Planning application · Brent
26/0815.
Shri Sanatan Hindu Mandir, Ealing Road, Wembley, HA0 4TA
Full / Other Planning at Shri Sanatan Hindu Mandir, Ealing Road, Wembley, HA0 4TA, received 30 Mar 2026 — refused on 22 May 2026 (delegated, Jeanne Gleize).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationBrent profile →
Refused
Outcome
22 May 2026
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
14
Documents
14 linked
0
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Brent planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Proposed three storey block to accommodate the installation of new toilets, store room and security, training and caretaker rooms to the rear north east corner of the Temple.
Reference
26/0815
Type
Full Planning Permission
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
HA0 4TA
Ward
Council
Received
30 Mar 2026
Target date
25 May 2026
Decision date
22 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Reference
26/0815
Type
Full Planning Permission
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
HA0 4TA
Ward
Council
Received
30 Mar 2026
Target date
25 May 2026
Decision date
22 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decided
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
Documents open on the Brent portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 22 May 2026, delegated decision by Jeanne Gleize — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
30 Mar 2026
Application received
25 May 2026
Statutory target date
22 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Jeanne Gleize
30 Mar 2026
Application received
25 May 2026
Statutory target date
22 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Jeanne Gleize
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, by reason of its excessive height, scale and siting in close proximity
to the northern boundary, would result in an overbearing form of development that would give rise
to a detrimental sense of enclosure to the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties. In
addition, the proposed first and second floor rear-facing windows would result in harmful
overlooking and an unacceptable loss of privacy to this neighbouring garden. The proposal is
therefore contrary to Policy DMP1 of the Brent Local Plan (2019–2041) and Brent's SPD1.
2
The proposed layout, including the provision of caretaker accommodation and an additional
unidentified room at upper floor levels, fails to adequately demonstrate that the use would remain
ancillary to the primary function of the site. The internal arrangement, including the mix of
semi-private and publicly accessible spaces on the same floors and the lack of clarity regarding
the nature and occupation of the accommodation, would result in substandard living conditions
and raises concerns regarding potential independent residential use. As such, the proposal is
contrary to Policy DMP1 of the Brent Local Plan (2019–2041).
1
The proposed development, by reason of its excessive height, scale and siting in close proximity
to the northern boundary, would result in an overbearing form of development that would give rise
to a detrimental sense of enclosure to the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties. In
addition, the proposed first and second floor rear-facing windows would result in harmful
overlooking and an unacceptable loss of privacy to this neighbouring garden. The proposal is
therefore contrary to Policy DMP1 of the Brent Local Plan (2019–2041) and Brent's SPD1.
2
The proposed layout, including the provision of caretaker accommodation and an additional
unidentified room at upper floor levels, fails to adequately demonstrate that the use would remain
ancillary to the primary function of the site. The internal arrangement, including the mix of
semi-private and publicly accessible spaces on the same floors and the lack of clarity regarding
the nature and occupation of the accommodation, would result in substandard living conditions
and raises concerns regarding potential independent residential use. As such, the proposal is
contrary to Policy DMP1 of the Brent Local Plan (2019–2041).
Policies cited
DMP1
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.