The Enfield Council Planning Committee was scheduled to meet to discuss two planning applications, as well as a report from the Head of Planning and Building Control. One application concerned the redevelopment of former garages on Ivy Road in Southgate, and the other concerned the internal and external refurbishment of buildings on Fore Street in Upper Edmonton.

Here's a breakdown of the key items from the agenda:

198-202 Fore Street, London, N18 2JD

The committee was scheduled to consider a request for the internal and external refurbishment of existing buildings at 198-202 Fore Street, including the erection of an additional floor above 200-202 Fore Street. The additional floor would create additional rooms to facilitate a 10-bedroom house in multiple occupation (HMO). The ground floor restaurant space (class E¹) was scheduled to be retained. Additionally, at the rear of the site, the plan included the erection of a new co-living building incorporating 50 studio rooms and internal communal living space, a publicly accessible café / co-working space at ground floor level (also class E), and external communal garden space at first floor level, with associated disabled parking, cycle storage and refuse storage provision.

The planning application, submitted by Mr K Chaudhry of Chaudhry Investment Limited, had been recommended for approval, subject to conditions and the completion of a Section 106 agreement². According to the report pack, the benefits of the scheme included:

• A contribution to the supply of new housing.
• Adding variety to the mix of accommodation available in the surrounding area.
• Providing an acceptable quality of accommodation.
• A financial contribution of £150,000 towards the delivery of off-site affordable housing.
• A Late Stage Viability Review to capture additional affordable housing contributions if viable.
• A publicly accessible café and co-working space at ground floor level.
• Heritage benefits associated with the renovation of the existing buildings at 198-202 Fore Street.
• A car free development, except for disabled parking.
• Investment in Fore Street.
• The planting of sixteen trees in the borough.

The report pack noted that the site is within the Fore Street Edmonton Conservation Area, which is included in Historic England's annual Heritage at Risk register. The report pack stated that the conservation officer was supportive of the scheme in principle, although some further detail from the applicant was required. The report pack stated that, were permission to be granted it is essential that the frontage works are secured via Section 106 agreement. These works should be completed to an agreed specification prior to the occupation of the rear development.

The report pack stated that Transport for London (TfL) expected a restriction on residents applying for parking permits in the local controlled parking zone (CPZ), and that the impacts of vibration on future occupants, as well as noise, must also be considered.

The report pack stated that Environmental Health officers did not object to the application, subject to mitigation measures to be secured by condition.

The report pack stated that Historic England's Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS) advised that the development could cause harm to archaeological remains and field evaluation was needed to determine appropriate mitigation.

The report pack stated that tree officers noted that there were no trees on site however there was a line of sycamore trees within the car park to the east of the site immediately adjacent to the application boundary. The report pack stated that the applicant had agreed to make a financial contribution of £11,133.28, to be secured by S106 agreement, to mitigate for the potential loss of trees T2-T5, with the financial contribution to cover the cost of planting 16 new trees (replacement by a ratio of 4:1) in an off-site location.

The report pack stated that Energetik (District Energy Network) stated that the proposed development was not close enough to the district energy network or of a suitable scale to require a connection to the network.

The report pack stated that the Council's climate action and sustainability officers noted that the proposed scheme was acceptable from a climate action perspective, and that the total emissions from the operation of the development were estimated at 207 tCO2 and a £26,521 contribution was payable into Enfield's New Development Carbon Compensation Fund (NDCCF).

The report pack stated that employment and skills officers requested that one apprentice was taken on for the development project, that 25% of the labour for the development was recruited locally (from Enfield), with 10% of the material cost to be spent locally, and that an Employment and Training Strategy was completed and approved before the commencement of the build.

Former Garages, Adjacent to 33 and 27-32 Ivy Road, N14 4LP

The committee was also scheduled to discuss an outline planning application for the redevelopment of a site with the erection of buildings to provide nine dwellings, and provision of six parking spaces at the former garages, adjacent to 33 and 27-32 Ivy Road, N14 4LP.

The application, submitted by Mr D Birjandi of Ivogreen Investment Ltd, was recommended for approval, subject to conditions. The report pack stated that the Head of Planning and Building Control be granted delegated authority to finalise the wording of the conditions.

The report pack noted that the site has been identified as part of the Strategic Housing Land Availability assessment (SHLAA) as a potential site for residential development, and has been put forward by the council as part of the 'Small Sites' program of the Greater London Authority (GLA).

The report pack stated that the benefits of the scheme were summarised as follows:

• The proposal delivers much needed housing, with the addition of 9 high quality residential units of accommodation to add to the Borough's housing stock.
• The proposal provides a mix of units, including 2 larger 3 bed family homes with suitable amenity. The scheme supports the availability of choice in the market tenure.
• The proposal makes use of an underutilised site in an accessible location, bringing forward brownfield land in an established residential area.
• The development is acceptable in terms of its relationship to adjoining existing and proposed residential occupiers.
• The development does not have an unacceptable impact on local highway network or safety.

The report pack stated that 47 objections were received during the public consultation, with concerns raised including inadequate distance to other properties, impact to local ecology, excessive height, inadequate parking, increased flood risk and pollution, loss of light and privacy, noise nuisance, and that the proposal was out of character with the area.

The report pack stated that the Transport Planning Team raised no objection subject to conditions relating to cycle parking.

The report pack stated that the Urban Design Team found the scheme generally acceptable but needed to consider the location of the bin stores, the scale and massing of unit 6 and 7 against Ivy Road and increasing the size of the amenity area for one of the units.

The report pack stated that the Environmental Health Team raised no objection subject to conditions relating to dust management, non-road mobile machinery and contamination conditions.

The report pack stated that the Climate Action and Sustainability Team raised an objection as no Energy Statement had been submitted.

The report pack stated that the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) / Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) Highway Services raised no objection and were in support of the application.

Report of the Head of Planning and Building Control

The committee was scheduled to receive and note the covering report of the Head of Planning and Building Control, Karen Page. The purpose of the report was to advise members on process and update Members on the number of decisions made by the council as local planning authority. The report pack stated that, in accordance with delegated powers, 144 applications were determined between 21 May 2025 and 3 June 2025, of which 117 were granted and 27 refused.