Four-storey community building at Little Trainers Playgroup and Hazel Road Community Centre, 26 Hazel Road and Harriet Tubman House, 28 Hazel Road
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Brent Planning Committee on 11 Feb 2026.
What was proposed
The application proposed demolishing the existing buildings and erecting a four-storey training centre and community hall with terraces, cycle parking and landscaping.
“Document Imaged DocRepF Ref: 25/0041Page1of37 COMMITTEE REPORT Planning Committee on11 February, 2026 Item No04 Case Number25/0041 SITE INFORMATION RECEIVED7 January, 2025 WARDQueens Park PLANNING AREABrent Connects Harlesden LOCATIONLittle Trainers Playgroup and Hazel Road Community Centre, 26 Hazel Road and Harriet Tubman House, 28 Hazel Road, London, NW10 5PP PROPOSAL Demolition of all existing buildings and structures and erection of 4 storey mixed-use building…”
“PROPOSAL IN DETAIL Demolition of all existing buildings and structures and erection of 4 storey mixed-use building comprising of training centre and community hall uses (Use Classes F1/F2), with roof and rear first floor terraces, associated cycle parking, refuse storage, landscaping and other associated and ancillary works. EXISTING The site contains two, separate two-storey buildings located on the southern side of Hazel Road.”
Officer report
Planning history and consultation
There was no relevant site history; consultation produced 134 objections, 10 supporting comments and two neutral comments.
“RELEVANT SITE HISTORY None CONSULTATIONS Public consultation responses Public consultation was initially carried out on 16th January 2025 with 55 addresses sent consultation letters on the proposal. Subsequent re-consultation was carried out on 10th June 2025 highlighting that a revised heritage statement was submitted.”
“An initial site notice was also placed up outside of the application site on the 22.01.2025, an initial press notice on the 23.01.2025 and a further site notice was placed up outside of the application site on the 06.08.2025 in tandem with a further public consultation following the publication of a revised heritage statement and an amendment to update the site address. A revised press notice was also issued for the application on the 14.08.2205 .”
Officer report
What members discussed
Members debated the building’s scale, heritage significance, community access, construction effects, public realm, terrace overlooking, transport and future management.
“The Chair questioned how the heritage significance scoring undertaken by officers compared with the views held by local groups. In addition, the Chair queried why officers were confident that the scoring before the Committee represented the correct assessment, noting that this would affect the balance between public benefits and heritage harm.”
“McDonagh (Development Management Service Manager) reassured members that conditions would be imposed regarding the use of the building, including a community access plan and an operational management plan. It was confirmed that any future change of use would require a further planning application, which would be assessed against the planning policies in force at the time.”
Minutes
The vote and decision
The committee granted permission subject to the legal agreement, conditions and informatives, adding a requirement preventing demolition before a binding construction contract.
“Having consider the application, the Committee RESOLVED to grant planning permission subject to:”
“That no demolition of Harriett Tubman House should take place until a binding contract has been entered into for the demolition and construction of the new development.”
Minutes
The members' reasons
“In response, a member from the applicant’s team acknowledged that there would be an overall reduction in the total floor area dedicated to community facilities.”
“In response, a member from the applicant’s team noted that it had been suggested that the applicant had indicated that approximately 800 letters would be sent, but that only 55 had been issued.”
“It was stated that scaffolding over the highway was feasible, provided that a pedestrian tunnel was maintained beneath it so that the footway remained open. • Members noted that the 2016 long listing exercise local list review process in 2016 stated that the side building was not locally listed because it had not reached the necessary threshold and questioned whether this meant the building had been assessed at that time, or whether it had simply not undergone a full assessment.”
Minutes
Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.
Sources
- Brent Planning Committee minutes, 11 February 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Brent's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Brent Planning Committee
- Council
- Brent
- Date
- Wednesday 11 February 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Brent committee decisions →
This committee's year
11 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.