Planning application · Enfield
22/03252/HOU.
100 Totteridge Road Enfield EN3 6NG
Householder at 100 Totteridge Road Enfield EN3 6NG, received 21 Sep 2022 — refused on 24 Mar 2023 (delegated, Andrew Parker).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
24 Mar 2023
26 wks
Decision time
18 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
5
Documents
5 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?
Demolition of existing rear extension and erection of a part single storey, part two storey side and rear extension.
Reference
22/03252/HOU
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN3 6NG
Ward
Council
Received
21 Sep 2022
Validated
23 Sep 2022
Target date
18 Nov 2022
Decision date
24 Mar 2023
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
22/03252/HOU
Type
Householder
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN3 6NG
Ward
Council
Received
21 Sep 2022
Validated
23 Sep 2022
Target date
18 Nov 2022
Decision date
24 Mar 2023
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 24 Mar 2023, delegated decision by Andrew Parker — 26 weeks from submission (18 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
21 Sep 2022
Application received
23 Sep 2022
Application validated
18 Nov 2022
Statutory target date
24 Mar 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Andrew Parker
21 Sep 2022
Application received
23 Sep 2022
Application validated
18 Nov 2022
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
24 Mar 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Andrew Parker
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, by reason of its siting, overall size and bulk, and flat roof design,
would result in an overly dominant, disproportionate and discordant form of development which would
be detrimental to the character and appearance of the property and the visual amenities of the
surrounding area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy D3 of the London Plan 2021, Core Policy
30 of the Council's Core Strategy 2010 and Policies DMD 8, DMD11, DMD14 and DMD 37 of the
Council's Development Management Document 2014.
2
The proposed development, by reason of its siting and depth of projection, would result in a
harmful loss of outlook and daylight prejudicial to the residential amenities enjoyed by the adjoining
occupiers of No.98 and No.102 Totteridge Road. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D3 of the
London Plan 2021, Policy CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy 2010 and Policies DMD8 and DMD11 of
the Enfield Development Management Document 2014.
Dated: 24 March 2023
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
andrew.parker@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Unnumbered Full Plans Drawing
E-mail dated 23.03.2023 Revised plans
Drawing 1 of 1 Drawing
APPEAL
Should you (an applicant or agent) feel aggrieved by the decision of the Council to either refuse
permission or to grant permission subject to conditions, you can
1
The proposed development, by reason of its siting, overall size and bulk, and flat roof design,
would result in an overly dominant, disproportionate and discordant form of development which would
be detrimental to the character and appearance of the property and the visual amenities of the
surrounding area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy D3 of the London Plan 2021, Core Policy
30 of the Council's Core Strategy 2010 and Policies DMD 8, DMD11, DMD14 and DMD 37 of the
Council's Development Management Document 2014.
2
The proposed development, by reason of its siting and depth of projection, would result in a
harmful loss of outlook and daylight prejudicial to the residential amenities enjoyed by the adjoining
occupiers of No.98 and No.102 Totteridge Road. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D3 of the
London Plan 2021, Policy CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy 2010 and Policies DMD8 and DMD11 of
the Enfield Development Management Document 2014.
Dated: 24 March 2023
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
andrew.parker@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Unnumbered Full Plans Drawing
E-mail dated 23.03.2023 Revised plans
Drawing 1 of 1 Drawing
APPEAL
Should you (an applicant or agent) feel aggrieved by the decision of the Council to either refuse
permission or to grant permission subject to conditions, you can
Policies cited
D3Council's Core Strategy 30DMD8DMD11DMD14DMD37CP30
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.