Planning Atlas
Planning AtlasEnfieldTown wardEN2 6PD3 Little Park Gardens Enfield EN2 6PD25/04374/HOU
Planning application · Enfield

25/04374/HOU.

3 Little Park Gardens Enfield EN2 6PD

Householder at 3 Little Park Gardens Enfield EN2 6PD, received 19 Dec 2025 — refused on 26 Feb 2026 (delegated, Eric Thompson).

EnfieldTownEN2 6PD25/04374/HOU
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
26 Feb 2026
10 wks
Decision time
2 wks over the 8-week target
Conditions
not captured
24
Documents
24 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?

2 no. single storey rear extensions involving replacement of existing lean-to, removal of tree, partial demolition of garage involving alterations to front elevation, demolition of front wall, installation of front slight gate and partial resurfacing the front garden.

Reference
25/04374/HOU
Type
Householder
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
19 Dec 2025
Validated
5 Jan 2026
Target date
2 Mar 2026
Decision date
26 Feb 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Reference
25/04374/HOU
Type
Householder
Show all 17 rows
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
19 Dec 2025
Validated
5 Jan 2026
Target date
2 Mar 2026
Decision date
26 Feb 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Documents

What was filed?

Document
Published
View
Officer Report
27 Feb 2026
Decision Notice
26 Feb 2026
PRESS NOTICE 14/01/2026
14 Jan 2026
Proposed Hardstand Cross Section
5 Jan 2026
PROPOSED SITE/HARDSTAND FLOOR PLAN
5 Jan 2026
PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR PLAN
5 Jan 2026
EXISTING SITE/HARDSTAND FLOOR PLAN
5 Jan 2026
EXISTING GROUND FLOOR PLAN
5 Jan 2026
SuDS Pro forma
5 Jan 2026
Application Form - Without Personal Data
19 Dec 2025
Officer Report
27 Feb 2026
Decision Notice
26 Feb 2026
PRESS NOTICE 14/01/2026
14 Jan 2026
Show all 10 rows
Proposed Hardstand Cross Section
5 Jan 2026
PROPOSED SITE/HARDSTAND FLOOR PLAN
5 Jan 2026
PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR PLAN
5 Jan 2026
EXISTING SITE/HARDSTAND FLOOR PLAN
5 Jan 2026
EXISTING GROUND FLOOR PLAN
5 Jan 2026
SuDS Pro forma
5 Jan 2026
Application Form - Without Personal Data
19 Dec 2025

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 26 Feb 2026, delegated decision by Eric Thompson — 10 weeks from submission (2 over the 8-week target).

Timeline

Date
Event
19 Dec 2025
Application received
5 Jan 2026
Application validated
2 Mar 2026
Statutory target date
26 Feb 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Eric Thompson
19 Dec 2025
Application received
5 Jan 2026
Application validated
2 Mar 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
26 Feb 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Eric Thompson

Why it was refused

Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed parking arrangement and vehicular access, by virtue of their siting and size, would result in insufficient width for vehicular entering/existing and vehicles slowing, turning and manoeuvring across the footway and on street parking area, leading to conflict with pedestrians and harm to the free flow and safety of traffic, as well as the loss or obstruction of essential on street parking. The proposal is therefore contrary to Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies T2, T4, and T6 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CP24 and CP25 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), Policies DMD45, DMD46 and DMD47 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014), and the Revised Technical Standards for Footway Crossovers (2013).
2
The proposed development, in the absence of a tree constraints plan, tree protection plan and trial dig report, has failed to demonstrate that the proposal would retain and protect trees of visual amenity and biodiversity value within the site contrary to Section 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies G6 and G7 of the London Plan (2021) and CP36 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD37, DMD 80 and DMD81 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014) and the British Standard for Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction (BS 5837:2012). Dated: 26 February 2026 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 Cover Letter Supporting Information 04 200 Drawing 04 101 Drawing 04 102 Drawing 04 201 Drawing 04 210 Drawing 04 111 Drawing 04 112 Drawing 04 100 A Drawing 04 113 Drawing 04 212 Drawing 04 110 A Drawing 04 103 Drawing 04 100 A Drawing 04 211 Drawing Flood Risk Assessment Supporting Information 04 105 Drawing Tree Survey Supporting Information 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 parking arrangement and vehicular access, by virtue of their siting and size, would result in insufficient width for vehicular entering/existing and vehicles slowing, turning and manoeuvring across the footway and on street parking area, leading to conflict with pedestrians and harm to the free flow and safety of traffic, as well as the loss or obstruction of essential on street parking. The proposal is therefore contrary to Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies T2, T4, and T6 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CP24 and CP25 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), Policies DMD45, DMD46 and DMD47 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014), and the Revised Technical Standards for Footway Crossovers (2013).
2
The proposed development, in the absence of a tree constraints plan, tree protection plan and trial dig report, has failed to demonstrate that the proposal would retain and protect trees of visual amenity and biodiversity value within the site contrary to Section 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies G6 and G7 of the London Plan (2021) and CP36 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD37, DMD 80 and DMD81 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014) and the British Standard for Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction (BS 5837:2012). Dated: 26 February 2026 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 Cover Letter Supporting Information 04 200 Drawing 04 101 Drawing 04 102 Drawing 04 201 Drawing 04 210 Drawing 04 111 Drawing 04 112 Drawing 04 100 A Drawing 04 113 Drawing 04 212 Drawing 04 110 A Drawing 04 103 Drawing 04 100 A Drawing 04 211 Drawing Flood Risk Assessment Supporting Information 04 105 Drawing Tree Survey Supporting Information 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 9T6CP24CP25DMD45DMD46DMD47NPPFNational Planning Policy Framework 15G6G7CP36DMD37DMD80DMD81

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.