Planning Atlas
Planning AtlasEalingNortholt West End ward254364FUL
Planning application · Ealing

254364FUL.

79 Rushdene Crescent Northolt UB5 6NG

Full / Other Planning at 79 Rushdene Crescent Northolt UB5 6NG, received 18 Nov 2025 — refused on 30 Mar 2026 (delegated, Georgina Heale).

EalingNortholt West EndUB5 6NG254364FUL
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEaling profile →
Refused
Outcome
30 Mar 2026
19 wks
Decision time
11 wks over the 8-week target
Conditions
not captured
10
Documents
10 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?

Formation of vehicular crossover; landscaping

Reference
254364FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
UB5 6NG
Council
Received
18 Nov 2025
Target date
13 Jan 2026
Decision date
30 Mar 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Reference
254364FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
UB5 6NG
Council
Received
18 Nov 2025
Target date
13 Jan 2026
Decision date
30 Mar 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Documents

What was filed?

Document
Published
View
DECISION NOTICE
30 Mar 2026
OFFICERS REPORT
30 Mar 2026
NEIGHBOUR SITE NOTICE
3 Dec 2025
254364FULSM.PDF
3 Dec 2025
APPLICATIONFORMREDACTED
18 Nov 2025
LOCATIONPLAN
18 Nov 2025
SITE PLAN
18 Nov 2025
TREE SURVEY
18 Nov 2025
ALL PLANS
18 Nov 2025
PLANNING STATEMENT
18 Nov 2025
DECISION NOTICE
30 Mar 2026
OFFICERS REPORT
30 Mar 2026
NEIGHBOUR SITE NOTICE
3 Dec 2025
Show all 10 rows
254364FULSM.PDF
3 Dec 2025
APPLICATIONFORMREDACTED
18 Nov 2025
LOCATIONPLAN
18 Nov 2025
SITE PLAN
18 Nov 2025
TREE SURVEY
18 Nov 2025
ALL PLANS
18 Nov 2025
PLANNING STATEMENT
18 Nov 2025

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 30 Mar 2026, delegated decision by Georgina Heale — 19 weeks from submission (11 over the 8-week target).

Timeline

Date
Event
18 Nov 2025
Application received
13 Jan 2026
Statutory target date
30 Mar 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Georgina Heale
18 Nov 2025
Application received
13 Jan 2026
Statutory target date
30 Mar 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Georgina Heale

Why it was refused

Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed crossover, by reason of its length over the existing grass verge, would result in a significant loss of soft open green space fronting the site and would result in a form of intrusive development of the subject site which would adversely affect the character of the original dwellinghouse as well as the character of the area and the visual amenity of the street scene. As such, the proposed development would fail to adhere to the Council's Vehicle Crossovers: Application Pack for Residents (2021), policies D3, D6, D8, T3 and T4 of the London Plan (2021), 5.10, 7A, 7.4 and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), policy 1.1 of the Ealing Local Development Framework - Adopted (Core) Strategy (2012) and policy DAA of Ealing's Draft New Local Plan (2022).
2
The proposed vehicular crossover as illustrated on drawing A0103 (Proposed Parking Provisions) by reason of exceeding the 2.4m standard width specification for a single crossover would result in an incongruous feature within the street scene, harming visual amenity and setting a harmful precedent for future development. By way of its interruption of the footway for a width of 2.89m, it would also present a safety risk to pedestrians and set a precedent for other such crossovers having a cumulative safety impact and loss of distinct public and private space within the street scene, harming both safety and amenity. As such, the proposal is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2025), policies G5, T3 and T4 of the London Plan (2021), policies 5.10 and 7A of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), The Vehicle Crossovers: Application Pack for Residents (2021).
1
The proposed crossover, by reason of its length over the existing grass verge, would result in a significant loss of soft open green space fronting the site and would result in a form of intrusive development of the subject site which would adversely affect the character of the original dwellinghouse as well as the character of the area and the visual amenity of the street scene. As such, the proposed development would fail to adhere to the Council's Vehicle Crossovers: Application Pack for Residents (2021), policies D3, D6, D8, T3 and T4 of the London Plan (2021), 5.10, 7A, 7.4 and 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), policy 1.1 of the Ealing Local Development Framework - Adopted (Core) Strategy (2012) and policy DAA of Ealing's Draft New Local Plan (2022).
2
The proposed vehicular crossover as illustrated on drawing A0103 (Proposed Parking Provisions) by reason of exceeding the 2.4m standard width specification for a single crossover would result in an incongruous feature within the street scene, harming visual amenity and setting a harmful precedent for future development. By way of its interruption of the footway for a width of 2.89m, it would also present a safety risk to pedestrians and set a precedent for other such crossovers having a cumulative safety impact and loss of distinct public and private space within the street scene, harming both safety and amenity. As such, the proposal is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2025), policies G5, T3 and T4 of the London Plan (2021), policies 5.10 and 7A of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), The Vehicle Crossovers: Application Pack for Residents (2021).
Policies cited
D3D6D8T3T4Ealing Local Development Framework 1.1G5NPPF

Public response

Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
2
Objections
0
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.