Planning application · Enfield
24/03995/HOU.
36 Halstead Gardens London N21 3DX
Householder at 36 Halstead Gardens London N21 3DX, received 27 Nov 2024 — refused on 30 Jan 2025 (delegated, Hannah Procter).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
30 Jan 2025
9 wks
Decision time
1 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
13
Documents
13 linked
—
Objections
not captured
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?
Rear dormer with front rooflights.
Reference
24/03995/HOU
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
N21 3DX
Ward
Council
Received
27 Nov 2024
Validated
5 Dec 2024
Target date
30 Jan 2025
Decision date
30 Jan 2025
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
24/03995/HOU
Type
Householder
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
N21 3DX
Ward
Council
Received
27 Nov 2024
Validated
5 Dec 2024
Target date
30 Jan 2025
Decision date
30 Jan 2025
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 30 Jan 2025, delegated decision by Hannah Procter — 9 weeks from submission (1 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
27 Nov 2024
Application received
5 Dec 2024
Application validated
30 Jan 2025
Statutory target date
30 Jan 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Hannah Procter
27 Nov 2024
Application received
5 Dec 2024
Application validated
30 Jan 2025
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
30 Jan 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Hannah Procter
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed rear dormer, by virtue of form, siting and bulk, within the roof plane, would appear
visually intrusive, incongruous, overly dominant and out of keeping with the character and
appearance of the host building and the surrounding area of which it forms part, contrary to
Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies D4 of the London Plan
(2021), CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD8, DMD13 and DMD37 of the Enfield
Development Management Document (2014).
Dated: 30 January 2025
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
hannah.procter@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Design and Access Statement Supporting Information
188-D-10B Drawing
188-D-01A Drawing
118-D-02A Drawing
188-D-07A Drawing
188-D-08A Drawing
188-D-09A 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 rear dormer, by virtue of form, siting and bulk, within the roof plane, would appear
visually intrusive, incongruous, overly dominant and out of keeping with the character and
appearance of the host building and the surrounding area of which it forms part, contrary to
Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies D4 of the London Plan
(2021), CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD8, DMD13 and DMD37 of the Enfield
Development Management Document (2014).
Dated: 30 January 2025
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
hannah.procter@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Design and Access Statement Supporting Information
188-D-10B Drawing
188-D-01A Drawing
118-D-02A Drawing
188-D-07A Drawing
188-D-08A Drawing
188-D-09A 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
National Planning Policy Framework 12D4CP30DMD8DMD13DMD37NPPF
Public response
Comment counts were not captured for this application.
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.