®Planning appeal decision
2 Rylston Road, Southgate, Enfield, London, N13 5NQ
a “single-storey front extension, part single-storey rear extension, first-floor side and rear extension.” S
- Authority
- London Borough of Enfield
- Appeal type
- householder · Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Householder developments
- Inspector
- Thomas M
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and area
- Whether there is sufficient information on which to assess the risk of flooding
What decided it
The proposed development would unacceptably harm the character and appearance of the host dwelling and area through its excessive bulk, poor design and lack of subservience, and insufficient flood risk information was provided to assess the development's impact on flood safety.
Plan policies cited: Policy D4 of the London Plan 2021, Policy DMD 8 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy DMD 11 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy DMD 13 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy DMD 14 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy DMD 37 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy SI 12 of the London Plan 2021, Policy SI 13 of the London Plan 2021, Policy DMD 59 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy DMD 60 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy DMD 61 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy DMD 62 of the Enfield Development Management Document (adopted 2014), Policy CP 28 of the Enfield Core Strategy (adopted 2010)
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.