Planning application · Enfield
21/03797/FUL.
Full / Other Planning at 3 London Road Enfield EN2 6BN, received 7 Oct 2021 — refused on 20 Dec 2021 (delegated, Jasmine Kaur-Singh).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
20 Dec 2021
11 wks
Decision time
3 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
9
Documents
9 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Enfield planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Replacement of existing shopfront with new aluminium style.
Reference
21/03797/FUL
Type
Full
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN2 6BN
Ward
Council
Received
7 Oct 2021
Validated
28 Oct 2021
Target date
23 Dec 2021
Decision date
20 Dec 2021
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
21/03797/FUL
Type
Full
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN2 6BN
Ward
Council
Received
7 Oct 2021
Validated
28 Oct 2021
Target date
23 Dec 2021
Decision date
20 Dec 2021
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Enfield portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 20 Dec 2021, delegated decision by Jasmine Kaur-Singh — 11 weeks from submission (3 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
7 Oct 2021
Application received
28 Oct 2021
Application validated
23 Dec 2021
Statutory target date
20 Dec 2021
Delegated decision: Refused · Jasmine Kaur-Singh
7 Oct 2021
Application received
28 Oct 2021
Application validated
23 Dec 2021
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
20 Dec 2021
Delegated decision: Refused · Jasmine Kaur-Singh
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed replacement of the traditional timber shopfront with an aluminium unit, would
detract from the appearance of the Conversation Area and the proposal would fail to enhance or
preserve the character of the Enfield Town Conversation Area contrary to NPPF 2021, Policies CP30
and CP31 of the Core Strategy (2010), Policies and DMD44 of the Development Management
Document (2014), policy HC1 Heritage conservation and growth of the London Plan (2021) and
Enfield Town Conservation Area Character Appraisal.
Dated: 20 December 2021
Authorised on behalf of:
Mr A Higham
Head of Development Management
Development Management,
London Borough Enfield,
PO Box 53, Civic Centre,
Silver Street, Enfield,
Middlesex, EN1 3XE
If you have any questions about this decision, please contact the planning officer jasmine.kaur-
singh@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
801 block plan Drawing
801 pros plan and elevations Drawing
Heritage Statement Supporting Information
Additional Information
Rights of Applicants Aggrieved by Decision of Local Planning Authority
1
The proposed replacement of the traditional timber shopfront with an aluminium unit, would
detract from the appearance of the Conversation Area and the proposal would fail to enhance or
preserve the character of the Enfield Town Conversation Area contrary to NPPF 2021, Policies CP30
and CP31 of the Core Strategy (2010), Policies and DMD44 of the Development Management
Document (2014), policy HC1 Heritage conservation and growth of the London Plan (2021) and
Enfield Town Conservation Area Character Appraisal.
Dated: 20 December 2021
Authorised on behalf of:
Mr A Higham
Head of Development Management
Development Management,
London Borough Enfield,
PO Box 53, Civic Centre,
Silver Street, Enfield,
Middlesex, EN1 3XE
If you have any questions about this decision, please contact the planning officer jasmine.kaur-
singh@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
801 block plan Drawing
801 pros plan and elevations Drawing
Heritage Statement Supporting Information
Additional Information
Rights of Applicants Aggrieved by Decision of Local Planning Authority
Policies cited
CP30CP31DMD44NPPF
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.