Planning application · Enfield
22/02514/FUL.
Public Footpath Adjacent 33 London Road Enfield EN2
Full / Other Planning at Public Footpath Adjacent 33 London Road Enfield EN2, received 18 Jul 2022 — refused on 20 Sep 2022 (delegated, Amma Busia).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
20 Sep 2022
9 wks
Decision time
1 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
14
Documents
14 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
Yes
Appeal
Appeal Allowed Subject to Conditions
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?
Installation of a multi-functional Communication Hub.
Reference
22/02514/FUL
Type
Full
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Ward
Council
Received
18 Jul 2022
Validated
26 Jul 2022
Target date
20 Sep 2022
Decision date
20 Sep 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
22/02514/FUL
Type
Full
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Ward
Council
Received
18 Jul 2022
Validated
26 Jul 2022
Target date
20 Sep 2022
Decision date
20 Sep 2022
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 Sep 2022, delegated decision by Amma Busia — 9 weeks from submission (1 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
18 Jul 2022
Application received
26 Jul 2022
Application validated
20 Sep 2022
Statutory target date
20 Sep 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Amma Busia
Appeal
Appeal decided · Appeal Allowed Subject to Conditions
18 Jul 2022
Application received
26 Jul 2022
Application validated
20 Sep 2022
Statutory target date
Show all 5 rows
20 Sep 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Amma Busia
Appeal
Appeal decided · Appeal Allowed Subject to Conditions
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed digital advertising display unit, by virtue of its size, placement, illumination, and
graphics, would appear visually dominant result in intrusive clutter within the streetscape. The proposal
would neither preserve or enhance the special character and appearance of the Enfield Town
Conservation Area nor the setting of the listed buildings in the immediate vicinity. As a result, the
proposal is contrary to Policies D8 and HC1 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CP30 and CP31 of
the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), Policies DMD37, DMD41 and DMD44 of the Enfield Development
Management Document (2014), and the National Planning Policy Framework as a whole (2021).
Dated: 20 September 2022
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
amma.busia@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
EXISTING & PROPOSED PLANS Drawing
DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT Supporting Information
NOISE LEVEL REPORT Supporting Information
COMMUNITY HEARTBEAT TRUST CHARITY Supporting Information
HUB UNIT DETAILS Supporting Information
PAVEMENT REINSTATEMENT Supporting Information
SUGGEST CONDITIONS AND REASONS Supporting Information
UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN Supporting Information
Heritage statement Supporting Information
SUSTAINABILITY AIMS Supporting Information
Rights of Applicants Aggrieved by Decision of Local Planning Authority
1
The proposed digital advertising display unit, by virtue of its size, placement, illumination, and
graphics, would appear visually dominant result in intrusive clutter within the streetscape. The proposal
would neither preserve or enhance the special character and appearance of the Enfield Town
Conservation Area nor the setting of the listed buildings in the immediate vicinity. As a result, the
proposal is contrary to Policies D8 and HC1 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CP30 and CP31 of
the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), Policies DMD37, DMD41 and DMD44 of the Enfield Development
Management Document (2014), and the National Planning Policy Framework as a whole (2021).
Dated: 20 September 2022
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
amma.busia@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
EXISTING & PROPOSED PLANS Drawing
DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT Supporting Information
NOISE LEVEL REPORT Supporting Information
COMMUNITY HEARTBEAT TRUST CHARITY Supporting Information
HUB UNIT DETAILS Supporting Information
PAVEMENT REINSTATEMENT Supporting Information
SUGGEST CONDITIONS AND REASONS Supporting Information
UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN Supporting Information
Heritage statement Supporting Information
SUSTAINABILITY AIMS Supporting Information
Rights of Applicants Aggrieved by Decision of Local Planning Authority
Policies cited
D8HC1CP30CP31DMD37DMD41DMD44NPPF
Appeal
Appeal
Outcome
Appeal decided
Outcome: Appeal Allowed Subject to Conditions
Appeal decided
Outcome: Appeal Allowed Subject to Conditions
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.