Planning application · Enfield
23/03775/HOU.
Householder at 142 Wades Hill London N21 1EH, received 21 Nov 2023 — refused on 12 Feb 2024 (delegated, Eric Thompson).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
12 Feb 2024
12 wks
Decision time
4 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
14
Documents
14 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?
Installation of two pairs of vehicle gates across the main entrance at front, with railings at front and side to a maximum height of 2.04m at front and 1.65m at side.
Reference
23/03775/HOU
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
N21 1EH
Ward
Council
Received
21 Nov 2023
Validated
20 Dec 2023
Target date
14 Feb 2024
Decision date
12 Feb 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
23/03775/HOU
Type
Householder
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
N21 1EH
Ward
Council
Received
21 Nov 2023
Validated
20 Dec 2023
Target date
14 Feb 2024
Decision date
12 Feb 2024
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 12 Feb 2024, delegated decision by Eric Thompson — 12 weeks from submission (4 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
21 Nov 2023
Application received
20 Dec 2023
Application validated
14 Feb 2024
Statutory target date
12 Feb 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Eric Thompson
21 Nov 2023
Application received
20 Dec 2023
Application validated
14 Feb 2024
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
12 Feb 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Eric Thompson
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed railings and automated gate by virtue of it's design, materials proposed, and
height would represent a visually obtrusive and discordant form of development which would detract
from the open character and setting of the street scene. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy
CP30 of Enfield Core Strategy (2010), Policies DMD8 and DMD37 of the Enfield Development
Management Document (2014).
2
The proposed development, by virtue of the lack of visual permeability, would give rise to
conditions prejudicial to the free flow and safety of vehicular traffic and pedestrians, T 4 of the London
Plan (2021), Policy CP 24 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), Policies DMD 46 and DMD 47 of the
Enfield Development Management Document (2014) and the Revised Technical Standards for Footway
Crossovers (2013)
Dated: 9 February 2024
Authorised on behalf of:
Karen Page
Head of Planning and Building Control
Housing, Regeneration and Development Department
Enfield Council
PO Box 53, Civic Centre
Silver Street, Enfield
EN1 3XE
If you have any questions about this decision, please contact the planning officer
eric.thompson@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
J37586-PC-01 Drawing
J37586-PC-03 Drawing
J37586-PC-07 Drawing
J37586-PC-05 Drawing
J37586-PC-06 Drawing
J37586-PC-02 Drawing
J37586-PC-04 Drawing
Additional Information
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 railings and automated gate by virtue of it's design, materials proposed, and
height would represent a visually obtrusive and discordant form of development which would detract
from the open character and setting of the street scene. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy
CP30 of Enfield Core Strategy (2010), Policies DMD8 and DMD37 of the Enfield Development
Management Document (2014).
2
The proposed development, by virtue of the lack of visual permeability, would give rise to
conditions prejudicial to the free flow and safety of vehicular traffic and pedestrians, T 4 of the London
Plan (2021), Policy CP 24 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), Policies DMD 46 and DMD 47 of the
Enfield Development Management Document (2014) and the Revised Technical Standards for Footway
Crossovers (2013)
Dated: 9 February 2024
Authorised on behalf of:
Karen Page
Head of Planning and Building Control
Housing, Regeneration and Development Department
Enfield Council
PO Box 53, Civic Centre
Silver Street, Enfield
EN1 3XE
If you have any questions about this decision, please contact the planning officer
eric.thompson@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
J37586-PC-01 Drawing
J37586-PC-03 Drawing
J37586-PC-07 Drawing
J37586-PC-05 Drawing
J37586-PC-06 Drawing
J37586-PC-02 Drawing
J37586-PC-04 Drawing
Additional Information
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
CP30DMD8DMD37T4CP24DMD46DMD47
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.