Planning application · Enfield
22/03868/HOU.
372 Southbury Road Enfield EN3 4JQ
Householder at 372 Southbury Road Enfield EN3 4JQ, received 15 Nov 2022 — refused on 21 Mar 2023 (delegated, Amma Busia).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
21 Mar 2023
18 wks
Decision time
10 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
11
Documents
11 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?
Part single, part 2-storey rear extension with front porch and installation of 1st floor front window.
Reference
22/03868/HOU
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN3 4JQ
Ward
Council
Received
15 Nov 2022
Validated
24 Jan 2023
Target date
21 Mar 2023
Decision date
21 Mar 2023
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
22/03868/HOU
Type
Householder
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN3 4JQ
Ward
Council
Received
15 Nov 2022
Validated
24 Jan 2023
Target date
21 Mar 2023
Decision date
21 Mar 2023
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
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 21 Mar 2023, delegated decision by Amma Busia — 18 weeks from submission (10 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
15 Nov 2022
Application received
24 Jan 2023
Application validated
21 Mar 2023
Statutory target date
21 Mar 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Amma Busia
15 Nov 2022
Application received
24 Jan 2023
Application validated
21 Mar 2023
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
21 Mar 2023
Delegated decision: Refused · Amma Busia
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed first floor rear extension, by reason of its flat roof design, its width and its depth,
would represent an overly dominant and out of keeping addition to the subject property which would
detract from the character and appearance of the original building and would be detrimental to the
visual amenities of the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy D3 of the London
Plan (2021), policy CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010) and policies DMD8, DMD11 and DMD37
of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014).
2
The proposed first floor rear extension, by reason of its siting and depth on the shared boundary
with number 374 Southbury Road, would result in an unacceptable loss of light and outlook, appear
overly dominant and result in a heightened sense of enclosure for the neighbouring occupiers. The
proposal is therefore contrary to policy CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010) and DMD11 of the
Enfield Development Management Document (2014).
Dated: 21 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
amma.busia@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
372SRSD Drawing
372SREP Drawing
372SRPE Drawing
SITE LOCATION PLAN Drawing
EXISTING BLOCK PLAN Drawing
PROPOSED BLOCK PLAN 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 first floor rear extension, by reason of its flat roof design, its width and its depth,
would represent an overly dominant and out of keeping addition to the subject property which would
detract from the character and appearance of the original building and would be detrimental to the
visual amenities of the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy D3 of the London
Plan (2021), policy CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010) and policies DMD8, DMD11 and DMD37
of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014).
2
The proposed first floor rear extension, by reason of its siting and depth on the shared boundary
with number 374 Southbury Road, would result in an unacceptable loss of light and outlook, appear
overly dominant and result in a heightened sense of enclosure for the neighbouring occupiers. The
proposal is therefore contrary to policy CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010) and DMD11 of the
Enfield Development Management Document (2014).
Dated: 21 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
amma.busia@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
372SRSD Drawing
372SREP Drawing
372SRPE Drawing
SITE LOCATION PLAN Drawing
EXISTING BLOCK PLAN Drawing
PROPOSED BLOCK PLAN 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
D3CP30DMD8DMD11DMD37
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.