Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed8 November 20213274609

26 Coniston Gardens, LONDON, N9 8NB

for a 4.2m rear extension

Authority
London Borough of Enfield
Appeal type
householder · Householder (HAS)
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Householder developments
Inspector
Plenty B

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the proposed extension would accommodate flood resilience measures and would be at risk of flooding

What decided it

The absence of sufficient evidence that the extension accommodates the required flood resilience measures and the resulting risk of flooding in a flood zone 2 location.

The private benefit of supporting a growing family was of limited weight and could not outweigh the identified policy conflict regarding flood risk; the neutral factor of complementary character could not overcome the flood risk harm.

Framework references: 167, 168

Plan policies cited: SI 12, SI 13, CP28, CP29, DMD59, DMD60

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.