Planning application · Enfield
26/00064/FUL.
Vacant Office 22 Aldermans Hill London N13 4PN
Full / Other Planning at Vacant Office 22 Aldermans Hill London N13 4PN, received 7 Jan 2026 — refused on 23 Apr 2026 (delegated, Mahboubeh Bahrami-Jovein).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
23 Apr 2026
15 wks
Decision time
7 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
12
Documents
12 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?
Change of use from first floor office (Use Class E) to a self-contained flat (Use Class C3).
Reference
26/00064/FUL
Type
Full
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
N13 4PN
Ward
Council
Received
7 Jan 2026
Validated
26 Feb 2026
Target date
23 Apr 2026
Decision date
23 Apr 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
26/00064/FUL
Type
Full
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
N13 4PN
Ward
Council
Received
7 Jan 2026
Validated
26 Feb 2026
Target date
23 Apr 2026
Decision date
23 Apr 2026
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 23 Apr 2026, delegated decision by Mahboubeh Bahrami-Jovein — 15 weeks from submission (7 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
7 Jan 2026
Application received
26 Feb 2026
Application validated
23 Apr 2026
Statutory target date
23 Apr 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Mahboubeh Bahrami-Jovein
7 Jan 2026
Application received
26 Feb 2026
Application validated
23 Apr 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
23 Apr 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Mahboubeh Bahrami-Jovein
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development due to its poor provision of natural light and outlook to the living
room would result in a substandard form of accommodation prejudicial to the living conditions of future
occupants of the self-contained flat. The development is therefore contrary to Section 12 of the
National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies D3 and D6 of the London Plan (2021), Policies
CP4 and CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010) and Policies DMD8 and DMD37 of the Enfield
Development Management Document (2014).
2
The proposed development, in the absence of adequate waste storage, fails to provide a
convenient and accessible facility for managing waste generated by the development, contrary to
Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies T2, T3, T4, T6, T6.1 and T7 of
the London Plan (2021), CP22 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD8, DMD30, DMD45, DMD46,
DMD47, DMD48 and DMD57 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014) and the
Enfield Household Recycling and Waste Planning Guidance for New Developments (2024).
Dated: 23 April 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
mahboubeh.bahrami-jovein@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
001 Drawing
002 Drawing
003 Drawing
Location Plan Drawing
Planning Statement Supporting Information
Additional Information
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 development due to its poor provision of natural light and outlook to the living
room would result in a substandard form of accommodation prejudicial to the living conditions of future
occupants of the self-contained flat. The development is therefore contrary to Section 12 of the
National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies D3 and D6 of the London Plan (2021), Policies
CP4 and CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010) and Policies DMD8 and DMD37 of the Enfield
Development Management Document (2014).
2
The proposed development, in the absence of adequate waste storage, fails to provide a
convenient and accessible facility for managing waste generated by the development, contrary to
Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies T2, T3, T4, T6, T6.1 and T7 of
the London Plan (2021), CP22 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), DMD8, DMD30, DMD45, DMD46,
DMD47, DMD48 and DMD57 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014) and the
Enfield Household Recycling and Waste Planning Guidance for New Developments (2024).
Dated: 23 April 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
mahboubeh.bahrami-jovein@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
001 Drawing
002 Drawing
003 Drawing
Location Plan Drawing
Planning Statement Supporting Information
Additional Information
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
National Planning Policy Framework 12D3D6CP4CP30DMD8DMD37NPPFNational Planning Policy Framework 9T2T3T4T6T6.1T7CP22DMD30DMD45DMD46DMD47DMD48DMD57
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.