Planning application · Ealing
252831FUL.
Rear Of 150 Broadway West Ealing W13 0TL
Full / Other Planning at Rear Of 150 Broadway West Ealing W13 0TL, received 23 Jul 2025 — refused on 16 Oct 2025 (delegated, Chenhao Liu).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEaling profile →
Refused
Outcome
16 Oct 2025
12 wks
Decision time
4 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
17
Documents
17 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?
Construction of a five storey residential building, comprising one ground/first floor maisonette with three self-contained flats above; accessed from Singapore Road; associated cycle and refuse storage
Reference
252831FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W13 0TL
Ward
Council
Received
23 Jul 2025
Validated
21 Aug 2025
Target date
16 Oct 2025
Decision date
16 Oct 2025
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
252831FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W13 0TL
Ward
Council
Received
23 Jul 2025
Validated
21 Aug 2025
Target date
16 Oct 2025
Decision date
16 Oct 2025
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 Oct 2025, delegated decision by Chenhao Liu — 12 weeks from submission (4 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
23 Jul 2025
Application received
21 Aug 2025
Application validated
16 Oct 2025
Statutory target date
16 Oct 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Chenhao Liu
23 Jul 2025
Application received
21 Aug 2025
Application validated
16 Oct 2025
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
16 Oct 2025
Delegated decision: Refused · Chenhao Liu
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed development, by reason of its flat roof form, extensive use of
metal cladding on the front elevation, and overhanging rear staircase, would
result in a visually discordant and incoherent addition to the streetscape, to the
detriment of character of the area. As such, the development is contrary to
Policies D3 and D4 of the London Plan 2021, and Policies 7B and 7.4 of the Ealing
Development Management DPD (2013).
2
The proposed development, by reason of the long, narrow and illegible
entrance, would fail to demonstrate compliance with inclusive design principles by
providing safe and accessible entrances for existing and future occupants.
Furthermore, the plans do not clearly demonstrate how upper-floor staircases
would be accessed, and no justification has been provided for the lack of a more
welcoming and accessible entrance. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy
D5 of the London Plan 2021.
3
The proposed development, by reason of its scale, siting and proximity to
neighbouring residential properties, fails to demonstrate that it would not result
in unacceptable loss of daylight or increased sense of enclosure to habitable
rooms within properties along Broadway. Furthermore, the proposed rear
bedroom windows would result in direct overlooking of existing habitable rooms
on the site. As such, the proposal is contrary to policies D3 and D6 of the London
Plan (2021) and policy 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013).
4
The proposed development fails to provide fit for purpose, secure, and
well-located cycle parking and refuse storage. As such, it is contrary to the
requirements of Policy T5 and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021).
5
Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate the extent of
demolition or how the remaining ground floor commercial floorspace would
remain functional to support the continued operation of the existing business.
Furthermore, the proposal would result in the loss of the existing rear service
yard, with no evidence submitted to demonstrate how deliveries and servicing
would be managed for the existing ground floor commercial unit. As such, the
proposal is considered to be contrary to Policies SD7 and T7 of the London Plan
2021.
1
The proposed development, by reason of its flat roof form, extensive use of
metal cladding on the front elevation, and overhanging rear staircase, would
result in a visually discordant and incoherent addition to the streetscape, to the
detriment of character of the area. As such, the development is contrary to
Policies D3 and D4 of the London Plan 2021, and Policies 7B and 7.4 of the Ealing
Development Management DPD (2013).
2
The proposed development, by reason of the long, narrow and illegible
entrance, would fail to demonstrate compliance with inclusive design principles by
providing safe and accessible entrances for existing and future occupants.
Furthermore, the plans do not clearly demonstrate how upper-floor staircases
would be accessed, and no justification has been provided for the lack of a more
welcoming and accessible entrance. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy
D5 of the London Plan 2021.
3
The proposed development, by reason of its scale, siting and proximity to
neighbouring residential properties, fails to demonstrate that it would not result
in unacceptable loss of daylight or increased sense of enclosure to habitable
rooms within properties along Broadway. Furthermore, the proposed rear
bedroom windows would result in direct overlooking of existing habitable rooms
on the site. As such, the proposal is contrary to policies D3 and D6 of the London
Plan (2021) and policy 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013).
Show all 5 rows
4
The proposed development fails to provide fit for purpose, secure, and
well-located cycle parking and refuse storage. As such, it is contrary to the
requirements of Policy T5 and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021).
5
Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate the extent of
demolition or how the remaining ground floor commercial floorspace would
remain functional to support the continued operation of the existing business.
Furthermore, the proposal would result in the loss of the existing rear service
yard, with no evidence submitted to demonstrate how deliveries and servicing
would be managed for the existing ground floor commercial unit. As such, the
proposal is considered to be contrary to Policies SD7 and T7 of the London Plan
2021.
Policies cited
D3D4Ealing Development Management DPD 7.4D5D6SD7T7
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.