Planning application · Ealing
254683FUL.
185 Northfield Avenue West Ealing W13 9QU
Full / Other Planning at 185 Northfield Avenue West Ealing W13 9QU, received 15 Dec 2025 — refused on 9 Feb 2026 (delegated, Imogen Botterill-Downs).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEaling profile →
Refused
Outcome
9 Feb 2026
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
9
Documents
9 linked
21
Objections
1 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 the ground-floor from C4 (HMO) to Restaurant (Class E). Use of first and second floor as C4 (HMO). Two storey rear/side infill extension with an extension of the roof to create habitable space and installation of one roof light to the side roofslope.
Reference
254683FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W13 9QU
Ward
Council
Received
15 Dec 2025
Target date
9 Feb 2026
Decision date
9 Feb 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
254683FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W13 9QU
Ward
Council
Received
15 Dec 2025
Target date
9 Feb 2026
Decision date
9 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 9 Feb 2026, delegated decision by Imogen Botterill-Downs — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
15 Dec 2025
Application received
9 Feb 2026
Statutory target date
9 Feb 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Imogen Botterill-Downs
15 Dec 2025
Application received
9 Feb 2026
Statutory target date
9 Feb 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Imogen Botterill-Downs
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed extensions, by way of their setting, size, and design, would
fail to preserve or enhance the character and setting of the Lammas Park
Conservation Area and corresponding entrance of Lammas Park. Cumulatively,
the proposed extensions would significantly change the nature of the host
building and would not appear sympathetic to the surrounding Conservation Area.
The loss of the original hipped roof and rear balcony element, in conjunction with
the proposed changes to the roof profile will result in an adverse impact to the
character and visual amenity of the application site.
As such, the proposal is contrary to policies HC1, D3 and D4 of the London Plan
(2021), policies 7B,7C and 7.4 of the Ealing Development Management DPD
(2013).
2
The proposed HMO, by way of its internal layout and external site
arrangement, would fail to provide adequate living conditions to the prospective
occupants. Resulting in poor outlook to rooms 4 and 6 within the loft, which
would only benefit from rooflights within the front and rear roofslopes.
Additionally, the proposed kitchen/dining room would host an undersized area,
failing to comply with Ealing's HMO Space Standards.
The proposal would also fail to provide adequate access to outdoor amenity space
or internal amenity space such as a living room for the occupants, failing to
provide access to the rear garden via the side of the property.
As such, the proposal fails to comply with policies D3 and D6 of the London Plan
(2021), and policy 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) as
well as the Ealing Council HMO Space Standards and HMO Guidance.
3
The proposed development, by way of its lack of refuse provision, storage
location and insufficient information regarding the collection arrangement, would
fail to provide adequate refuse storage arrangements for both the restaurant and
the HMO. The proposed on-site refuse storage provision falls short of the
minimum requirements for residential uses as stated in the The Ealing Council
Refuse Requirements.
As such, proposed refuse arrangement fails to comply with Policy SI 8 of the
London Plan (2021).
1
The proposed extensions, by way of their setting, size, and design, would
fail to preserve or enhance the character and setting of the Lammas Park
Conservation Area and corresponding entrance of Lammas Park. Cumulatively,
the proposed extensions would significantly change the nature of the host
building and would not appear sympathetic to the surrounding Conservation Area.
The loss of the original hipped roof and rear balcony element, in conjunction with
the proposed changes to the roof profile will result in an adverse impact to the
character and visual amenity of the application site.
As such, the proposal is contrary to policies HC1, D3 and D4 of the London Plan
(2021), policies 7B,7C and 7.4 of the Ealing Development Management DPD
(2013).
2
The proposed HMO, by way of its internal layout and external site
arrangement, would fail to provide adequate living conditions to the prospective
occupants. Resulting in poor outlook to rooms 4 and 6 within the loft, which
would only benefit from rooflights within the front and rear roofslopes.
Additionally, the proposed kitchen/dining room would host an undersized area,
failing to comply with Ealing's HMO Space Standards.
The proposal would also fail to provide adequate access to outdoor amenity space
or internal amenity space such as a living room for the occupants, failing to
provide access to the rear garden via the side of the property.
As such, the proposal fails to comply with policies D3 and D6 of the London Plan
(2021), and policy 7B of the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013) as
well as the Ealing Council HMO Space Standards and HMO Guidance.
3
The proposed development, by way of its lack of refuse provision, storage
location and insufficient information regarding the collection arrangement, would
fail to provide adequate refuse storage arrangements for both the restaurant and
the HMO. The proposed on-site refuse storage provision falls short of the
minimum requirements for residential uses as stated in the The Ealing Council
Refuse Requirements.
As such, proposed refuse arrangement fails to comply with Policy SI 8 of the
London Plan (2021).
Policies cited
HC1D3D4Ealing Development Management DPD 7.4D6SI8
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
21
In support
1
Total comments
22
Objections
21
In support
1
Total comments
22
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.