped out of
further assessment:
• Church Farmhouse Museum (grade II*); • Model Farm, the Milking Parlour (grade II); • Hendon War Memorial (grade II); • Ivey House (grade II); • 15 The Burroughs (grade II); • Burroughs House (grade II);
GL Hearn Page 530 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
• 44-52 The Burroughs (grade II); • The Vicarage (grade II); • Montfort House (grade II); • Milestone (London 7) on wall of number 161 Brent Street between Church Road
and Lodge Road (grade II);
They are included in the summary table at the end of this section for completeness.
Listed buildings
This section provides an assessment of the effects on listed buildings at operational
stage.
St Mary’s Church (grade II*), Tombs In St Mary’s Churchyard (grade II); Mausoleum of Philip Rundell in St Mary’s Churchyard (grade II); Unidentified Chest Tomb 15 metres south east of Church in St Mary’s Churchyard (grade II); Headstone of Thomas Thatcher in St Mary’s Churchyard (grade II);
Plainly the Proposed Development does not directly affect the principal elements of
heritage value of the church, in terms of the degree of medieval fabric and the
importance of the various fixtures and associations with noted stonemasons.
Similarly, the Proposed Development does not affect our ability to appreciate the
historic interest of the church. Thus the main elements of the heritage value of the
church are unchanged, and one’s appreciation of these principal elements of
heritage value are unaffected.
Thus any effect on the heritage value of the church would be by virtue of developing
within its setting. The primary setting of the church is defined by the churchyard walls
itself. The Proposed Development is obviously outside of this primary setting. The
primary setting also encompasses the entrances to the churchyard from Church
Terrace and Church End and these too are unaffected by the development; this
entrance sequence to the church by users is unaffected by the development which
would only be experienced peripherally. The views from the north of the churchyard
are also an important part of the church’s setting, and this too is entirely unaffected.
GL Hearn Page 531 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
As a suburban landscape, the character of the churchyard results in part from its
existence as an area of open space set within first a rural settlement and then later
a dense built environment. The church itself doubled in size in 1914, reflecting the
extent of change in the function and characteristics of the area.
Its historic function was intrinsically related to the growth and habitation of this part
of north-west London, and as such the relationship between the church, the
churchyard and its developed, suburban setting forms part of its character close to
a location of iterative change and suburbanisation throughout the 19th and 20th
Centuries which has resulted in development closer and further away from the
eastern church boundary in different phases over time. Any change to the setting
of the church should be considered in this context.
At the present time, views of the church from the south along Church End and
Church Terrace are part obscured by the unattractive Meritage Centre. Similar to the
positive effects on the conservation area, the removal of these blocks will have a
positive effect on the approach to the church from the south. This is a beneficial
effect which should be accorded great weight in the assessment of the proposals.
Historic England Advice Note 3 identifies that the creation of new views of heritage
assets should be considered a benefit.
Whilst the proposed development would be visible from parts of the churchyard
(limited to Block 1 of the Meritage Centre Site and only the taller elements), the built
form is more distant from the boundary than the current Meritage Centre, preserving
a sense of differentiation. The taller element is set further away. This separation is
a new development – the historic maps show that historically there were Victorian
terraces very close to the boundary, and so the change is part of an iterative process
of development in the locality. The perception of the development at the boundary
does not have a material effect on the tranquillity of the churchyard and preserves
the most important views from it.
GL Hearn Page 532 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The articulation of the proposed blocks 1 and 2 of the Meritage Centre Site into
different elements with a variety of materials, an articulated roof form and section of
greater and lower height break down the mass of the building so that it does not read
as a large block, especially within the views of along Church End.
We note also that a number of memorials within the churchyard are listed, but by
their nature they are not susceptible to the sort of setting change under consideration
and there would be no harm to the ability to appreciate the distinguished memorials.
These, by virtue of their form, scale and purpose, derive their historic and
architectural interest from their age and function, and have a setting which is defined
by the character of the space within the cemetery. The wider townscape, which is
understood separately from the defined space within the cemetery, does not
contribute to the heritage value of these tombs, or their appreciation.
While the mature and verdant character of the churchyard can be appreciated from
outside is boundary, this does not form part of the principal element of the church’s
heritage value. Views into the churchyard would have been obscured for the better
part of the last 150 years. Notwithstanding, the green character of the churchyard
will still be discernible and the approach to the church generally will be improved.
The susceptibility of the receptor is judged to be Low which results in a Low sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a Low magnitude of impact to the Church.
The Proposed Development would give rise to a Minor Beneficial (not significant). The effect will be direct, local and permanent.
Owing to the inward-focussed nature of the memorials and their setting within the
Churchyard, the Proposed Development would have a Low magnitude of impact to
these receptors. The Proposed Development would give rise to a Negligible Beneficial (not significant). The effect will be direct, local and permanent.
GL Hearn Page 533 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Hendon Library, Hendon Town Hall and Hendon Fire Station (grade II)
These three receptors fall within the setting of both the B9 Site and the Ravensfield
and Fenella Site. For clarity, the effects can be summarised thus:
• The effect of the B9 proposals on the fabric of the Library and Town Hall annexe; • The effect of the B9 Proposals on the setting of the Town Hall and Hendon Fire
Station; • The effect of the Fenella and Ravensfield proposals on the setting of the Library,
Town Hall and Fire Station, both individually and as an ensemble.
The following discursive analysis considers these effects before reaching an
assessment of the effect of the proposals as a whole on each receptor.
As described at Section 5.0 of Appendix 1, the library’s front elevation remained
intact through the (largely harmful) 1973 works, and this remains an element of
principal heritage value. The Proposals do not affect or change the appearance or
appreciation of the front elevation, and the ability to appreciate its heritage value
would be preserved.
The northern and southern elevations, which are illustrated at drawings CS/099180
and CS/099180, has been carefully considered to preserve a sense of distinction
between the Library and Town Hall buildings. The use of materials, including a
language of red brick and glazing, ties the buildings together, with rectangular
punched fenestration in the new building providing a contemporary response to the
similarly proportioned multi-paned windows of the library.
The building appears as three distinct parts, differentiated by glazed connections.
The viewer would here appreciate the architectural interest of each of the listed
buildings, and visually differentiate between the central new portion. At roof level,
set-backs further differentiate between the three portions of the building. The
setbacks and form of the roof reduce the sense of scale of the library, with the
GL Hearn Page 534 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
proposed extension reading as a three storey element, comfortably in scale with the
library itself, the town hall and annex and adjacent fire station.
The creation of an active ground floor frontage here would also be beneficial,
drawing people in to this underutilized part of the Site and contributing to the sense
of the buildings as a destination.
The proposed plant room of B9 is to be placed on the area formerly occupied by the
1970s extension library, avoiding any historic fabric. It is sufficiently set back so as
to not be visible in street views and the detailed design of enclosures will be
developed prior to an application.
Overall, we consider that the proposals would remove an unsympathetic element
abutting the listed Library building, and improve the opportunity for its appreciation
by enlivening its setting, to form the focus of a new university centre.
The form of the new building at the B9 site utilises appropriate materials from a
traditional palette to reflect the character of the library, while reading as a distinct,
high quality modern addition to the building.
In terms of scale and mass, it is proportionately sized with a subordinate upper floor
(formed by a mansard roof which significantly reduces the presence of the additional
storey from street eye-level)) and a parapet line that steps down towards the
connection with the library. The building line of the building on its northern side steps
in to mediate between the different building lines of the library and the Town Hall
Annex.
The proposals seek to provide a sympathetic update to the internal spaces of the
library. The principal spaces at ground and first floor level are to be retained and
given a new purpose at the heart of the Proposed Development. Details of quality
GL Hearn Page 535 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
and interest are retained, including the original principal staircase, which has a neo-
Georgian elegance.
The plan form of the building will remain legible, with the maintenance of principal
spaces.
Importantly, the development will allow the removal of piecemeal modern additions
and partitions in the main areas at ground floor which have eroded the proportions
of the space.
There is therefore little impact on important fabric of the building itself, and its
heritage value as an early 20th century library building will be unaffected by the B9
development.
The main intervention forming part of the B9 works to the building is via the rear
extensions to the library. Our analysis at Section 5.0 of Appendix 1 concluded that
the infill building to the rear is a modern structure which makes no meaningful
contribution to the historic or architectural interest of the listed building.
The insertion of new elements has been carefully considered to avoid visual
disruption to the internal and external form of the library and to enable the extent of
the building to be appreciated in its original form. The new development will read as
a modern extension to the building. There will be a clear distinction between the
main historic spaces and the new internal spaces created to the rear. The extension
will not be perceptible from external views of the building to the front. It will not
interfere with an appreciation of the aesthetic qualities of the building when viewed
from the Burroughs.
In particular, works are proposed to refurbish the building, creating an airy,
welcoming entrance hall (removing unsympathetic modern subdivisions within the
GL Hearn Page 536 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
entrance hall), and help integrate the new business school into its context. These
internal alterations are considered beneficial.
These works represent an enhancement to the important entrance sequence of the
building, enabling an appreciation of the elegant stair and entrance hall which is
currently obscured by later interventions. These works of enhancement should be
given great weight in the consideration of the proposals overall.
At ground floor level, the removal of the partitions to create an open planform would
change the character of the space, and the cellular rooms to either side of the main
entrance would no longer be legible.
In terms of the town hall, the physical connection to the town hall is limited to central
connections through existing openings in the 1960 Annex. The extent of physical
intervention is limited to lowering the sills on one window on each floor.
The central connections are to be contained within a glazed void to full height. The
glazed connection is set back 5m from the façade of the Town Hall Annex in
accordance with advice received during the first pre-application discussions, and set
in from the main façade of the new building, and side façade of the Town Hall Annex.
The glazed link allows internal circulation and visual connectivity with the Town Hall
Annex and allows views of the façade of the Annex itself.
The Annex is part of the 1960s phase of development. The principal heritage value
of the Town Hall is contained within its original early 20th Century core facing the
Burroughs. The annex is a postwar addition forming the third of multiple phases of
additions to the Town Hall. It was developed to match the 1930s rear extension in
terms of its detailing, but appears as a utilitarian block and while it sits well in context
in terms of massing, details and materials, the Annex is architecturally
undistinguished and holds little historic interest.
GL Hearn Page 537 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The Annex is physically distant from the principal areas of interest within the Town
Hall and the degree of connection to the principal listed building is weak, and it is
debatable whether the annex should be considered part of the listing.
Nevertheless, the interventions in the Annex are not harmful to the principal areas
of heritage value of the Town Hall exterior or interior. While the proposal blocks
oblique views of the town hall annex from the Burroughs, we do not consider this to
be harmful to the principal areas of interest within the Town Hall contained within its
original historic core. The design of the proposed building allows one to continue to
understand the Annex in the context of a late addition to the original Town Hall in
multi-phased additions to accommodate expanded civic responsibilities. The
heritage value of the principal town hall building remains intact. We conclude that
there is no direct or indirect harm to the listed Town Hall as a whole arising from the
proposed development.
Setting effects resulting from the B9 Proposals
The principal contribution made by setting is the appreciation of the ‘family’ of three
civic buildings facing the Burroughs. This relationship is unchanged by the proposed
development and the family of three buildings and the clear relationships between
them (style, period, materials, scale etc.) will continue to be appreciated from the
front, the main views from the Burroughs.
The proposed building will be visible only obliquely between the buildings in views
from the front and this will be in the context of buildings of similar scale and
materiality. This does not affect one’s ability to appreciate the architectural and
historic interest of any of the three listed buildings, either individually or as an
ensemble. For this reason, we do not consider that the proposed building alters any
appreciation of the status of the family of civic buildings, either symbolically or
visually.
GL Hearn Page 538 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Setting effects resulting from the Fenella and Ravensfield Proposals
Turning now to the Fenella and Ravensfield Site, the new buildings have been
conceived as a ‘family’ of three separate buildings, distinct in form, architectural
design and function but unified as a family through their related uses, scale, siting
and materiality. These materials and the shaped roof form of the taller central
element relate the proposals to the listed buildings opposite.
This tripartite structure ensures that the buildings are read distinctly, and respond to
the family of civic buildings opposite.
The buildings have a defined ground floor with active glass frontages, providing a
welcoming entrance with a human scale at street level.
The form of the new buildings follows the requirements of the brief, to provide a
mixed-use development as part of the Middlesex University Estate. The three
buildings would read as a family, separated by townscape gaps which break up the
overall impression of the massing and reflect their individual architectural
expressions which would differentiate between the uses accommodated within. The
grain is therefore considered appropriate to the buildings’ context, responding to
ensemble of the three listed buildings opposite.
In terms of materials, the Proposed Development incorporates brick and stone
dressings, reflecting the wider campus character and architecture. The theatre block
and library block in particular reflect ‘solid’ civic uses which are in keeping with the
ensemble to the west of the Burroughs.
The glazing at ground floor would have a contemporary appearance, whilst the
regular, rectangular fenestration provides a modern response to the window pattern
of the library building opposite.
GL Hearn Page 539 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The materiality is consistent with that used in its context, and wouldn’t jar or compete
with the listed buildings.
In terms of scale, the buildings would be consistent with the prevailing height of
Usher Hall to the north, befitting the theatre use. The mass increases towards the
middle of the site frontage with the Burroughs, before stepping down to the at the
southern, library end. At roof level, the articulation and use of setbacks and garden
spaces reduces the appearance of the massing. A contemporary version of a
mansard, proposed for the central section, corresponds to the traditional roof forms
opposite.
Its architectural composition is a well-considered contextual approach. The detailing
at ground and top floors give the building a defined character and differentiate its
appearance from the library opposite.
The proposed development also introduces a greater level of active frontage than
the existing condition, including the new library. The function would link the Site with
the former library opposite, which would be understood as part of the same campus
context.
To the rear, the scale decreases toward the residential development beyond, again
reflecting the use and responding to its context. At lower levels, the buildings have
been well-articulated, to create a pleasing ensemble with a human scale. Think we
need to round off on this point and scale relative to the buildings opposite –
concluding that the buildings balance the Burroughs but do not compete.
The new landscaping scheme would create a more welcoming pedestrian and visitor
environment, and better integrate the buildings into the streetscene. These would
also facilitate improved access and connectivity between the listed buildings to the
west, also within the campus, and the Site.
GL Hearn Page 540 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
As a whole,we consider that the Proposed Development would be an attractive, high
quality addition to the setting of the listed buildings, which would improve the
contribution made by the Site to their setting.
The three listed building comprise a legible ensemble, which make a mutual
contribution to the respective setting of each. The ability to appreciate the three
buildings as a group is an important aspect which makes a notable contribution to
their setting.
This is best done from the east side of The Burroughs, oriented west towards their
front elevations. The Proposed Development would not affect these views, and from
this perspective, any setting impact would be peripheral to the buildings’ principal
appreciation.
The new development would be larger than the existing, underscaled development,
and would frame The Burroughs in views north and south, improving the symmetry
of the listed ensemble.
The articulation at roof level (including through a modern mansard floor) and use of
setbacks will reduce the effect of the massing, and maintain the primacy of the listed
cluster.
Our assessment finds that the intrinsic heritage value of the civic buildings would
not be affected. The Fire Station, Town Hall and Library would remain as good
examples of 20th century buildings of this type, and the ability to appreciate the
ensemble as a group would not change.
The manner in which we understand the importance of the family of three civic
buildings within a suburban context would be preserved.
GL Hearn Page 541 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The architectural interest of the three, their collective and individual use of
harmonious materials, detailing, and their collective historic interest as part of a
phase of municipal resources for the growing suburb of Hendon, would be unaffected.
Thus, the listed buildings retain their prominence as part of the civic ensemble,
enhancing the development’s destination identity as part of a comprehensive
masterplan for the campus as a whole. The immediate setting of the Town Hall will
be further improved through the provision of high quality public realm.
The proposals also provide an improved setting for the nearby listed Town Hall and
Fire Station buildings through the transformation of its underscaled and poor quality
surroundings to an attractive and high quality development that will encourage its
public use. The rear of the existing clinic in particular is a back of house space
dominated by amenities such as bin stores and parking areas and is not welcoming
to visitors or passers-by. This space, which currently detracts from the setting of the
fire station and library, will be enhanced.
Our analysis has produced not just a finding of no harm by virtue of development
within the settings of the three listed buildings. There are net enhancements to the
appreciation of the grade II listed Library, town hall and fire station, through the
removal of an element abutting a non-original part of the building and the associated
unattractive back of house area. That benefit derives from a comprehensive,
managed solution comprising the replacement of an unattractive abutting structure
and focussing on the ensemble of listed civic buildings at the core of a high quality
new development.
In reaching our conclusions we have regard to the high quality of the proposed
buildings, their active frontages and uses and the quality of public realm proposed in
the immediate setting of the civic buildings.
GL Hearn Page 542 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The susceptibility of the receptors is judged to be Medium which results in a
Moderate sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a Low magnitude of impact to the receptors.
The Proposed Development would give rise to a Minor Beneficial (not significant). The effect will be direct, local and permanent.
The susceptibility of the Library is judged to be Medium, because the works to the listed building will preserve its heritage value, and the works to the setting will not impede the appreciation of its historic and architectural interest, which results in a Moderate sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a Low magnitude of impact to the Town Hall
by virtue of the link to the annexe and changes to its setting from the B9 and Fenella
and Ravensfield Sites. The Proposed Development would give rise to a Minor Beneficial (not significant). The effect will be direct, local and permanent.
The susceptibility of the Fire Station is judged to be Medium which results in a
Moderate sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a Low magnitude of impact to the receptor,
arising from the changes to its setting. The Proposed Development would give rise
to a Minor Beneficial (not significant). The effect will be direct, local and
permanent.
Conservation Areas Hendon Church End Conservation Area
In terms of the replacement buildings, and when the Site and CA are considered as
a whole, we consider that the site should be capable of accommodating the scale of
residential accommodation proposed as a matter of principle to reflect the ever
evolving suburbanization of this part of Hendon. The proposed development reflects
GL Hearn Page 543 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
the latest chapter of development of the site in a series of redevelopments that
commenced in the 19th Century. The site has, in the past, accommodated dense
residential development.
The scale and mass of the proposals has been refined throughout the design
process and in consultation with Officers and Historic England. The massing has
been carefully considered across the Site to provide coherent architectural forms
that relate to each other and that respond to the character of the conservation area.
The scale of the Proposed Development at the Meritage Centre site modulates to
reflect local contextual influences and the sensitivities of surrounding residential
properties. The proposed development is lowest where it fronts Church end at two
storeys. It rises to three storeys here it fronts Church Terrace where development is
generally denser. The proposed development improves the Church Terrace
Frontage by establishing a more legible frontage to the street and improving the
streetscape generally.
The proposed development also maintains a permeability that reflects the original
historic lane layout in the convergence of Church Lane, Church Terrace and Church
End.
The materiality of the new buildings has been carefully considered to respond to the
surrounding context, drawing from elements such as the traditional brickwork, and
the arrangement of fenestration. The variety in materiality and form of the buildings
breaks down the mass of the buildings and reflects the grain of the surroundings
The development will be visible in a number of views within the conservation area
as identified in the conservation area appraisal. The redevelopment of the site will
not affect the majority of the views identified in the appraisal.
GL Hearn Page 544 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The principal impact will be on views along Church End towards the church, which
will be opened up to view and should be considered an enhancement. Views of the
site when approaching from the west will also be enhanced.
Demolition of the existing buildings
The existing Meritage Centre buildings at the Site comprise two modern late 20th
century utilitarian (up to) two storey brick structures. Taken as a whole, the modern
character, unsympathetic brickwork and ‘boxy’ appearance of the buildings mean
that the building is a detracting feature in Conservation Area and the setting of St
Mary’s Church.
No. 28 Church End makes a slight positive contribution to the character and
appearance of the conservation area.
Considering the site as a whole in its existing condition, we consider that this is an
overall detraction to the character and appearance of a conservation area.
This negative effect of the existing site is apparent in the principal route through the
conservation area (Church End) in both directions and from Church Terrace to the
rear of the site. The site is also glimpsed in views from Greyhound Hill and detracts
from the approach from that direction.
To note, the CA as a whole extends beyond the site, and takes in the historic
ensemble focussed on St Mary’s Church, as well as the approach, and open space
to the north and west. Its focus is the historic village-like arrangement at Church End,
comprised of the Greyhound Public House, Church and Church Farmhouse, though
this is a limited enclave which reads as a group separate from the more varied,
modern development in the environs.
GL Hearn Page 545 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
It is clear from the map regression at Section 5.0 of Appendix 3 that the present
appearance of the Site dates from the latter part of the 20th century, and has no
particular importance in the history or character of the CA. This part of the CA has
been subject to considerable change distinct from the historic Church End core
focused around the pub and church, and views from Greyhound Hill. This latter, more
significant part of the CA is not materially affected by the proposals.
The loss of the existing Meritage Centre buildings is not considered to cause any
harm to the Conservation Area, because they are of no intrinsic interest and make
no contribution to its character or appearance.
The effect of the loss of the buildings (including No. 28 Church End) should be
considered in terms of their effect on the Conservation Area as a whole.
The demolition of no. 28 would self-evidently not nullify the value of the Conservation
Area as a whole, and the ability to appreciate its special character and appearance
would be preserved.
This consideration would plainly need to take in to account the demolition of the
Meritage Centre, a detracting element as it is not possible to consider the merits of
the replacement buildings without considering the condition of the buildings they
replaced.
Overall, we consider that the proposals provide an opportunity to improve the
contribution made by the Site to the character and appearance of the Conservation
Area and the setting of St Mary’s Church, and at least preserve the setting and
significance of the ensemble of historic buildings to the west.
We reach this same conclusion whether we consider the contribution of the site as
a whole makes to the character and appearance of the conservation area (insofar
GL Hearn Page 546 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
as it is located within the conservation area boundary), or whether, as a starting point,
we consider the effect of the buildings to be demolished.
In both cases, we identify that there is the potential to be some harm to the character
and appearance of the conservation area by the loss of No. 28 Church End, but this
is capable of being outweighed by the corresponding loss and replacement if the
Meritage Centre and when considering the Proposed Development as a whole.
The development does not have any material effect on one’s understanding of the
historic core of the conservation area to the west of the site or the open area to the
north.
The building at 13 to 21 Church End detracts from the setting of the Conservation
Area. We conclude that the 13-21 redevelopment is appropriate in its context and
does not affect the setting of the conservation area or any listed building.
The PDSA building at the Meritage Centre site also detracts from the setting of the
conservation area and we consider there to be an enhancement from its
redevelopment on the setting of the conservation area.
The development of Blocks 3 and 4 at the Meritage Centre site outside the
conservation area enhances the setting of the conservation area by removing
existing unattractive building and replacing them with buildings of an appropriate
scale and design.
The susceptibility of the receptor is judged to be Medium which results in a Moderate sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a Low magnitude of impact on the receptor,
because the assessment relates to the Conservation Area as whole. As set out at
Section 5.0 of Appendix 3, the heritage value of the Conservation Area is derived
GL Hearn Page 547 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
principally from the enclave of buildings to the west of the Site, which will remain
unaltered. The Proposed Development would give rise to a Minor Beneficial (not significant). The effect will be direct, local and permanent.
The Burroughs Conservation Area
The intrinsic character of The Burroughs as an historic linear route to and from
Hendon Town Centre would not change. The Proposals would not appear in any
views identified in the Conservation Area Appraisal. The Proposals would change
an element of the CA’s setting to the north-east, through the replacement of the
existing unrelieved hardstanding at the car park with new, high quality university
development.
The university uses to the north is noted in the CA Appraisal, and reinforce its
transitional character through the movement of students between the university
buildings and Hendon Central Station. The Proposals would continue and reinforce
this movement, which is appropriate to the CA’s historic use.
The materials of the Proposed Development would respond to the context in the
setting of the CA to the north, and sit comfortably within their context.
The scale and footprint of development at this end of the CA is greater than the finer
grain residential development to the south and east, as reflected by Hendon
Methodist Church. At six storeys, the new buildings at the Fenella and Ravensfield
site would introduce additional height to the Site, though this would be moderated
through the varied building line, set-backs and the positioning of the new Library
rotunda closest to the Conservation Area. This would introduce an attractive new
element on the former car park land, and define the northern part of the junction with
Egerton Gardens, seen in conjunction with the Church.
We therefore consider that the Proposed Development would be an attractive feature
in the setting of the Conservation Area.
GL Hearn Page 548 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The susceptibility of the receptors is judged to be Low which results in a
Low/Moderate sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a Neutral magnitude of impact to the
receptors. The Proposed Development would give rise to a Neutral effect (not significant). The effect will be direct, local and permanent.
Locally Listed Buildings Church House, 49 Church End
The Proposed Development has no direct effect on the asset. The development will
improve the appearance backdrop of the building when approach from the west.
The susceptibility of the receptor to the proposed development is judged to be low
which results in a low sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a Negligible magnitude of impact to the
receptor. The Proposed Development would give rise to a Negligible effect (not significant). The effect will be indirect, local and permanent.
Rose Cottage
The Proposed Development has no direct effect on the asset. The development will
improve the appearance backdrop of the building when approach from the south and
the west and will enable the building to be appreciated without the detracting
Meritage Centre within its setting.
The susceptibility of the receptor to the proposed development is judged to be low
which results in a low sensitivity.
GL Hearn Page 549 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The Proposed Development would have a Negligible magnitude of impact to the
receptor. The Proposed Development would give rise to a Negligible effect (not significant). The effect will be indirect, local and permanent.
Chequers Public House, 20 Church End
The Proposed Development does not affect the asset directly and does not affect
any aspect of the building’s setting that contributes to its heritage value.
The susceptibility of the receptor to the proposed development is judged to be low
which results in a low sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a neutral magnitude of impact to the
receptor. The Proposed Development would give rise to a Neutral effect (not significant). The effect will be indirect, local and permanent.
Greyhound Inn Public House
The Proposed Development has no direct effect on the asset. The development will
improve the appearance backdrop of the building when approach from the south and
the west and will enable the building to be appreciated without the detracting
Meritage Centre within its setting.
The susceptibility of the receptor to the proposed development is judged to be low
which results in a low sensitivity.
The Proposed Development would have a Negligible magnitude of impact to the
receptors. The Proposed Development would give rise to a Negligible effect (not significant). The effect will be indirect, local and permanent.
GL Hearn Page 550 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Non-Designated Heritage Receptor 28 Church End
No. 28 is considered to be a non-designated heritage receptor. This is distinct from
an assessment of the impact of the development and its demolition on the
conservation area and it is important that the two assessments are not conflated.
Any harm to a non-designated heritage asset is therefore capable of being offset by
a development of a high architectural and urban design quality, contributing to the
status and vitality of the area, as well as other planning benefits. This is a distinct
assessment from whether the development causes harm to the conservation area.
In this case, the proposals as a whole comprise the replacement of the unattractive,
utilitarian Meritage Centre building with a new high quality student accommodation
development and community use.
No. 28 would be demolished as part of the proposals, which would result in the total
loss of its significance. This could, to a degree, be mitigated through historic building
recording and agreed by an appropriately worded condition if the planning authority
considered that to be necessary.
However, we consider that the loss of the building is outweighed by the heritage
benefits of the Proposed Development.
Applying the matrices strictly, the effect is Minor Adverse upon the non-designated
heritage asset (not significant).
GL Hearn Page 551 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Cumulative Construction and demolition
The assessment of cumulative demolition and construction effects is primarily a
qualitative assessment.
The demolition and construction of the cumulative schemes identified in Chapter 2
of the ES would introduce additional noise, traffic and visual influences which are
unattractive and which detract from the wider area in which the receptors are
experienced, and for that reason, the combined effect of the construction and
demolition of the Proposed Development and cumulative schemes would continue
to have a Low magnitude of impact, resulting in Minor Adverse likely effects. The
effect is indirect, temporary, short -term and not significant.
Operation Phase
We do not consider there to be any cumulative heritage impacts arising from the
cumulative effects of schemes summarised in Chapter 2 nor:
• Fuller Street Car Park; • Prince of Wales Estate Landscape Improvements; • Daniel Almshouses Landscape Improvements • Linear Woodland landscape improvements • Former Quinta Club, Mays Lane
In the case of the Quinta Club and Linear Woodland landscape improvements, these
are sufficiently distant that no cumulative impacts arise with regards to any heritage
asset under assessment. Both the Prince of Wales Estate and Daniel Almshouses
are located outside the Church End Conservation Area and the proposed landscape
improvements do not have any material effect on its setting. While the Daniel
Almshouses are themselves listed, the nature of the works does not generate a
GL Hearn Page 552 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
cumulative impact with the Proposed Development at any of the three sites, either
directly, or indirectly with respect to any other heritage asset.
The Fuller Street Car Park is sufficiently distant from the boundary of the
conservation area and is not located within the setting of any listed building and so
therefore there is no cumulative impact on any heritage asset.
The table below provides a summary of the effects on built heritage receptors.
Map Ref
Receptor Heritage Value
Susceptibility to Change
Sensitivity Magnitude of Impact (Operation)
Likely Effect (Operation)
Likely Effect
(D&C)
Likely Effect
(Cumulative)
Listed Buildings 1 Parish
Church of St Mary
High Low Low Low Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
2 Church Farmhouse Museum
High Low Low Nil None None None
3 Tombs in St Mary’s Churchyard of: Conquest Jones, John Jones, Sir Joseph Ayloffe, John Haley, Henry Jaynes, Susannah Frye
Medium Low Low Negligible Negligible Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Negligible Beneficial
4 Mausoleum of Philip Rundell in St Mary’s Churchyard
Medium Low Low Negligible Negligible Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Negligible Benficial
5 Unidentified Chest Tomb 15 metres south east of Church in St Mary’s Churchyard
Medium Low Low Negligible Negligible Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Negligible Benficial
6 Headstone of Thomas Thatcher in St Mary’s Churchyard
Medium Low Low Negligible Negligible Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Negligible Beneficial
7 Model Farm, the Milking Parlour
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
8 Daniel Almshouses
Medium Low Low Nil None Minor Adverse
None
GL Hearn Page 553 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
9 The Vicarage
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
10 Hendon Fire Station
Medium Medium Moderate Low Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
11 Montfort House
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
12 Milestone (London 7) on wall of no. 161 Brent Street between Church Road and Lodge
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
13 Hendon Library
Medium Medium Moderate Low Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
14 Hendon Town Hall
Medium Low Moderate Low Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
15 16 47 and 55,
The Burroughs NW4
Medium Medium Low Nil None None None
17 44-52, The Burroughs NW4
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
18 Burroughs House
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
19 25, The Burroughs NW4, and Ivey House
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
20 9 and 11, The Burroughs
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
21 Hendon War Memorial
Medium Low Low Nil None None None
Conservation Areas A Hendon
Church End CA
Medium Low Moderate Medium Moderate Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Moderate Beneficial
B The Burroughs Hendon CA
Medium Low Low/ Moderate
Neutral Neutral None Neutral
Locally Listed Buildings The
Greyhound Inn Public House
Low Low Low Negligible Negligible Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Negligible Beneficial
Church House, 49 Church End
Low Low Low Negligible Negligible Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Negligible Beneficial
Rose Cottage, Church End
Low Low Low Negligible Negligible Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Negligible Beneficial
The Chequers Public House
Low Low Low Nil None Minor Adverse
None
Non Designated Heritage Receptor
GL Hearn Page 554 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
28 Church End
Very Low Medium Low/ Moderate
Medium Minor Adverse applying professional judgment
n/a Minor Adverse applying professional judgment
Townscape
The three HTVIAs at Appendices 1-3 have set out an assessment of the townscape
effects of each of the Sites in turn. The Proposed Development comprises the
development across the three sites. This section provides an assessment of the
effects of the Proposed Development as a whole.
Our assessment of the effects on each character area is set out below.
Character Area 1
The proposals remove the current imposition provided by the Building 9 infill,
improving movement across the Site. The B9 development and associated
landscaping will invite exploration between the family of civic buildings beyond and
reinforces the sense of a ‘campus’ space in what presently has the feel of a backland
area.
The principal façade of the library is an attractive feature in the streetscape and will
be preserved as is, which will retain the historic frontage to The Burroughs.
The footprint of the proposed new building successfully transitions from the width of
the library to the Town Hall Annex to enable the provision of high quality public realm
and reflects the wider urban grain of the campus area.
In terms of scale, this element of the Proposals has been developed to maintain the
pre-eminence of the listed Town Hall and Library. The height of the B9 building is
consistent with the library and the Annex building behind, sitting comfortably relative
to the eaves height of the Town Hall Annex and the roof from has been designed to
transition to the height of the library.
GL Hearn Page 555 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The roof form has been designed so the upper floor adopts a series of setbacks,
which significantly reduces the prominence of the upper storey within the street
scene. Overall the building reflects the wider campus character on the western side
of the Burroughs in terms of scale and mass.
The scale is considered appropriate and is articulated through its rhythm, with
setbacks and variations in treatment to differentiate between the new fabric and
historic listed buildings. The rhythm of fenestration provides a contemporary
response to the library, whilst the use of red brick ties the new structure into its
context. The glazed link portions provide a visible reading of base, middle and top.
These are considered to be consistent with the campus character of the area.
The changes to the rear of the library introduce a more active and open frontage,
which provides a better relationship both in building line and form to the Town Hall
and adjacent Fire Station.
A new active frontage is also proposed along the space between the two, to the
north. This would be a significant townscape benefit; introducing natural surveillance
and vibrant ground-floor activity to an area which currently comprises bin stores and
utilitarian structures.
The modulation of the roofline at the upper level breaks the proposed development
down into composite parts, this is further enhanced through the glazed link sections
between the parts of the building.
The pattern of fenestration, comprising rectangular, recessed openings at regular
intervals, draws inspiration from the library and the town hall extension, integrating
comfortably into this context.
GL Hearn Page 556 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The materiality has likewise drawn from the palette of the library and town hall
buildings, and provides a contemporary response to their character.
The permeability of the Site and streetscene would be improved for those using the
building, with entrances on either side of the new block. The Proposed Development
represents an improvement in design quality on the site, and is considered to
appropriately scaled as part of the civic core of the University.
We turn now to the Fenella and Ravensfield element of the Proposed Development,
which is within the same character area.
The new development would improve the appearance of the linear route along The
Burroughs by widening the street frontage, creating a sense of symmetry with the
opposite Town Hall/ Library frontage, and implementing an improved scheme of
landscaping.
The buildings have been devised as a family of three separate buildings, with gaps
between at higher levels. This reflects the civic and campus character of the existing
uses on the other side of the Burroughs.
• The form has developed to meet the following needs of the development: • To accommodate the library and new improved facilities such as archive facilities, • To accommodate improved performing arts facilities • To accommodate student accommodation. • To accommodate community facilities (such as citizens advice bureau and retail
facilities).
The undistinguished Fenella and Ravensfield buildings and car parking within the
Site will be removed and replaced by high quality architecture that defines new public
realm on the east side of The Burroughs. The new buildings will be arranged within
new, high quality landscaping, which would create a sense of space in front of the
new buildings to reflect the landscaping arrangement of the listed buildings opposite.
GL Hearn Page 557 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
New pedestrian links would extend through the Site to The Burroughs, and the
ensemble of listed buildings to the west and the heart of the university campus to
the northwest. The buildings and the unified landscaping scheme across the area
extends and reinforces the campus character across the Burroughs.
While the proposals for Building B9 are submitted under a separate application, the
proposed new building B9 and the proposals for Fenella and Ravensfield both
directly affect Character Area 1. Importantly, the B9 proposals remove the current
imposition provided by the Building 9 infill, improving movement across the Site. The
B9 development and associated landscaping will invite exploration between the
family of civic buildings beyond and enhance the sense of a ‘campus’ space in what
presently has the feel of a backland area. This reinforces the townscape character
along with the Fenella and Ravensfield Proposals.
The new buildings are set back from the boundary and are positioned so as to
separate the new development from the existing development along The Burroughs.
The buildings to the eastern side of the Burroughs are composed to be understood
as a family of three distinct buildings reflecting their uses; the performance arts
space, the student accommodation and the library. The overall form is well-
articulated with is a gap at upper floors between the central block and API and the
library is wholly separate with a new public realm route in between.
This creates a clear understanding of the separation of the different functions. The
performance arts and library buildings reflect their civic functions in terms of their
overall composition reflecting their ‘public’ uses.
The building line and orientation to the eastern side of the Burroughs responds to
comments received in pre-application discussions held with the Council. It also
means that the dense tree boundary at the east of the Site the buildings are
GL Hearn Page 558 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
perceived through a green boundary composed of existing mature trees and new
planting, thus improving the existing green character of the area.
The scale and mass of the proposals has been refined throughout the design
process and in consultation with Officers. The massing has been carefully
considered across all buildings to provide coherent architectural forms that relate to
each other and that respond to their townscape context.
The mass and scale of the proposals reflects the overall masterplan brief to
accommodate the required enhancements to the library, performance arts space,
teaching facilities (with ancillary facilities) and student accommodation.
The scale of the Proposed Development modulates to reflect local contextual
influences and the sensitivities of surrounding residential properties.
To the east side of the Burroughs, the staggered form of the buildings, with the scale
reducing to the rear of the Site, creates a visually interesting frontage to The
Burroughs, whilst responding to the more domestic scale of development further east.
The height of the blocks at the southern and northern ends are at four storeys to
reflect Usher Hall to the north and Methodist Church to the south, as well as
responding to the general scale of the civic buildings to the west with increased
massing towards the middle of the site.
This massing creates an attractive composition in views along The Burroughs which
does not overwhelm or overbear on the existing buildings. These buildings are given
proportion through a defined bottom, middle and top to each of the massing blocks,
each reflecting the activities that are to take place within each block. The stepped
frontage, introducing landscaped areas at podium level emphasises the distinction
between the three blocks in views along the Burroughs.
GL Hearn Page 559 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The ground floor opening to The Burroughs frontage creates a human scale at
ground level.
The detailed design and materials of the proposed buildings have been developed
to a high degree and reflect materials found locally, and so accordingly, we consider,
are entirely appropriate.
The chosen materials palette is simple, and subtle variations in colour are used to
help define the architectural form and express the constituent elements of the
buildings.
To the east, the primary material is brick, with the academic character expressed
through to the simple, repetitive arrangement of the fenestration which reflects that
of the library itself, the Town Hall and the Annex.
The Site will provide active frontages created through large glazed windows at
ground floor level. The animation of the street scene, in place of the existing,
unwelcoming frontage, will improve the vitality of the area.
The two Sites flanking The Burroughs will create a new sense of destination as part
of the University, and the permeability of both Sites will be enhanced. The new
landscaping and pedestrian routes will provide enhanced opportunities for
movement between the Town Hall/ Library civic centre and the new accommodation
and performing arts centre to the east.
The trees that are a distinctive feature will continue to be focal points along the
eastern side of The Burroughs, positively contributing to the character of the
streetscene. Within the Site, new public realm and planting will assist in creating a
distinctive identify for the Site that will encourage movement into it.
GL Hearn Page 560 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The use of the new buildings would improve the experience of the Site and activate
the frontage to The Burroughs, creating welcoming, permeable addition to the
campus and streetscape. The relocation of the Library to this site reinforces the
university character, which together with the performing arts use would enhance the
opportunity for students to utilize the Site.
The new active frontages to the north and south of the Site would be a marked
improvement from the existing unrelieved hardstanding, comprising a significant
townscape benefit and improving the permeability of the Site.
The Proposals would reinforce the campus character of this part of Hendon,
improving its existing use as a university site, and creating a sense of destination,
with a public library and a performing arts centre which would invite visitors.
In terms of scale, the Proposals have been developed to present a varied building
line which modulates the effect of the massing. Garden spaces at upper levels would
contribute to a pleasing, established character, and the set-backs would not affect
the experience of the building at ground level.
We therefore identify a net townscape benefit to Character Area 1.
The susceptibility of this area to the Proposed Development is Medium, and its
sensitivity, accordingly, is Moderate. The magnitude of change would be Low.
Applying the matrices set out in the tables, the effect generated through the
Proposed Development would be Minor/Moderate. However, applying professional
judgement, the substantial urban design benefits generated through the Proposed
Development and the improvement in the visual quality of the Site is judged to result
in a Long Term Minor Beneficial Effect (not significant).
GL Hearn Page 561 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Character Area 2
The boundaries of this character area are broadly consistent with those of the
Church End Conservation Area. It covers the former village at Church End, which
has been substantially altered through the addition of infill development of varying
quality.
The Proposed Development would replace the existing, irregular array of buildings
at the Site with a high quality student accommodation development, residential
accommodation and community use.
First, this would be beneficial to the public realm, which would be enhanced through
the improvement of existing pedestrian routes alongside the churchyard and through
to the residential development to the east. At present, these have no natural
surveillance and are not well integrated into the townscape. These routes will reflect
the alignments of historic lanes.
Second, the new landscaping would relieve the urban environment and respond
positively to the established, vegetated character of the churchyard to the north.
Thirdly, the student accommodation use is appropriate to the existing purpose of the
Site, and would provide a much needed resource that responds to the existing
university use in the area. This would introduce a modern village character in the
wider setting of the historic centre. Whilst the two would be read separately, this
would be complementary.
The separate blocks will break up the appearance of the massing and create an
attractive environment, with new landscaping and pedestrian routes which reflect
and reinforce historic routes though the site. The blocks themselves are articulated
so as to read as a conjoined collection of smaller buildings, reinforced by variety in
height, materials and the articulated roof form.
GL Hearn Page 562 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The proposed development will contribute activity and animation (improving a
current relatively inactive site) from the new residents and visitors to the doctors’
surgery.
The susceptibility of this area to the Proposed Development is Medium, and its
sensitivity, accordingly, is Moderate. The magnitude of change would be Low.
Applying the matrices set out in the tables, the effect generated through the
Proposed Development would be Minor/Moderate. However, applying professional
judgement, the substantial urban design benefits generated through the Proposed
Development and the improvement in the visual quality of the Site is judged to result
in a Long Term Minor Beneficial Effect (not significant).
Character Area 3
This character area sits to the south of the Site, and comprises the linear route of
The Burroughs.
There would be no direct effect on the townscape character of this area. The new
development would invigorate the townscape character to the north, and reinforce
the use of this part of the town centre by visitors and pedestrians. The intrinsic
character of the townscape would remain the same.
The new building would be visible in some views north along The Burroughs, and
would reinforce the campus character of this part of the surrounding context. The
effect on Visual Amenity is considered as part of the Visual Impact Assessment.
The susceptibility of this area to the Proposed Development is Low, and its
sensitivity, accordingly, is Low. The magnitude of change would be Low. Applying
the matrices set out in the tables, the effect generated through the Proposed
Development would be Minor. However, applying professional judgement, the
Proposed Development would have no effect on the townscape quality of Character
Area 2, and is judged to result in a Long Term Neutral effect (significant).
GL Hearn Page 563 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Character Area 4: Wider Residential Development
Character Area 4 is a very large character area, comprising the suburban
development arranged in the vicinity of Hendon. Sub-area 4a shares a boundary
with character area 3, comprising Church End, and the Site of the Meritage
development. Given the scale and nature of the development, it is likely that
townscape receptors in the north-western parts of character area 4b will experience
a degree of change as a result of the proposals. These are likely to be caused by
the increase in pedestrian and vehicular activities brought by the new uses to be
accommodated on the Site.
.The existing contrast between the civic and residential uses would be reinforced.
The removal of the unattractive, unrelieved expanse of the hardstanding at the car
park would improve the appearance of the Site in the setting of the character area.
The effect on visual amenity from Egerton Gardens and Babington Road is
considered as part of the visual assessment, but in views from rear gardens, the
mature landscaping would provide some screening of the lower levels of the new
building. The replacement of the existing irregular elevation of the Victorian terrace
building with a new, well-considered building with an attractive elevation would
improve views towards the Site.
There are beneficial impacts identified in terms of the effect of Blocks 3 and 4 at the
Meritage Centre site on the townscape of Prince of Wales Road and Church Terrace
by improving the appearance and legibility of the street.
Overall, given the size of the character area and the scale of change which is limited
to the northern part of the character area, it is our judgement that the Proposed
Development would therefore have a low magnitude of Impact.
GL Hearn Page 564 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The susceptibility of this area to the Proposed Development is Low, and its
sensitivity, accordingly, is Low. The magnitude of change would be Negligible. The
effect generated through the Proposed Development would be Negligible. The likely
effect is Long Term Negligible Beneficial Effect (not significant).
Character Area 5: Open Space
This character area comprises the open space at Sunny Hill Park which falls partially
within the study area to the north.
The park predominantly comprises grassland, and offers significant views to the
north and west owing to its high elevation.
Towards the south-east of the park, and area formerly within the St Mary’s
Churchyard is now part of the public open space, and forms a transitional area
between the two.
The open spaces is bordered by residential development to the east and west–
mostly terraced or semi-detached in nature and dating from the late-C19 and early-
C20. This sense of enclosure is further emphasised by boundary walls, fencing and
vegetation, which filters and/or screens views south.
The susceptibility of this area to the Proposed Development is Low, and its
sensitivity, accordingly, is Low. The magnitude of change would be Negligible. The
effect generated through the Proposed Development would be Negligible. The likely
effect is Long Term Negligible Beneficial Effect (not significant).
Cumulative Impact
Demolition and Construction
The cumulative context is not considered to change the assessment and
construction effects of on any Character Area, which would remain Negligible
GL Hearn Page 565 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Adverse and which would be direct, short-term, temporary. This effect is not
significant.
We do not consider there to be any cumulative townscape impacts arising from the
cumulative effects of schemes summarised in Chapter 2 nor
• Prince of Wales Estate Landscape Improvements; • Daniel Almshouses Landscape Improvements • Linear Woodland landscape improvements • Former Quinta Club, Mays Lane
In the case of the Quinta Club and Linear Woodland landscape improvements, these
are sufficiently distant from the three Sites that no cumulative impacts arise with
regards to any impact on the character areas under assessment. There is no visual
connection between these two schemes and the three elements of the Proposed
development that are the subject of this EIA.
The Prince of Wales Estate and Daniel Almshouses will improve the landscaping of
minor areas within Character Area 4 but there is no cumulative impact arising from
these works.
Similarly, the Fuller Street Car Park development is located within Character Area 4.
While Block 3 of the Meritage Centre development is located within Character Area
4, there is no material change to the character as a whole when the two residential
blocks are considered cumulatively.
Character Area Townsca
pe value Susceptibility to change
Sensitivity Magnitude of impact
Likely effect (Operational)
Likely Effect (D&C)
Likely Effect (Cumulative)
GL Hearn Page 566 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
1 Civic and Institutional Centre
Medium Medium Moderate Low Minor Beneficial
Negligible adverse
Minor Beneficial
2 Church End Historic Settlement
Medium Medium Moderate Low Minor Beneficial
Negligible adverse
Minor Beneficial
3 The Burroughs Medium Low Low/Moderate
Negligible Neutral Negligible adverse
Neutral
4 Wider Residential Development
Low Low Low Negligible Negligible Beneficial
Negligible adverse
Negligible Beneficial
5 Open Space Medium Low Low Negligible Nil Negligible adverse
Nil
Visual Impact
AVRs to represent each view are included at Section 9.0 of Appendices 1-3.
View 1: The Burroughs 1
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated at a crossing point mid-way along The Burroughs, south
of the Library frontage, oriented north-east towards the Fenella and Ravensfield Site
opposite.
In the existing condition, the fore and middle ground are comprised primarily of the
open hardstanding of the road, flanked by wide pavements to either side, drawing
the viewer’s eye towards the vanishing point in the background.
The viewer would be aware of heavy traffic passing to and from the centre of Hendon
along the road.
In the middle ground, the low-rise range with pitched roofs can be seen, though the
projecting single storey extension at ground level are a detracting feature. Mature
vegetation contributes to a leafy, established visual character.
GL Hearn Page 567 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The viewer has an oblique view of the Hendon Town Hall to their left, though this is
not a position from which it is best appreciated.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and road users.
The susceptibility of this visual receptor is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
The open character of the road would remain the same, and the viewer’s eye would
naturally follow the route of the road.
The new Fenella and Ravensfield building would be a new element to the right hand
side of the view.
The tripartite structure would read as three interrelated buildings from this position,
whilst the curved aspect facing the junction with Egerton Gardens provides an open
character to the corner, improving the quality of the public realm.
The varied building line reduces the appearance of the massing, and the positioning
of the tallest elements toward the centre of the site creates an attractive transition to
the north and south.
Whilst the materials are not illustrated, these are specified in the Design and Access
Statement and would be drawn from the character of surrounding development,
including red brick with stone banding creating a well-defined composition with a
defined top, middle and bottom.
The new library building reads as a similar sale to the Methodist Church in the
foreground.
GL Hearn Page 568 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Overall, the Proposals would improve the appearance of the Site from this position.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 2: The Burroughs 2
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated adjacent to the Town Hall frontage, oriented north-east
towards The Burroughs and the Fenella and Ravensfield Site.
The view is oriented laterally across the road, and the viewer would be aware of busy
traffic passing each way to and from Hendon.
The bus stop in the centre of the view draws the viewer’s eye, whilst the
unremarkable shop fronts to the viewer’s left are an unattractive feature, with the
three-four storey terrace behind forming the tallest element in the view. The existing
vegetation gives the view an established character.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and road users.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
In the Proposed, the middle ground of the view would comprise the rotunda, with an
enhanced, widened public realm at street level. The glazing at ground floor
contributes to a sense of permeability and a human scale at ground floor, whilst the
tighter banding of the storeys above and sloped roof of the top storey gives the
building a defined top, middle and bottom.
GL Hearn Page 569 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The viewer would also be aware of the new development to their left, which
continues the human scale at ground floor and improves the public realm in their
surroundings. The tallest elements are situated at the centre of the Site, which steps
down toward the north and south to respond to its context.
Whilst the viewpoint gives a narrow impression of the buildings’ appearance in their
context, the use of traditional materials would respond positively to the character of
surrounding development.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 3: Egerton Gardens 1
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated along Egerton Gardens, oriented west towards the rear of
the Fenella and Ravensfield Site and The Burroughs. . It would be experienced as
part of a kinetic sequence as the viewer moved along the road. Along with view 2.
The view has a transitional character; to the viewer’s right is an oblique view of
Hendon Methodist Church, and positioned at the curve in the road, the viewer can
see the irregular rear elevations of the buildings facing the east side of The
Burroughs, which include a range of plant, irregular fenestration, and mixed rear
extensions.
The front elevations of Hendon Library and Town Hall are partially visible in the
background of the view, though this is not the best position from which to appreciate
their heritage value, owing to the distance and interposing elements.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
GL Hearn Page 570 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and road users, and residents of the
local area.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
In the Proposed condition, the existing irregular range would be replaced by the new
rotunda of the library building.
The curved elevation would provide an interesting, attractive feature in the view, and
the pitched top storey would reduce the appearance of the massing.
The projecting ground floor entrance would give the new building a human scale,
and provide a welcoming approach. The library use would be evident through the
glazing at ground floor.
To the viewer’s right, the new public realm and pedestrian route through the Site the
Fenella and Ravensfield would create a new view towards the Fire Station.
Whilst the Library and Town Hall would be obscured, this was not a position from
which their heritage value could be best appreciated.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 4: Rear of dwellings to the north side of Egerton Road
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated to the rear of dwellings along Egerton Road, oriented west
towards the rear of the Fenella and Ravensfield Site.
GL Hearn Page 571 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The view is contained by the dense evergreen vegetation in the foreground. There
is no visibility of the Site.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value. The susceptibility of visual
receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
The Proposals would be entirely obscured by the existing vegetation. There would
be no effect on visual amenity.
The magnitude of impact would be Nil and the likely effect would be None. This
effect is not significant.
View 5: Egerton Gardens 2
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated part way along Egerton Gardens, oriented west towards
The Burroughs. It would be experienced as part of a kinetic sequence as the viewer
moved along the road. Along with view 1.
The view has a largely domestic character, comprising the linear route of Babington
Road, lined with two storey houses set behind front gardens and driveways. The
mature vegetation gives the view an established character.
There is a marked difference in character from the domestic scale and use of the
buildings in the foreground and the civic centre beyond, and the viewer would be
aware of this sense of transition.
The viewer’s eye is drawn along the road towards the background, where part of
Hendon Library and the Town Hall can just be seen, though this is not a position
from which their heritage value can be best appreciated owing to the separating
distance and interposing structures.
GL Hearn Page 572 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and road users, and residents of the
local area.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
The domestic character of the fore and middle ground of the view would be
preserved.
In the background of the view, the rear parts of the Fenella and Ravensfield Site
would be visible.
The library would be seen along the route of the road. The curved elevation would
provide an interesting, attractive feature in the view, and the pitched top storey would
reduce the appearance of the massing.
The projecting ground floor entrance would give the new building a human scale,
and provide a welcoming approach. The library use would be evident through the
glazing at ground floor.
The building would be seen in conjunction with the houses on the right hand side of
the road. The character of the new building would be expressed through its
fenestration and the use of balconies to upper levels, drawing a visual distinction
with the houses in the foreground. The textured brick to the centre part of the
elevation, stone and glazing at ground floor and the set back at upper storey level
would give the building a defined top, middle and bottom, and would read as part of
a family with the adjacent new library.
GL Hearn Page 573 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The use of traditional materials such as red brick and stone dressings would tie the
building in to its context, providing an appropriate response to the houses visible in
the view. The sense of transition between the residential foreground and the civic
centre at The Burroughs would be reinforced.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 6: Babington Road EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated part way along Babington Road, oriented west towards
The Burroughs and the Fenella Building.
The foreground of the view takes in the open space of the road, with narrow, paved
front gardens to the terraced housing on the north side of Babington Road. The
houses terminate the view to left field, owing to their scale and proximity. The
housing and Fenella building are understood separately by the viewer.
To the viewer’s right, the side elevation of the Fenella building can be seen, set
behind a wooden fence, further metal security fencing and a temporary tent structure.
The building has an unremarkable appearance, with large expanses of unrelieved
brickwork and an awkward interaction between the fenestration at first floor, and the
pitched room.
The fencing in the foreground has a hostile character, and the pedestrian footpath
adjacent to no. 10, which provides access to The Burroughs, does not appear
welcoming from this perspective.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
GL Hearn Page 574 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and road users, and residents of the
local area.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
In the Proposed condition, the side elevation of the new building would be seen. The
use of red brick with contrasting banding would give the building a defined bottom,
middle and top, and the use of glass would contribute a human scale at ground floor.
The footpath would be improved as part of the new public realm proposals, and
natural surveillance provided by the new building would encourage its use.
Whilst taller than the existing building, the new development does not appear overly
large in its context; and sits below the parapet height of the houses adjacent from
this perspective. Of course, this would change as the viewer move around the locality.
For the reasons described above, the Proposed Development is considered to
improve visual amenity from this perspective.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 7: The Burroughs 2
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated along The Burroughs, on the opposite pavement to the
Middlesex University Courtyard. It is oriented south, along the road.
The view takes in the linear feature of the road, oriented south. This is a kinetic view,
which would be experienced as part of a linear sequence as the viewer moved
further south.
GL Hearn Page 575 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The foreground takes in the dense hedge to the viewer’s left, and an oblique view of
the Fenella and Ravensfield Site, which makes no contribution to visual amenity and
has a squat appearance owing to the positioning of the roof and the fenestration.
Hendon Fire Station, opposite, is an attractive feature in the view, which marks the
location of the civic quarter in this part of Hendon.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and road users.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
In the proposed condition, the character and composition of the view would remain
the same, with the linear route of the road flanked by civic and university
development.
The Fire Station would remain as a focal point in the view.
At the Fenella and Ravensfield Site, the view would be enlivened by the double
height outdoor space at the entrance to the performing arts centre, which would be
an attractive feature welcoming visitors to the building.
The use of red brick would respond to the prevailing character of surrounding
development, and the enhanced public realm would improve the appearance of the
streetscene. Whilst taller than the existing, the new building would not overpower its
surrounding development owing to the varied building line and the width of the road.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
GL Hearn Page 576 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
View 8: Middlesex University Courtyard
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated on the west side of The Burroughs, directly in front of the
Middlesex University Courtyard. It is oriented south-east towards the Fenella and
Ravensfield Site.
The fore and middle ground of the view has an open character, derived from the
linear pathways and rectilinear lawns. There is little visual interest and the space is
devoid of features to draw the eye.
The linear route of The Burroughs passes laterally across the view in the middle
ground, and the viewer would be aware of traffic passing to and from the town centre.
At the Site, the present 20th century building is partially obscured by the mature trees
in the middle ground. The building appears underscaled in its context owing to the
awkward interaction of the pitched roof and first floor windows, and the large
expanses of unrelieved red brick make no particular contribution to visual amenity.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and visitors to the university
buildings.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
The fore and middle ground would remain the same.
In the background of the view, the new development would introduce an attractive,
varied ensemble which responds to its context through the use of materials.
GL Hearn Page 577 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
This viewpoint is closest to the entrance to the performing arts centre, with a double
height outdoor space creating a welcoming front. The rectangular recessed
fenestration and use of materials at second floor would differentiate the top portion,
and create visual interest. The taller elements of the building beyond are well-
articulated, with a varied building line making a positive contribution to the
streetscene and reducing the effect of the massing. These would be partially and
seasonally occluded by the existing mature trees.
Whilst taller than the existing, the new building would not overpower its surrounding
development owing to the varied building line and the width of the road.
The Proposed Development would be beneficial to visual amenity from this position.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 9: Hendon Library/ Fire Station Side Street EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated part way along the narrow access street between Hendon
Library and the Fire Station. It is oriented east towards The Burroughs and the
Fenella and Ravensfield Site.
The view would be experienced as part of a kinetic sequence as the viewer moved
toward The Burroughs.
The fore and middle ground of the view have a functional character, derived from
the unrelieved elevations to each side. The use of materials, including the stone
ground floor to the fire station, communicate their civic function.
GL Hearn Page 578 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The Fenella and Ravensfield Site can be seen in the background, and has a
vernacular, unattractive character with an underscaled appearance and
unsympathetic materiality.
The mature vegetation along the road softens the urban environment and provides
screening of the background of the view.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and visitors to the university
buildings.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
The unattractive, underscaled development at the Fenella and Ravensfield Site
would be replaced with a new, high quality university building. The larger openings
at ground floor, and set- back glazed top floor give the building a defined top, middle
and bottom. The height of the building is varied and the central portion set back,
which responds to the projecting front portion of the library to the viewer’s right.
The use of materials would provide a contemporary response to the prevailing
context.
The new development would be beneficial to visual amenity from this viewpoint.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 10: The Burroughs (3)
EXISTING
GL Hearn Page 579 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
This viewpoint is situated close to the south-eastern corner of the Middlesex
University building frontage, oriented west.
The view is oriented laterally across the landscaped space in front of the university
building, with the route of the road passing from the viewer’s left to right in the middle
ground. The planting in the foreground contributes to an attractive open character,
though the rectilinear lawns and pathways toward the middle provide little of visual
interest. The viewer’s eye is drawn toward the right hand side of the view, along the
path.
In the background of the view, the present buildings at the Fenella and Ravensfield
Site can be seen. These are partially obscured by the existing mature trees along
the road, and are of no particular visual or architectural interest.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and road users.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
The fore and middle ground of the view would remain the same.
In the background of the view, the new development at the Fenella and Ravensfield
site would provide visual interest, with a double height entrance space closest to the
viewer, marking the performing arts centre. The rhythmic use of columns, recessed
fenestration and use of materials at second floor would differentiate the top portion,
and create visual interest.
GL Hearn Page 580 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The building’s taller elements are well-articulated, with a varied building line making
a positive contribution to the streetscene and reducing the effect of the massing.
These would be partially and seasonally occluded by the existing mature trees.
The Proposed Development would make a positive contribution to visual amenity
from this position.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 11: The Burroughs 4
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated at a crossing point part way along The Burroughs, close to
the Fire Station, oriented south. The viewer would be aware of busy traffic passing.
The foreground of the view takes in the open space of the road, and the viewer’s eye
is drawn towards the side elevation of Hendon Methodist Church and the Brampton
Court block of flats in the mid-distance.
The mature trees to the viewer’s left provide relief from the urban environment, as
well as partially screening the unattractive Ravensfield building behind. The car park
at the Site is also visible, and is a detracting feature with striped barriers and
unrelieved hardstanding.
Whilst not within the frame, the viewer would be aware of the ensemble of listed
buildings to their right, which would draw the viewer’s eye.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and road users.
GL Hearn Page 581 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
In the Proposed condition, the linear route of the road would remain the focus, and
the side elevations of the Methodist Church and Brampton Court would continue to
draw the viewer’s eye.
The new building would replace the unattractive Ravensfield frontage with new
public realm, retaining the existing mature trees which would continue to provide
screening.
The new space would widen the pavement, and invite the viewer into the space.
The colonnaded entranced and use of glazing at ground floor would give the building
a human scale, and whilst not within the frame, the viewer would be aware of the
upper storeys, which utilise traditional materials to sit comfortably within the
surrounding context.
The Proposed Development would make a positive contribution to visual amenity
from this position.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 12: Hendon Library/ Building 9 Side Street 1
EXISTING
This views is situated close to the library and town hall frontage, oriented along the
space between. This is a kinetic view, which would be experienced as part of a
sequence as the viewer moved along the path.
GL Hearn Page 582 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The viewer’s focus would be on the frontages of the two buildings, to their left and
right, or on wayfinding into the site.
The view has a contained character, derived from the flanking two buildings. The
regular, rectangular fenestration to the library is an attractive feature, and the
viewer’s eye is drawn to the area of planting in the middle ground of the view.
The single storey building adjoining B9 is partially visible in the middle ground, set
behind the library and beyond the planted area. It has a squat, underscaled
appearance, with unattractive contrasting brickwork and a flat roof, and is a
detracting feature in the view.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and visitors to the university
buildings.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
Those elements which make a positive contribution to the view would be retained,
and the rhythm of the fenestration continued in the new addition to the rear of the
library.
The scale would sit comfortably between the two parts of the listed structure, and
the use of string courses would respond to their character, whilst giving the new
building a defined top, middle and bottom.
The use of red brick would improve the appearance of this part of the view, providing
a more sympathetic response to the host building than the existing B9.
GL Hearn Page 583 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The Proposed Development would make a positive contribution to visual amenity
from this position.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 13: Hendon Library/ Building 9 Side Street 2
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated further along the public footpath between the library and
town hall. This is a kinetic view, which would be experienced as part of a sequence
as the viewer moved along the path.
The viewer’s focus would be on the linear route of the footpath, and the arched
opening ahead.
The view has a contained character, derived from the flanking two buildings. The
single storey building is a prominent element in the middle of the view, and has a
squat, vernacular character, with contrasting brickwork, unsympathetic fenestration
and a dilapidated appearance with plant growth at parapet level.
The building is a detracting feature in the view.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians, and visitors to the university
buildings.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
GL Hearn Page 584 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The character and composition of the view would remain the same. The viewer’s
attention would be further focussed along the linear route to the arched entrance in
the background, through the continued line of the new building.
The scale would sit comfortably between the two parts of the listed structure, and
the use of string courses would respond to their character, whilst giving the new
building a defined top, middle and bottom.
The use of red brick would improve the appearance of this part of the view, providing
a more sympathetic response to the host building than the existing B9.
The Proposed Development would make a positive contribution to visual amenity
from this position.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 14: Hendon Library/ Building 9 Side Street 1
EXISTING
This viewpoint is situated part way along the route between the Library and Town
Hall, oriented back towards The Burroughs. This is a kinetic view, which would be
experienced as part of a sequence as the viewer moved along the path.
The middle of the view comprises the open landscaped space between the Town
Hall and B9, which has an attractive, contained quality. The view is framed to the
right by the flank wall of the Town Hall, and the rhythmic fenestration, stone sills and
string courses, and pointed gables make a positive contribution to visual amenity.
To the viewer’s left is Building 9, which contrasts with the other buildings in its scale
and materiality. The single storey structure to the rear of the library is an unattractive
feature, with metal shuttering and an unsympathetic, mid-20th century expression.
GL Hearn Page 585 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Whilst the listed buildings are prominent elements in the view, this is not the best
position from which to appreciate their heritage value; their front elevations, seen
from The Burroughs, are the principal expression of this.
In the background, the Victorian terrace at the Fenella and Ravensfield Site is
partially visible, along with the trees beyond.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value.
Visual receptors would primarily be pedestrians and visitors to the university
buildings.
The susceptibility of visual receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
Those elements which make a positive contribution to the view would be retained,
and the contained character reinforced by the continued building line to the viewer’s
right.
Whilst from this position, the new building sits above the parapet of the library, this
is not a position from which its heritage value is best appreciated. The use of glazing
would give the new building a lightweight appearance, whilst the red brick would tie
it in to its built context.
The view to the background would be terminated by the new library. Its curved
elevation would provide an interesting, attractive feature in the view, and the pitched
top storey would reduce the appearance of the massing.
The library use would be evident through the glazing at ground floor and provide a
welcoming approach for students moving through the campus complex.
GL Hearn Page 586 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The building sits below the parapet of the library from this perspective, though this
would change as the viewer moved closer. The two would, however, be understood
separately.
The Proposed Development would make a positive contribution to visual amenity
from this position.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 15 – Junction of Church End and Church Road
EXISTING
This view is located within the conservation area looking north along Church End.
From in front of the Daniels Almshouses. It is identified as a key view within the
conservation area. It forms the basis of a kinetic view (along with views 18 and 19)
as one passes along Church End towards the historic core of the conservation area.
Receptors will be pedestrians and road users.
The foreground of the view contains No 13-21 Church End (which is outside of the
conservation area is outside the conservation area) at three storeys tall. It is
unattractive although it is largely concealed by the mature trees in the landscaping
area to its southern flank.
On the opposite side of the road, the open green area enclosed behind railings with
prominent mature vegetation dominates the view.
At the periphery of the view, to the right, one senses the more commercial character
of Church Road, marked by the Claddagh Ring public house.
GL Hearn Page 587 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The railings and alignment of Church End draw the viewers eye into the view and
the flank of the former Chequers public house is visible with its varied roof form over
two storeys.
The Meritage Centre is visible and terminates the view in the distance where Church
End bends towards the west.
The overall character of the view is a suburban one. St Marys Church is not visible
in this view.
The view is considered to have a Low to Medium value. The susceptibility of visual
receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
The unattractive 13-21 Church End is replaced with a new building, one storey taller.
The proposed buildings is of an improved design compared to the existing building,
It remains largely concealed behind mature vegetation.
The principal elements in the view remain unaffected by the proposed development.
It does not change the receptors’ experience of the Chequers public house, the open
space, dense vegetation or the commercial fringe to the right of the receptor.
The existing Meritage Centre is is no longer present, and no longer terminates the
view, with the greenery behind now present. The proposed building on the site of the
Meritage Centre is visible and utilizes contextual materials. Due to interposing
vegetation, only the ground floor is perceptible.
The likely effect is found to be Minor Beneficial to visual receptors.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 16 Prince of Wales Road
EXISTING
GL Hearn Page 588 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
View 16 is along Prince of Wales Road looking north. The receptors will primarily be
residents of the Prince of Wales Estate, entering the residential area from Church
End. In the foreground is a two storey yellow brick residential building surrounded
by a timber boundary.
The focus of the view is the PDSA which is an unattractive and low quality building
of 1-1.5 storeys. Two storey residential buildings are visible to the right of the
receptor.
Distant mature trees are visible behind the PDSA, and along Prince of Wales Road.
The rear of the Meritage Centre (within the conservation area) is visible in the view
and represents a detracting element in the view.
The view is considered to have a Very Low value. The susceptibility of visual
receptors is judged to be Medium. The sensitivity is Low.
PROPOSED
The unattractive PDSA is no longer present and replaced with a four storey
residential building of good design quality using appropriate materials which
becomes the focus of the view.
To the left, a three storey building (again of good design quality and appropriate
materials) and provides a more legible frontage to the street which is framed by both
new buildings. The appearance of the street and townscape is improved overall.
The existing Meritage Centre is no longer visible, and the view is terminated by
pleasant and attractive dense vegetation.
The setting of the conservation area is enhanced.
GL Hearn Page 589 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The likely effect is likely to be Minor/Moderate Beneficial.
This likely effect is Not Significant.
View 17 Greyhound Hill
EXISTING
View 17 is part of a sequence of kinetic views east along Greyhound Hill into North
End. The receptors are pedestrians and traffic including residents moving along the
roads and users of the church and pub buildings.
The suburban nature of the view is dominated by the road itself, flanked by the locally
listed Church House and Model Farm House.
The ‘summit’ of the incline on the road towards Church End is marked by the existing
unattractive and plainly modern Meritage Centre although it is screened to a degree
by existing mature trees.
The Grade II* listed Church is outside of the frame to the left along with the locally
listed pub. This contribute to the overall character and appearance of the location
from which the view is taken.
The view is considered to have a Medium value. The susceptibility of visual
receptors is judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low to Moderate.
PROPOSED
The change in the view is evident in the removal of the existing Meritage Centre and
its replacement with a new building which similarly terminates the summit of hill. The
new building is screened by existing interposing vegetation and only the ground floor
of the building is visible from the lower viewpoint. The height of the buildings is
appropriate in its context, and no taller than visible surrounding buildings.
GL Hearn Page 590 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The materials are appropriate in their context.
The appearance of the Site when approaching from the east west is improved
Other aspects of the view remain unchanged and there is no effect on the receptors’
appreciation of the wider character and appearance of the view.
The likely effect is Minor Beneficial.
The likely effect is Not Significant.
View 18 – Church End (1)
EXISTING
View 18 is part of a kinetic sequence of views (along with View 15 and 19) for
receptors moving north along Church End in the conservation area.
The eye is drawn by the topography and curve in the road and the Grade II* listed
church tower is a focal point and adds interest in the view as it becomes visible via
movement towards it.
The view is identified as an important view in the Conservation Area Appraisal.
In the middle/foreground, the Meritage Centre is visible as a detracting element, hard
against the frontage of Church End, with incongruous form, materiality and glazing.
Outside of the frame to the receptors’ right is 28-30 Church End which are visible
only obliquely as the receptor passes along Church End.
The view is considered to be a Medium value. The susceptibility of visual receptors
is judged to be Medium. The sensitivity is Moderate.
The receptors are pedestrians and traffic moving along Church End, including
residents.
GL Hearn Page 591 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
PROPOSED
The Meritage Centre is removed. This opens up the views behind and allows clearer
and new views of the Grade II listed church within the foil of the existing mature
vegetation.
Part of the Proposed Development is visible (Block 1), although this is limited to the
ground floor, screened by interposing existing mature trees. In winter months, the
two storey element will be visible, sitting comfortably within its context. The new
building (Block1) adopts an appropriate material palette and the pitched form of the
roof will be perceptible, glimpsed through vegetation.
Block 2 is visible obliquely at the same approximate height as the buildings it
replaces. The traditional materials and form of the roof is evident.
The likely effect is Moderate Beneficial.
The likely effect is Significant.
View 19 – Church End 2
EXISTING
The view taken from Church End opposite the existing Meritage Centre. The
receptors will be pedestrians and vehicles passing along Church End in both
directions including residents and users of the surrounding buildings including the
pub and church. It forms part of a kinetic sequence of views with Views 15 and 18.
The view is within a conservation area.
Outside of the frame to the left is the Grade II* listed St Marys Church on the opposite
side of the road and behind the receptor lies the locally listed Church House. These
contribute to the overall appreciation of the wider character.
GL Hearn Page 592 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
In this context, the view is dominated by the existing quality Meritage Centre. It is
part screened by the existing landscape within the site, but the detracting qualities
of the Meritage Centre are apparent in terms of its layout, materials, form and
general unkempt appearance). The area of landscape forecourt in front of the
Meritage Centre is visible in the view.
Receptors can glimpse the suburban character of the residential area behind the site
to the east.
The view is considered to be a Low value. The susceptibility of visual receptors is
judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low.
PROPOSED
The proposed view is dominate by the proposed building. It is set back from the
frontage of the site and retains landscape areas within the site. The permeability of
the site is maintained with the view through the site to the residential area beyond
maintained.
Where the building fronts the site it is a high quality two story building which is
appropriate in its context although the mass is broken down further by the articulation
of the elevation, the rhythm of the fenestration and contrasting use of materials.
The front elevation responds to local influences by adopting a traditional gabled form
which reduces the apparent mass of the building at its upper level, and introduces a
traditional roof form on the site.
The single storey community use element is set back further within the site, and the
contrasting use of materials distinguishes it from the blocks of university
accommodation. The overall character of the site changes from a somewhat
unkempt community use to one of a more mixed character incorporating residential
GL Hearn Page 593 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
accommodation and community use. The overall animation of the site is likely to be
enhanced.
The likely effect is Minor Beneficial.
The likely effect is Not Significant.
View 20 – Church Terrace
EXISTING
View 20 is taken from Church Terrace looking at the rear of the Meritage Centre.
Receptors are likely to be local residents and pupils and staff of St Mary;s and St
John’s CE School.
The view is taken from outside the conservation area, looking into it.
The view is dominate by the poor quality rear of the Meritage Centre. It is a single
storey at its frontage, rising to two storeys plus a roof form. The view has a ‘back of
house’ view and presents a hostile frontage to Church Terrace with no natural
surveillance or overlooking from the site.
The flank elevation is blank and unattractive.
The rear of the building is used as ad hoc bin storage which detracts from the
townscape. There is similar clutter in the form of bollards and unattractive street
furniture.
The mature vegetation of the Grade II* listed St Marys Church is visible beyond.
The view is considered to be a Low value. The susceptibility of visual receptors is
judged to be Low. The sensitivity is Low.
PROPOSED
GL Hearn Page 594 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The existing Meritage Centre is replace with a new high quality building fronting
Church Terrace. It is three storeys tall and its mass is broken down by reading as a
terrace of individual houses and the articulation of the front elevation.
The side flank is enlivened by fenestration and a subtle articulation of the brick work.
The animation of the site is improved generally by the introduction of a more active
frontage overlooking the street.
The Proposed Development creates a stronger frontage to the street and reinforces
its residential character.
The route through the site to Church End is visible, maintaining a permeability to the
site and aiding wayfinding by marking a clear route to Church End.
The mature vegetation of the churchyard beyond is still visible in the view
background.
The likely effect is Minor Beneficial.
The likely effect is Not Significant.
Effects Once the Proposed Development is Operational
The effects set out above would remain the same at operational stage.
Cumulative Impacts
Demolition and Construction
The cumulative context is not considered to change the assessment and
construction effects on any view, which would remain Negligible Adverse and which
would be direct, short-term, temporary. This effect is not significant.
GL Hearn Page 595 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
We do not consider there to be any cumulative views impacts arising from the
cumulative effects of schemes summarised in Chapter 2 nor:
• Prince of Wales Estate Landscape Improvements;
• Daniel Almshouses Landscape Improvements
• Linear Woodland landscape improvements
View Value Susceptibility to change
Sensitivity Magnitude of impact
Likely effect
(Operational)
Likely Effect
(D&C)
Likely Effect (Cumulative)
1 The Burroughs 1
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
2 The Burroughs 2
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
3 Egerton Gardens 1
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
4 Rear of Dwellings to the north side of Egerton Road
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Nil None None None
5 Egerton Gardens 2
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
6 Babington Road Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
7 The Burroughs 2
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
8 Middlesex University Courtyard
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
9 Hendon Library Fire Station Side Street
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
10 The Burroughs (3)
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
GL Hearn Page 596 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
• Former Quinta Club, Mays Lane
In the case of the Quinta Club and Linear Woodland landscape improvements, these
are sufficiently distant from the identified views that no cumulative impacts arise due
to the lack of intervisbility.
The remaining cumulative schemes do not have any impact within any of the views
identified for assessment.
11 The Burroughs (4)
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
12 Hendon Library
Building 9 Side Street
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
13 Hendon Library
Building 9 Side Street 2
Low/Med Low Low to moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
14 Hendon Library
Building 9 Side Street 1
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
15 Junction of Church end and Church Road
Low/Med Low Low to Moderate
Low Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
16 Prince of Wales Road
Very Low
Medium
Low Medium Minor/Moderate beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor/Moderate beneficial
17 Grey hound Hill Medium Low Low to Moderate
Low Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor Beneficial
18 Church End 1 Medium Medium
Moderate Medium Moderate Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Moderate Beneficial
19 Church End 2 Low Low Low Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor beneficial
20 Church Terrace Low Low Low Medium Minor Beneficial
Minor Adverse
Minor beneficial
GL Hearn Page 597 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation During Construction
The Construction Management Plan sets out the anticipated programme of works
and the key activities that would be undertaken on the Sites during demolition and
construction necessary to facilitate the Proposed Development. The construction
period is to be phased which will help mitigate any potential effects on heritage
receptors.
The Sites would be enclosed with tall hoarding during Demolition and Construction,
which will provide a visual buffer from the immediate environment. . Equipment and
heavy machinery will also be a common feature of the Site for the anticipated
construction programme.
The demolition and construction phase will also result in increased noise, vibration,
dust and traffic in the surrounding area.
The magnitude of this impact will be mainly experienced within the Site, with much
of the construction activity occluded from view by hoardings.
Mitigation Once the Proposed Development is Operational
Mitigation measures proposed to prevent, reduce or offset any significant likely
adverse effects have been identified and developed as part of the pre-application
design process. The primary mitigation measures have become embedded into the
project design, commonly referred to as embedded mitigation. The mitigation arising
from design development and consultation responses is also identified where
appropriate in the assessment.
GL Hearn Page 598 of 677 Z:\J041302 - FBC Fennella House, Hendon\14. Planning Submission - 2021\ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT\Volume II - Environmental Statement\Volume II Environmental Statement.docx
The likely effects of the Proposed Development include embedded mitigation. As a
result, there is no requirement for additional mitigation and thus likely residual effects
remain the same as the likely effects, unless otherwise stated.
Residual Impacts and Monitoring
The residual impacts arising from the Proposed Development are summarised in
Table 12.11 above.