®Planning appeal decision
95 New Park Avenue, London, N13 5NA
Planning appeal 3350688 at 95 New Park Avenue, London, N13 5NA (London Borough of Enfield) was dismissed on 7 July 2025 by Inspector Courtney T, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: in Appeal A only, whether the proposal would provide adequate living conditions for the future occupiers of the appeal dwelling with particular regard to the provision of satisfactory communal space and access to the external amenity space.
the change of use from Use Class C3 (single dwelling house) to Use as Sui Generis, HMO (House in Multiple Occupation) for up to 8 people, involving demolition of existing single storey rear extension and erection of a rear ground floor extension, loft conversion and dormer extension at rear with roof lights at the front
- Authority
- London Borough of Enfield
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Change of use
- Inspector
- Courtney T
- Postcode
- N13 5NA
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- in Appeal A only, whether the proposal would provide adequate living conditions for the future occupiers of the appeal dwelling with particular regard to the provision of satisfactory communal space and access to the external amenity space
- in Appeals A and B, the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, with particular regard to noise and disturbance
What decided it
The cumulative and considerable harm to living conditions of both future occupiers (Appeal A) and neighbouring occupiers (Appeals A and B) significantly and demonstrably outweighs the limited housing and economic benefits, even when the tilted balance is applied due to the Council's inability to demonstrate a 5-year housing land supply.
The cumulative and considerable harm identified would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the limited benefits of the appeal schemes when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole, with the balance tipping decisively against the proposals.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy DMD5Policy DMD6Policy DMD8Policy DMD37Policy DMD68Policy CP4Policy CP30Policy CP32Policy D6Policy D14
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in London Borough of Enfield
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2025
- Dismissed21 October 202660105412 Queen Annes Grove, Enfield, EN1 2JP
- Allowed28 August 202660083619 The Spinney, Winchmore Hill, London, N21 1LL
- Dismissed6 August 2026600682628 The Crest, London, N13 5JT
- Dismissed30 June 2026600515327 Abbey Road, Enfield, EN1 2QP
- Notice varied and upheld4 June 20263336794Land on West Side of Burnt Farm Ride, Enfield, EN2 9DY
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.