Burnt Farm Ride, EN2 9DY

1. 1.The retrospective change of use of agricultural land to a scaffolding storage yard, as implemented and operating on the site, together with the associated hardstanding, canopy structure, external storage areas and servicing activity which facilitate that use, constitutes inappropriate development within the Metropolitan Green Belt. By reason of the scale, siting, bulk, height, footprint and visual presence of the development, together with the associated activity and storage generated by the use, the development has resulted in substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt and conflicts with the purposes of including land within it. No Very Special Circumstances have been demonstrated that clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and other identified harm. The development is therefore contrary to Chapter 13 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2026), Policy G2 of the London Plan (2021), Policy CP33 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), and Policies DMD82 and DMD89 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014).
2. 2.The development has resulted in the urbanisation of previously open agricultural land through the introduction of extensive hardstanding, scaffolding storage, ancillary structures and associated commercial activity. By reason of its siting, scale, bulk, appearance and operational characteristics, the development has caused harm to the rural character, appearance and agricultural setting of the site and surrounding area and has resulted in the unjustified loss of agricultural land and green space. The development is therefore contrary to Chapters 12 and 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2026), Policy G1 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CP30 and CP33 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), and Policies DMD23, DMD37, DMD84, DMD85, DMD88 and DMD89 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014).
3. 3.In the absence of a robust Transport Assessment and sufficient information relating to vehicle movements, parking, cycle parking, servicing, deliveries and pedestrian access arrangements, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the development, as carried out, would not give rise to unacceptable impacts on highway safety, the operation and capacity of the local highway network, the adjacent public bridleway, or the amenities of neighbouring occupiers through noise and disturbance associated with the use. The proposal is therefore contrary to Chapter 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2026), Policies T2, T4, T5 and T6 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CP24 and CP25 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), and Policies DMD23, DMD45, DMD47, DMD48 and DMD68 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014).
4. 4.The applicant has failed to provide an adequate Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment based on a lawful and robust baseline position and has failed to demonstrate that the development, as carried out, achieves the mandatory 10% Biodiversity Net Gain required by legislation and policy. Furthermore, insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that adequate ecological enhancement measures have been secured to compensate for the loss of habitat and green space associated with the development and to secure long-term biodiversity benefits. The development is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2026), Policy G6 of the London Plan (2021), Policy CP36 of the Enfield Core Strategy (2010), and Policies DMD78, DMD79, DMD81 and DMD85 of the Enfield Development Management Document (2014).

From the council's decision notice.

Postcode

EN2 9DY

Application type

Full planning permission