Planning application · Ealing
243026HH.
30 Mulgrave Road Ealing W5 1LE
Householder at 30 Mulgrave Road Ealing W5 1LE, received 6 Aug 2024 — refused on 16 Sep 2024 (delegated, Patrick Franklin).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEaling profile →
Refused
Outcome
16 Sep 2024
6 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 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?
Installation of glass canopy to rear elevation.
Reference
243026HH
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W5 1LE
Ward
Council
Received
6 Aug 2024
Target date
1 Oct 2024
Decision date
16 Sep 2024
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
243026HH
Type
Householder
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W5 1LE
Ward
Council
Received
6 Aug 2024
Target date
1 Oct 2024
Decision date
16 Sep 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 Sep 2024, delegated decision by Patrick Franklin — 6 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
6 Aug 2024
Application received
1 Oct 2024
Statutory target date
16 Sep 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Patrick Franklin
6 Aug 2024
Application received
1 Oct 2024
Statutory target date
16 Sep 2024
Delegated decision: Refused · Patrick Franklin
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, by reason of its combined depth into the rear
garden (6.9m, or 7.4m if the canopy is 3m deep as indicated on the proposed
block plan), would fail to appear subservient to the main dwellinghouse and
would fail to be in keeping with the development patterns in the area. The
proposal does not comply with the NPPF (2023), Policies D3 and D4 of the London
Plan (2021), Policies 7.4 and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD
(2013) and Policy DAA of the Ealing Local Plan (Reg 19) (2024).
2
The proposed development by reason of its combined depth into the rear
garden, proximity to the boundary, the height, and the fact that the adjoining
neighbour is north of the application site, would result in a sense of enclosure for
the neighbour to the north, a loss of outlook, and potentially a loss of daylight
and direct sunlight. The proposal does not comply with Policy D6 of the London
Plan (2021), Policies 7A and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD
(2013), and Policy DAA of the Ealing Local Plan (Reg 19) (2024).
1
The proposed development, by reason of its combined depth into the rear
garden (6.9m, or 7.4m if the canopy is 3m deep as indicated on the proposed
block plan), would fail to appear subservient to the main dwellinghouse and
would fail to be in keeping with the development patterns in the area. The
proposal does not comply with the NPPF (2023), Policies D3 and D4 of the London
Plan (2021), Policies 7.4 and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD
(2013) and Policy DAA of the Ealing Local Plan (Reg 19) (2024).
2
The proposed development by reason of its combined depth into the rear
garden, proximity to the boundary, the height, and the fact that the adjoining
neighbour is north of the application site, would result in a sense of enclosure for
the neighbour to the north, a loss of outlook, and potentially a loss of daylight
and direct sunlight. The proposal does not comply with Policy D6 of the London
Plan (2021), Policies 7A and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD
(2013), and Policy DAA of the Ealing Local Plan (Reg 19) (2024).
Policies cited
D3D4NPPFD6
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.