Planning application · Hackney
2022/0281.
17 Englefield Road, Hackney, London, N1 4LJ
Householder at 17 Englefield Road, Hackney, London, N1 4LJ, received 7 Feb 2022 — refused on 4 Apr 2022 (delegated, Erin Glancy).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHackney profile →
Refused
Outcome
4 Apr 2022
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
9
Documents
9 linked
1
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Hackney 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?
Demolition of section of front boundary wall, proposed dropped curb and additional hardstanding to allow for driveway for off street parking and Electric Car Charging.
Reference
2022/0281
Type
Householder Planning
Applicant
Agent / consultant
None recorded
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
7 Feb 2022
Target date
4 Apr 2022
Decision date
4 Apr 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Premises record
Council register
Reference
2022/0281
Type
Householder Planning
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
None recorded
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
7 Feb 2022
Target date
4 Apr 2022
Decision date
4 Apr 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Final Decision
Premises record
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Hackney portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 4 Apr 2022, delegated decision by Erin Glancy — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
7 Feb 2022
Application received
4 Apr 2022
Statutory target date
4 Apr 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Erin Glancy
7 Feb 2022
Application received
4 Apr 2022
Statutory target date
4 Apr 2022
Delegated decision: Refused · Erin Glancy
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, by reason of the partial loss of the
front boundary wall and front garden area to facilitate a dropped
kerb, vehicle crossover and additional hardstanding would result in
the loss of visual amenity and local distinctiveness to the
streescene that would fail to preserve or enhance the character
and appearance of the application property and wider De Beauvoir
Conservation Area. As such, the proposal is contrary to policies D3
(Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach); D4
(Delivering good design) and HC1 (Heritage Conservation and
Growth) of the London Plan (2021) and policies LP1 (Design
Quality and Local Character), LP3 (Designated heritage assets)
and LP45 (Parking and Car Free Development) of the Hackney
Local Plan 2033 (2020) and guidance contained within Hackney
Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD (2009), the National
Planning Policy Framework and De Beauvoir Conservation Area
Appraisal (2008).
1
The proposed development, by reason of the partial loss of the
front boundary wall and front garden area to facilitate a dropped
kerb, vehicle crossover and additional hardstanding would result in
the loss of visual amenity and local distinctiveness to the
streescene that would fail to preserve or enhance the character
and appearance of the application property and wider De Beauvoir
Conservation Area. As such, the proposal is contrary to policies D3
(Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach); D4
(Delivering good design) and HC1 (Heritage Conservation and
Growth) of the London Plan (2021) and policies LP1 (Design
Quality and Local Character), LP3 (Designated heritage assets)
and LP45 (Parking and Car Free Development) of the Hackney
Local Plan 2033 (2020) and guidance contained within Hackney
Residential Extensions and Alterations SPD (2009), the National
Planning Policy Framework and De Beauvoir Conservation Area
Appraisal (2008).
Policies cited
NPPF
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
1
Objections
1
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
No agent recorded
Applied without an agent, or agent not recorded.
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
No agent recorded
Applied without an agent, or agent not recorded.
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.