Planning application · Enfield
25/00956/FUL.
9 Fotheringham Court Fotheringham Road Enfield EN1 1PU
Full / Other Planning at 9 Fotheringham Court Fotheringham Road Enfield EN1 1PU, received 13 Mar 2025 — refused on 23 May 2025 (delegated, Jeremiah Ayerh).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
23 May 2025
10 wks
Decision time
2 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
8
Documents
8 linked
1
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?
Extension of vehicular crossover and associated hardstanding.
Reference
25/00956/FUL
Type
Full
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN1 1PU
Ward
Council
Received
13 Mar 2025
Validated
25 Mar 2025
Target date
20 May 2025
Decision date
23 May 2025
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
25/00956/FUL
Type
Full
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN1 1PU
Ward
Council
Received
13 Mar 2025
Validated
25 Mar 2025
Target date
20 May 2025
Decision date
23 May 2025
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 23 May 2025, delegated decision by Jeremiah Ayerh — 10 weeks from submission (2 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
13 Mar 2025
Application received
25 Mar 2025
Application validated
20 May 2025
Statutory target date
23 May 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Jeremiah Ayerh
13 Mar 2025
Application received
25 Mar 2025
Application validated
20 May 2025
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
23 May 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Jeremiah Ayerh
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed construction of hardstanding in connection with vehicle access, by reason of the
excessive width of the proposed crossover, would result in a harmful reduction of on-street parking
provision along Fotheringham Road where there is high demand for on-street parking, as well as
posing a risk to the free flow of traffic flow and to road safety, detrimental to road users, pedestrians
and cyclists. The proposal is considered contrary to Sections 9 and 12 and of the National Planning
Policy Framework (2021), Policies D8, T5 and T6 of the London Plan (2023), CP24, CP25 and CP30
of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD 8, DMD 37, DMD 45, DMD 46 and DMD 47 of the Enfield
Development Management Document (2014).
Dated: 23 May 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
Jeremiah.ayerh@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Design and Access Statement Supporting Information
Location Plan Drawing
DPL.03. Drawing
DPL.02. Rev B Drawing
Additional Information
Should the applicant wish to resubmit, the Council's Crossover and Transportation teams have
advised that a crossover no wider than 3.66 metres, with appropriate means of enclosure to prevent
illegal use of the dropped kerb, may be considered more acceptable.
APPEAL GUIDANCE:
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 construction of hardstanding in connection with vehicle access, by reason of the
excessive width of the proposed crossover, would result in a harmful reduction of on-street parking
provision along Fotheringham Road where there is high demand for on-street parking, as well as
posing a risk to the free flow of traffic flow and to road safety, detrimental to road users, pedestrians
and cyclists. The proposal is considered contrary to Sections 9 and 12 and of the National Planning
Policy Framework (2021), Policies D8, T5 and T6 of the London Plan (2023), CP24, CP25 and CP30
of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD 8, DMD 37, DMD 45, DMD 46 and DMD 47 of the Enfield
Development Management Document (2014).
Dated: 23 May 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
Jeremiah.ayerh@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Design and Access Statement Supporting Information
Location Plan Drawing
DPL.03. Drawing
DPL.02. Rev B Drawing
Additional Information
Should the applicant wish to resubmit, the Council's Crossover and Transportation teams have
advised that a crossover no wider than 3.66 metres, with appropriate means of enclosure to prevent
illegal use of the dropped kerb, may be considered more acceptable.
APPEAL GUIDANCE:
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
D8T5T6CP24CP25CP30DMD8DMD37DMD45DMD46DMD47NPPF
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
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.