Planning application · Enfield
26/00207/HOU.
52 Bramley Road London N14 4HS
Householder at 52 Bramley Road London N14 4HS, received 21 Jan 2026 — refused on 6 May 2026 (delegated, Jeremiah Ayerh).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEnfield profile →
Refused
Outcome
6 May 2026
15 wks
Decision time
7 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
13
Documents
13 linked
3
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?
Rear Dormer.
Reference
26/00207/HOU
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
N14 4HS
Ward
Council
Received
21 Jan 2026
Validated
31 Mar 2026
Target date
26 May 2026
Decision date
6 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
26/00207/HOU
Type
Householder
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
N14 4HS
Ward
Council
Received
21 Jan 2026
Validated
31 Mar 2026
Target date
26 May 2026
Decision date
6 May 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 6 May 2026, delegated decision by Jeremiah Ayerh — 15 weeks from submission (7 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
21 Jan 2026
Application received
31 Mar 2026
Application validated
26 May 2026
Statutory target date
6 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Jeremiah Ayerh
21 Jan 2026
Application received
31 Mar 2026
Application validated
26 May 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
6 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Jeremiah Ayerh
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed rear dormer, by virtue of its detailed design, form, siting and bulk, 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 The proposal is therefore contrary to
Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy D4 of the London Plan (2021),
Policy CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), and Policies DMD13 and DMD37 of the Enfield
Development Management Document (2014).
Dated: 6 May 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
Jeremiah.ayerh@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Location Plan Drawing
101 Rev A Drawing
PA 05 Drawing
E2 Drawing
102 Drawing
103 Rev A Drawing
E1 Rev A Drawing
100 Rev A 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 its detailed design, form, siting and bulk, 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 The proposal is therefore contrary to
Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy D4 of the London Plan (2021),
Policy CP30 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), and Policies DMD13 and DMD37 of the Enfield
Development Management Document (2014).
Dated: 6 May 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
Jeremiah.ayerh@enfield.gov.uk.
List of plans and documents referred to in this Notice:
Title/Number Version TYPE
Location Plan Drawing
101 Rev A Drawing
PA 05 Drawing
E2 Drawing
102 Drawing
103 Rev A Drawing
E1 Rev A Drawing
100 Rev A 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 12D4CP30DMD13DMD37NPPF
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
3
In support
0
Total comments
3
Objections
3
In support
0
Total comments
3
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.