Planning application · Ealing
242254FUL.
Full / Other Planning at 4-6 Bond Street Ealing W5 5AA, received 7 Jun 2024 — refused on 16 Aug 2024 (delegated, Christopher Neelands).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEaling profile →
Refused
Outcome
16 Aug 2024
10 wks
Decision time
2 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
9
Documents
9 linked
1
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Ealing 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?
Conversion of first, second and third floors from 3 self-contained residential flats to 6 self-contained residential flats; extensions and external alterations to rear elevation; cycle storage and refuse storage
Reference
242254FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
7 Jun 2024
Validated
28 Jun 2024
Target date
23 Aug 2024
Decision date
16 Aug 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
242254FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
Ward
Council
Received
7 Jun 2024
Validated
28 Jun 2024
Target date
23 Aug 2024
Decision date
16 Aug 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Ealing portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 16 Aug 2024, delegated decision by Christopher Neelands — 10 weeks from submission (2 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
7 Jun 2024
Application received
28 Jun 2024
Application validated
23 Aug 2024
Statutory target date
16 Aug 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Christopher Neelands
7 Jun 2024
Application received
28 Jun 2024
Application validated
23 Aug 2024
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
16 Aug 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Christopher Neelands
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, by reason of its design, scale, massing, and
bulk, would result in an unsympathetic and incongruous form of development. It
would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Ealing
Green Conservation and the terrace which is recognised for its façade and group
value. As such, the proposal would be contrary to Policies D3, D4 and HC1 of the
London Plan (2021) and 7.4, 7B, and 7C of the Ealing Development Management
DPD (2013) and the NPPF (2023).
2
The proposed development, by reason of Units 1 and 2 not meeting the
minimum space standards, the single bedrooms of these units failing to meet the
minimum width requirements, and the living, dining, and kitchen areas also
falling short of the required space standards, along with the absence of private
amenity space for all proposed units, would result in substandard accommodation
negatively affecting the living conditions of future occupants. As such, the
proposal is contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021), Policy 3.5 of the
Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), and the Housing Design Standards
LPG (2023).
3
The proposed development, by reason of the insufficient number of cycle
parking spaces, fails to adequately support and encourage cycling. As such, it is
contrary to Policy T6 of the London Plan (2021).
1
The proposed development, by reason of its design, scale, massing, and
bulk, would result in an unsympathetic and incongruous form of development. It
would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Ealing
Green Conservation and the terrace which is recognised for its façade and group
value. As such, the proposal would be contrary to Policies D3, D4 and HC1 of the
London Plan (2021) and 7.4, 7B, and 7C of the Ealing Development Management
DPD (2013) and the NPPF (2023).
2
The proposed development, by reason of Units 1 and 2 not meeting the
minimum space standards, the single bedrooms of these units failing to meet the
minimum width requirements, and the living, dining, and kitchen areas also
falling short of the required space standards, along with the absence of private
amenity space for all proposed units, would result in substandard accommodation
negatively affecting the living conditions of future occupants. As such, the
proposal is contrary to Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021), Policy 3.5 of the
Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), and the Housing Design Standards
LPG (2023).
3
The proposed development, by reason of the insufficient number of cycle
parking spaces, fails to adequately support and encourage cycling. As such, it is
contrary to Policy T6 of the London Plan (2021).
Policies cited
D3D4HC1NPPFD6Ealing Development Management DPD 3.5T6
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
2
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
2
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.