Modern industrial units at Phase 1B, Field Way Greenford Park Central, Greenford

What was proposed

The application sought outline permission to demolish the existing buildings and provide up to 15,000 square metres of flexible industrial floorspace with supporting works.

“The proposal seeks outline planning consent (with all matters reserved) for the demolition of the existing buildings and structures, and the comprehensive redevelopment of the site to deliver new flexible Eg(iii) / B2 / B8 floorspace, with ancillary mezzanine and office floorspace, and associated landscaping, yard, parking, access, and supporting infrastructure works. Up to 15,000 sq m of industrial floorspace is proposed.”

“The application seeks permission for the following development parameters:”

Officer report

The site and its surroundings

The site is an industrial estate beside the canal and A40, containing older buildings, hardstanding and parking, with most units currently vacant.

“The application site lies within the Greenford Industrial Estate immediately to the east of the Grand Union Canal and north of the A40. The 3.28ha site is divided by Field Way, an industrial road. It contains 4 blocks of older industrial buildings built in 1965, some 12m in height and with 15,187 sq m of floorspace, along with hardstanding and car parking. Over 70% of the units are currently vacant.”

“In the Ealing Development Management DPD (2013), and the Draft Ealing Local Plan (Regulation 22), the site lies within a Strategic Industrial Location (SIL). It does not lie within a conservation area, contains no listed buildings, or trees with Tree Preservation Orders and lies in Flood Zone 1. However, immediately to the east of the site the Alladin building, occupied as a B&Q / Dunelm superstore, is designated as a local heritage asset.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

There were no recent relevant decisions on the site, but permission had been granted nearby for a large industrial development and pre-application advice supported redevelopment in principle.

“There are no recent planning decisions on this site of relevance to this proposal. However, it is noted that planning permission was granted in January 2025, subject to completion of a S106 Agreement, for a large industrial development immediately to the north of this site. This involved demolition of existing buildings and erection of two industrial and/or logistics buildings with flexible E(g)(iii), Class B2 and B8 uses with ancillary offices (Ref: 242581FUL).”

“Pre-application advice was provided in June 2025 with regard to redevelopment of the existing industrial site to deliver new flexible Eg(iii)/B2/B8 floorspace, with ancillary mezzanine and office floorspace, and associated landscaping, yard, parking, access and supporting infrastructure works. This would provide up to 14,999 sq m of industrial floorspace. Key elements of that advice included:”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to a section 106 agreement and conditions because the scheme would provide modern industrial floorspace, jobs and regeneration benefits without unacceptable impacts.

“The proposed outline development is considered acceptable in principle, will provide modern industrial floorspace and an uplift in jobs within a Strategic Industrial Location in line with London Plan policy and appears unlikely to cause unacceptable impacts on adjoining properties. It also complies with London Plan policies with respect to air quality and energy matters.”

Officer report

Who spoke

There were no speakers on the application.

Members’ questions

Members asked about reserved matters, building heights, landscaping, energy, drainage, parking and heritage, and officers explained how later controls would address them.

“Both the height of the buildings and the amount of landscaping were the subject of reserved matters and would be assessed by officers and considered by the planning committee at a later stage, when a more detailed application had been made by the developer. Alex Jackson assured the planning committee that the parameters plan was part of the recommendation, and this described the zones in which the development would occur, plus the envelope of the height.”

“Car parking would also be a reserved matter and the applicants would be asked to justify 95 spaces. Planning officers had stipulated a condition that the applicant provide a car parking management plan, which would set out why they…”

Minutes

The committee vote

There was no debate, and the committee voted unanimously to grant planning permission.

“There was no debate on this application, and the Committee proceeded to the vote.”

“That for the reasons set out in the committee report and Briefing Note, planning permission for application REF 253638OUT be GRANTED subject to:”

Minutes