Planning application · Harrow
PL/2887/25.
226 - 228 Kenton Road, Kenton, Harrow, HA3 8BZ
Full / Other Planning at 226 - 228 Kenton Road, Kenton, Harrow, HA3 8BZ, received 7 Nov 2025 — refused on 9 Mar 2026 (delegated, Chris Wentworth).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHarrow profile →
Refused
Outcome
9 Mar 2026
17 wks
Decision time
9 wks over the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
45
Documents
45 linked
—
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Harrow 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?
Demolition and redevelopment to provide two storey building with basement level and habitable roofspace comprising of 26 bed House of Multiple Occupancy (HMO)
Reference
PL/2887/25
Type
Full Planning Application
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
HA3 8BZ
Ward
Council
Received
7 Nov 2025
Validated
19 Dec 2025
Target date
13 Feb 2026
Decision date
9 Mar 2026
Decision route
Not recorded
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Reference
PL/2887/25
Type
Full Planning Application
Show all 16 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
HA3 8BZ
Ward
Council
Received
7 Nov 2025
Validated
19 Dec 2025
Target date
13 Feb 2026
Decision date
9 Mar 2026
Decision route
Not recorded
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Show all 10 rows
Documents open on the Harrow portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 9 Mar 2026, delegated decision by Chris Wentworth — 17 weeks from submission (9 over the 8-week target).
Timeline
Date
Event
7 Nov 2025
Application received
19 Dec 2025
Application validated
13 Feb 2026
Statutory target date
9 Mar 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Chris Wentworth
7 Nov 2025
Application received
19 Dec 2025
Application validated
13 Feb 2026
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
9 Mar 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Chris Wentworth
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
- Loss of office accommodation
The proposal has failed to provide any form of evidence, including details regarding all opportunities to re-let
the accommodation being fully explored, and evidence of suitable marketing for a period of at least 12
months, regarding the loss of office accommodation in this location. The proposal has therefore failed to
accord with Policy DM32 the Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and Policy LE1 within the
Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
2
- Over-intensification use of site
The proposed development, by reason of a high concentration of bedroom accommodation, the lack of any
communal areas on each floor with bedroom accommodation and poor quality external amenity space, would
result in an over intensive form of development on site to the detriment of neighbouring occupiers and future
occupiers of the proposed development. The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy
Framework (2024), Policy H16 of the London Plan (2021), Policy DM30 of the Development Management
Policies Local Plan (2013) and Policies GR1 and HO10 within the Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
3
- Basement Provision
The proposal has failed to provide sufficient information, in the form of a construction method statement, to
adequately assess the suitability of basement provision in this location. As such, the proposal is
therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy D10 of the London Plan (2021),
Policy DM1 of the Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and Policy GR4A of the Harrow
Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
4
- Flooding and Drainage
The proposal, by reason of insufficient information relating to flooding and drainage impacts, has failed to
demonstrate that the proposed development would result in a net reduction in flood risk, be resistant and
resilient to flooding and would not exacerbate the risk of flooding within the site or increase the risk and
consequences of flooding elsewhere. The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy
Framework (2024), Policies SI12 and SI13 of the London Plan (2021), Core Policy CS1 U of the Harrow Core
Strategy (2012), Policies DM9 and DM 10 of the Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and
Policies CN1 and CN3 within the Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
5
- Secure By Design
The proposed development would result in adverse amenity impacts for future occupiers of the development
through the provision of a poor quality internal layout, the lack of defensible space at ground floor level, lack of
building security measures throughout the building for occupants or any form of management plan which
would result in poor levels of security and safety for future residents and neighbouring occupiers.
The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies GG1, D4, D5
and H16 of the London Plan (2021), Policies DM1 and DM30 of the Harrow Local Plan (2013) and Policies
GR1 and HO10 within the Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
6
- External Amenity Space
The proposal, by reason of its very limited provision and poor quality external amenity space for 26 no.
residents, would result in a poor quality residential environment for future occupiers and would be contrary to
the high quality design aspirations of National Planning Policy Framework (2023), Policies D3 (D1) and (D11)
of The London Plan (2021), Core Policy CS1.B of The Harrow Core Strategy (2012), Policies DM1 and DM27
of the Harrow Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and Policies GR1 and HO10 within the
Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
1
- Loss of office accommodation
The proposal has failed to provide any form of evidence, including details regarding all opportunities to re-let
the accommodation being fully explored, and evidence of suitable marketing for a period of at least 12
months, regarding the loss of office accommodation in this location. The proposal has therefore failed to
accord with Policy DM32 the Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and Policy LE1 within the
Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
2
- Over-intensification use of site
The proposed development, by reason of a high concentration of bedroom accommodation, the lack of any
communal areas on each floor with bedroom accommodation and poor quality external amenity space, would
result in an over intensive form of development on site to the detriment of neighbouring occupiers and future
occupiers of the proposed development. The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy
Framework (2024), Policy H16 of the London Plan (2021), Policy DM30 of the Development Management
Policies Local Plan (2013) and Policies GR1 and HO10 within the Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
3
- Basement Provision
The proposal has failed to provide sufficient information, in the form of a construction method statement, to
adequately assess the suitability of basement provision in this location. As such, the proposal is
therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy D10 of the London Plan (2021),
Policy DM1 of the Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and Policy GR4A of the Harrow
Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
Show all 6 rows
4
- Flooding and Drainage
The proposal, by reason of insufficient information relating to flooding and drainage impacts, has failed to
demonstrate that the proposed development would result in a net reduction in flood risk, be resistant and
resilient to flooding and would not exacerbate the risk of flooding within the site or increase the risk and
consequences of flooding elsewhere. The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy
Framework (2024), Policies SI12 and SI13 of the London Plan (2021), Core Policy CS1 U of the Harrow Core
Strategy (2012), Policies DM9 and DM 10 of the Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and
Policies CN1 and CN3 within the Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
5
- Secure By Design
The proposed development would result in adverse amenity impacts for future occupiers of the development
through the provision of a poor quality internal layout, the lack of defensible space at ground floor level, lack of
building security measures throughout the building for occupants or any form of management plan which
would result in poor levels of security and safety for future residents and neighbouring occupiers.
The proposal is therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policies GG1, D4, D5
and H16 of the London Plan (2021), Policies DM1 and DM30 of the Harrow Local Plan (2013) and Policies
GR1 and HO10 within the Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
6
- External Amenity Space
The proposal, by reason of its very limited provision and poor quality external amenity space for 26 no.
residents, would result in a poor quality residential environment for future occupiers and would be contrary to
the high quality design aspirations of National Planning Policy Framework (2023), Policies D3 (D1) and (D11)
of The London Plan (2021), Core Policy CS1.B of The Harrow Core Strategy (2012), Policies DM1 and DM27
of the Harrow Development Management Policies Local Plan (2013) and Policies GR1 and HO10 within the
Harrow Local Plan (2021-2041) (Draft).
Policies cited
H16DM30NPPFD10DM1GR4ASI12SI13DM9DM10GG1D4D5DM27
Public response
Comment counts were not captured for this application.
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.