Planning Atlas
AtlasDevelopersEnmore Developments
Planning AtlasDevelopersEnmore Developments
Developer · London

Enmore Developments.

A developer bringing schemes forward across London. Has 3 applications in 3 boroughs, at a 33% approval rate, 2000–05.[1] Where they build, and how, is below.

Developer3 boroughs33% approval
Where they build — by borough · tap to focus
FewerMore applications
ShowingAll years · subscriber →across all years on record — a period re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
At a glanceEach metric links to the investigation behind it
All investigations →
3
Applications
London 2000–05
Avg S106 / unit
awaits s106 ingestion
Why a developer? Listed as a developer because every application we hold for them names them as the applicant.Something not right? Claim · Correct · Merge
Is this your developer?This profile is built from public planning records. Claim it to add your intro, logo and project images.
Claim this profile →
Approval rate over time — improving or slippingtheir London-wide rate by year
20%60%100%’00’05
What they build — by scheme type
6decisions

Click a slice to reshade the London map by that type.

Their planning record — policies in play

The policies most in play across this developer's schemes — how often each appears, and how often a scheme citing it wins consent.

Policies are coded from each officer report and decision notice — this table publishes when decision-notice ingestion lands. No policy record is shown until it's real.
Case officers — win rate when this developer submits

How often each named case officer grants consent on this developer's schemes. Pairing patterns from the public register — not endorsements.

The officer↔developer pairing isn't joined in the data layer yet — this table publishes when it is. Each borough's officers are already ranked in Track Records.
Applications by borough
Borough
Applications
Approval rate
3
33%
2
100%
3
33%
2
100%

Where this developer builds, 2000–05.[1] Click the map above to explore spatially, or a row to open the borough.

Outcomes secured — S106 by borough
S106 outcomes per unit aren't traced per developer yet — the borough-by-borough table publishes when the section 106 agreements and committee reports are ingested against this developer's consents.
Recent applications
Address
Borough
Type
Outcome
Date
Brent
Removal of condition(s)
Refused
2005-04-04
Brent
Removal of condition(s)
Refused
2005-04-04
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Approved
2005-01-31
Barnet
Advertisement
Approved
2000-12-12
Barnet
Full Application
Approved
2000-12-07
Camden
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2000-02-17
Camden
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2000-02-14
Brent
Removal of condition(s)
Refused
2005-04-04
Brent
Removal of condition(s)
Refused
2005-04-04
Brent
Conditions pursuant to a full permission
Approved
2005-01-31
Show all 7 rows
Barnet
Advertisement
Approved
2000-12-12
Barnet
Full Application
Approved
2000-12-07
Camden
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2000-02-17
Camden
Full Planning Permission
Refused
2000-02-14
Consultants they instruct— subscriber data
At a glance
DeveloperEnmore Developments
Coverage3 London boroughs
Applications3 (2000–05)
Units sought
Approval rate33%
London rank#12095 of 16,342
Related investigations
How every developer ranks →
Approval rate, units sought and borough coverage across London developers, consultants, officers and inspectors.
Refusal Hotspots — where it's hard →
The wards and boroughs where applications die — and the ones that wave almost everything through.
Sources & method
  1. [1]Applications, approval rate, borough breakdown and units — the planning applications across London on which this company is the named applicant, from borough planning registers. Individual householders are excluded. Units = residential units conservatively parsed from each proposal (sought, not delivered); not every scheme states a count. · methodology
  2. [2]Agents — the named planning agent on each of this developer’s applications, joined to the London consultant record. · methodology
Methodology is published in full so every number is traceable to its primary source.