Planning application · Ealing
254851FUL.
364 Uxbridge Road Acton W3 9SL
Full / Other Planning at 364 Uxbridge Road Acton W3 9SL, received 31 Dec 2025 — refused on 24 Mar 2026 (delegated, Hitarthi Patel).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationEaling profile →
Refused
Outcome
24 Mar 2026
12 wks
Decision time
4 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
8
Documents
8 linked
1
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?
Alterations to existing flats including rear roof extension to main roofslope, extending over outrigger; pitched roof extension above first floor flat (side/rear); installation of two front rooflights; removal of existing chimney stack
Reference
254851FUL
Type
Full Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W3 9SL
Ward
Council
Received
31 Dec 2025
Validated
3 Feb 2026
Target date
31 Mar 2026
Decision date
24 Mar 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Refused
Council register
Reference
254851FUL
Type
Full Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
W3 9SL
Ward
Council
Received
31 Dec 2025
Validated
3 Feb 2026
Target date
31 Mar 2026
Decision date
24 Mar 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 24 Mar 2026, delegated decision by Hitarthi Patel — 12 weeks from submission (4 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
31 Dec 2025
Application received
3 Feb 2026
Application validated
31 Mar 2026
Statutory target date
24 Mar 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Hitarthi Patel
31 Dec 2025
Application received
3 Feb 2026
Application validated
31 Mar 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
24 Mar 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Hitarthi Patel
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
The proposed scheme is considered to cause harm to the Creffield
Conservation Area. The proposed roof alterations, including the introduction of a
gable ended pitched roof, removal of chimney stacks, and full width rear dormer,
would result in a roof form that is uncharacteristic of buildings within the Creffield
Conservation Area and would fail to preserve or enhance its character or
appearance. The cumulative scale, form and visual impact of the proposed
alterations would materially erode the architectural integrity of the host building,
identified by the applicant as potentially contributing to the conservation area as
a non designated heritage asset. As such, the proposal is contrary to Paragraphs
199-203 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2025), Policies D3, D4 and
HC1 of the London Plan (2021), and Policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing
Development Management DPD (2013) and Policy 1.2 of the Ealing Core Strategy
(2012).
2
The proposed scheme fails to demonstrate acceptable quality of
accommodation. The proposed alterations to the roof structure introduce new
roof forms and internal volumetric changes without providing sufficient evidence
to demonstrate that daylight, headroom, and internal functionality within the
existing upper floor accommodation would be maintained or improved. In the
absence of supporting information, the proposal fails to demonstrate compliance
with the requirements for high quality internal environments as required by Policy
D6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy 7B of the Ealing Development
Management DPD (2013).
1
The proposed scheme is considered to cause harm to the Creffield
Conservation Area. The proposed roof alterations, including the introduction of a
gable ended pitched roof, removal of chimney stacks, and full width rear dormer,
would result in a roof form that is uncharacteristic of buildings within the Creffield
Conservation Area and would fail to preserve or enhance its character or
appearance. The cumulative scale, form and visual impact of the proposed
alterations would materially erode the architectural integrity of the host building,
identified by the applicant as potentially contributing to the conservation area as
a non designated heritage asset. As such, the proposal is contrary to Paragraphs
199-203 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2025), Policies D3, D4 and
HC1 of the London Plan (2021), and Policies 7.4, 7B and 7C of the Ealing
Development Management DPD (2013) and Policy 1.2 of the Ealing Core Strategy
(2012).
2
The proposed scheme fails to demonstrate acceptable quality of
accommodation. The proposed alterations to the roof structure introduce new
roof forms and internal volumetric changes without providing sufficient evidence
to demonstrate that daylight, headroom, and internal functionality within the
existing upper floor accommodation would be maintained or improved. In the
absence of supporting information, the proposal fails to demonstrate compliance
with the requirements for high quality internal environments as required by Policy
D6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy 7B of the Ealing Development
Management DPD (2013).
Policies cited
D3D4HC1Ealing Core Strategy 1.2NPPFD6
Public response
Measure
Count
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
Objections
1
In support
0
Total comments
1
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.