Planning application · Enfield
25/02885/HOU.
Householder at 3 Abbey Road Enfield EN1 2QP, received 26 Aug 2025 — refused on 21 Oct 2025 (delegated, Andrew Pommells).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
21 Oct 2025
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
13
Documents
13 linked
0
Objections
1 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?
Single storey rear extension involving demolition of existing conservatory, rebuilding of first floor rear outrigger and side rooflights.
Reference
25/02885/HOU
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN1 2QP
Ward
Council
Received
26 Aug 2025
Target date
21 Oct 2025
Decision date
21 Oct 2025
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
25/02885/HOU
Type
Householder
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
EN1 2QP
Ward
Council
Received
26 Aug 2025
Target date
21 Oct 2025
Decision date
21 Oct 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 21 Oct 2025, delegated decision by Andrew Pommells — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
26 Aug 2025
Application received
21 Oct 2025
Statutory target date
21 Oct 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Andrew Pommells
26 Aug 2025
Application received
21 Oct 2025
Statutory target date
21 Oct 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Andrew Pommells
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, by virtue of the overall design of the first-floor rear outrigger ridge
increase, and the single storey rear extension would be to the detriment of the dwelling and would
neither protect nor enhance the conservation area. The height of first floor rear outrigger exceeds the
main roof ridge disrupting the established roofline, that is at odds with the established character of the
building and the wider Conservation Area. The single storey rear extension proposes flat roof with a
shallow hipped edge introduces an ad hoc appearance that conflicts with the established rear form and
detailing of the host building. The alterations ground floor rear and first floor outrigger the established
roof form and result in a disproportionate roofscape representing an incongruous and visually intrusive
addition appearance contrary to Section and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) Act 1990. The harm is not outweighed by any planning benefits, contrary to Sections 12 and 16
of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies D3, D4, HC1 of the London Plan (2021),
CP30 and CP31 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD6, DMD11 and DMD13 of the Development
Management Document (2014).
2
In the absence of a site specific flood risk assessment, it has not been demonstrated that the
proposed development is safe from flooding and would not increase flood risk elsewhere. As such the
proposal is contrary to Policies S1 12 of the London Plan (2021), CP 28 of the Core Strategy (2010),
DMD 59, DMD 60, DMD 61 and DMD 62 of the Development Management Document (2014) and the
NPPF (2024).
Dated: 21 October 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
Andrew.Pommells@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Application form Supporting Information
Heritage Statement Supporting Information
FRA CFC25020 Supporting Information
Planning Statement Rev O Supporting Information
SUDS Pro Forma Supporting Information
Location Plan Drawing
Block Plan 25014/1 Drawing
25014/2 Drawing
25014/1 Drawing
25014/4B Drawing
25014/6 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 development, by virtue of the overall design of the first-floor rear outrigger ridge
increase, and the single storey rear extension would be to the detriment of the dwelling and would
neither protect nor enhance the conservation area. The height of first floor rear outrigger exceeds the
main roof ridge disrupting the established roofline, that is at odds with the established character of the
building and the wider Conservation Area. The single storey rear extension proposes flat roof with a
shallow hipped edge introduces an ad hoc appearance that conflicts with the established rear form and
detailing of the host building. The alterations ground floor rear and first floor outrigger the established
roof form and result in a disproportionate roofscape representing an incongruous and visually intrusive
addition appearance contrary to Section and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) Act 1990. The harm is not outweighed by any planning benefits, contrary to Sections 12 and 16
of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies D3, D4, HC1 of the London Plan (2021),
CP30 and CP31 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD6, DMD11 and DMD13 of the Development
Management Document (2014).
2
In the absence of a site specific flood risk assessment, it has not been demonstrated that the
proposed development is safe from flooding and would not increase flood risk elsewhere. As such the
proposal is contrary to Policies S1 12 of the London Plan (2021), CP 28 of the Core Strategy (2010),
DMD 59, DMD 60, DMD 61 and DMD 62 of the Development Management Document (2014) and the
NPPF (2024).
Dated: 21 October 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
Andrew.Pommells@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Application form Supporting Information
Heritage Statement Supporting Information
FRA CFC25020 Supporting Information
Planning Statement Rev O Supporting Information
SUDS Pro Forma Supporting Information
Location Plan Drawing
Block Plan 25014/1 Drawing
25014/2 Drawing
25014/1 Drawing
25014/4B Drawing
25014/6 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
National Planning Policy Framework 12National Planning Policy Framework 16D3D4HC1CP30CP31DMD6DMD11DMD13NPPFLondon Plan 12CP28DMD59DMD60DMD61DMD62
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
1
Total comments
1
Objections
0
In support
1
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.