Planning application · Ealing
251352FUL.
14 The Avenue West Ealing W13 8PH
Full / Other Planning at 14 The Avenue West Ealing W13 8PH, received 31 Mar 2025 — refused on 27 Feb 2026 (delegated, Pinderpal Rathor).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEaling profile →
Refused
Outcome
27 Feb 2026
48 wks
Decision time
40 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
21
Documents
21 linked
8
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?
Change of use of existing commercial with 1 no. ground floor flat and 1no. 2 bed flat at first floor (following demolition of existing), with associated amenity and cycle store
Reference
251352FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W13 8PH
Ward
Council
Received
31 Mar 2025
Validated
23 Apr 2025
Target date
18 Jun 2025
Decision date
27 Feb 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
251352FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W13 8PH
Ward
Council
Received
31 Mar 2025
Validated
23 Apr 2025
Target date
18 Jun 2025
Decision date
27 Feb 2026
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 27 Feb 2026, delegated decision by Pinderpal Rathor — 48 weeks from submission (40 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
31 Mar 2025
Application received
23 Apr 2025
Application validated
18 Jun 2025
Statutory target date
27 Feb 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Pinderpal Rathor
31 Mar 2025
Application received
23 Apr 2025
Application validated
18 Jun 2025
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
27 Feb 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Pinderpal Rathor
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed two storey rear extension, by reason of its scale, mass, bulk,
design and siting, would result in an overbearing and unneighbourly form of
development, that would create an increased sense of enclosure and harm the
visual amenities of No. 16 The Avenue. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policy
7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Policy DAA of
Ealing's draft new Local Plan (Regulation 22).
2
The proposed first floor flat, by reason of their insufficient flat size would
result in poor quality of accommodation for the future occupants, failing to
comply with the objectives of the policy D6 of the London Plan (2021), policies
3.5 and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), Housing Design
Standards LPG (2023) and Ealing draft Local Plan (2024).
3
The proposed refuse storage, by way of its size, would result in a refuse
space unable to accord with the requirements of policy SI8 of the London Plan
(2021)
1
The proposed two storey rear extension, by reason of its scale, mass, bulk,
design and siting, would result in an overbearing and unneighbourly form of
development, that would create an increased sense of enclosure and harm the
visual amenities of No. 16 The Avenue. As such, the proposal is contrary to Policy
7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) and Policy DAA of
Ealing's draft new Local Plan (Regulation 22).
2
The proposed first floor flat, by reason of their insufficient flat size would
result in poor quality of accommodation for the future occupants, failing to
comply with the objectives of the policy D6 of the London Plan (2021), policies
3.5 and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), Housing Design
Standards LPG (2023) and Ealing draft Local Plan (2024).
3
The proposed refuse storage, by way of its size, would result in a refuse
space unable to accord with the requirements of policy SI8 of the London Plan
(2021)
Policies cited
D6SI8
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
8
In support
0
Total comments
8
Objections
8
In support
0
Total comments
8
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent as stated on the application
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent as stated on the application
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.