Installation of automatic front gates to the house (retrospective application) Decision
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Character & Appearance
Heritage & Conservation
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 4 April 2024
by Martin Andrews MA(Planning) BSc(Econ) DipTP & DipTP(Dist) MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date:26th April 2024
Appeal Ref: APP/F5540/D/24/3337603
1 Old Park Mews, Hounslow TW5 0QD
• The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against
a refusal to grant planning permission.
• The appeal is made by Mr Harmon Singh Kapoor against the decision of the Council of
the London Borough of Hounslow.
• The application, Ref. 01457/1/P5, dated 27 September 2023 was refused by notice
dated 23 November 2023.
• The development proposed is the installation of automatic front gates to the house
(retrospective application)
Decision
1. The appeal is dismissed.
Main Issue
2. The main issue is the effect of the gates on the character and appearance of the
host dwelling and the street scene of Old Park Mews.
Reasons
3. I saw on my visit that No. 1 Old Park Mews is located close to the junction with
Church Road and a short distance after entering the cul-de-sac is the first house
in a terrace of four on the left hand side. In common with other nearby houses
on this side of the road, the terrace has a fairly modest front building line (the
houses not being well set back from the pavement).
4. However, the enclosure of the frontage space by the black metal gates amounts
to a significant change in the street scene as they are seen in the context of the
dwarf brick wall and metal railings of the adjoining dwelling and the entirely
open front lawn and paved areas of the other nearby houses on the outside of
the bend.
5. The gates at No. 1 are perceived as ‘heavy’ and bulky structures that are
incongruous in this setting of relatively small dwellings with only a limited set -
back on modestly sized plots. This is especially so because of the open plan
design of the street scene, not just for the above-mentioned houses on this side
of the road but also for the extensive development of flats on the opposite side
of Old Park Mews. And although the appellant refers to being able to ‘see
through’ the gates, the gaps are far too small to have any meaningful impact on
their appearance and the overall visual amenity of the frontage.
Appeal Decision APP/F5540/D/24/3337603
2
6. I acknowledge that adjacent entrance to No. 92 Upper Sutton Lane has a similar
barrier but despite its proximity this does not read together with the buildings in
Old Park Mews as part of the character and appearance of the street scene.
I have also noted the appellant’s concerns as to the security of the house and
have sympathy with the unpleasant effects of the incident that has already
occurred.
7. However, there is no reliable evidence to demonstrate that it is the gates that
have prevented a re-occurrence or indeed provide an effective deterrent in the
future. Furthermore, to accept this as a reason for granting permission would in
fairness effectively commit the Council to allow all householders to erect similar
deterrents, irrespective of their effect on the visual amenity of the
surroundings.
8. The appeal also includes photographs of a number of other properties in the
Borough with front gates of a similar size and degree of enclosure. However,
each individual setting is different and there is no information as to the
particular circumstances of their installation. For this reason my judgement in
this case has to be made primarily on the effect of the gates on the character
and appearance of the host dwelling and the street scene of Old Park Mews.
9. Having taken account of all that I have seen and read, I find that the gates are
harmful to the character and appearance of both No. 1 and the Old Park Mews
street scene in conflict with Policies CC1, CC2 & SC7 of the Hounslow Local Plan
2015-2030 and with Government policy in Section 12: ‘Achieving Well-Designed
and Beautiful Places’ of the National Planning Policy Framework December
2023.
10. For these reasons the appeal fails.
Martin Andrews
INSPECTOR
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.