Demolition of existing porch replace with new enlarged porch

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 6 August 2026 by F Bradford BA (Hons) MRTPI Decision by Paul Thompson DipTRP MAUD MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 9 September 2026 Appeal Ref: 6009451 3A Camden Avenue, Feltham, Hounslow TW13 5AZ • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Murdhanya Dave against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Hounslow. • The application Ref is P/2026/0025. • The development proposed is the demolition of existing porch replace with new enlarged porch. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for an enlarged porch at 3A Camden Avenue, Feltham, Hounslow TW13 5AZ in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P/2026/0025, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan, OAB 01, OAB 03, OAB 05, and OAB 06. 3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension shall match those used in the existing dwelling. Appeal Procedure 2. The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal. Preliminary Matter 3. The description of development has been amended within the decision in the interests of accuracy and clarity. Main Issue 4. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area. Reasons for the Recommendation 5. Camden Avenue comprises a mix of detached and semi-detached forms, exhibiting a range of architectural styles, ages, materials and detailing. Whilst there is no single prevailing house type, there is uniformity between some dwellings achieved Appeal Decision 6009451 2 through the consistency of architectural features such as bay windows and the overall scale of dwellings. Together with a strong building line, these factors collectively contribute to create a rich and attractive streetscape, contributing positively to the character and appearance of the area. 6. The appeal dwelling is single storey and is located between two storey dwellings. Although other single storey homes are present within the street, and the appeal dwelling adheres to the established building line, its scale and design mean it is observably unique within its context. This adds to the varied character and appearance of the area. 7. Whilst the porch would be large, the L-shaped design of the dwelling means that it would be set back from the main front elevation and would not appear dominant, either in relation to the dwelling itself or within the wider street scene. Its mass would be noticeably smaller than that of the host dwelling, and it would integrate comfortably with the existing roofscape. Furthermore, the proposal would not appear as an incongruous addition or diminish the contribution that the dwelling makes to the character and appearance of the area. 8. For these reasons, the proposed development would not result in harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling or wider area. Accordingly, I find no conflict with Policies CC1, CC2 and SC7 of the London Borough of Hounslow Local Plan 2015-2030 which, among other things, aim to ensure that extensions and alterations respond sensitively to their context, remain subordinate to the host dwelling, and preserve or enhance the established character and appearance of the street scene through high-quality design that harmonises with surrounding development. I also find the proposal would follow the advice set out within the Hounslow Character, Sustainability and Design Codes SPD: Part A5 Residential Extension Guidelines (2024) where it sets out that porches should not alter the overall appearance of the house or dominate the character of the street. Conditions 9. In addition to the standard time limit condition, I recommend a condition requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans. This is necessary for enforcement purposes. I further recommend a condition requiring that the materials of the development match those used on the dwelling, in the interests of the character and appearance of the host and surrounding area. Conclusion and Recommendation 10. For the reasons given above, I recommend that the appeal should be allowed, subject to conditions. Finlay Bradford APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER Inspector’s Decision 11. I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed. Paul Thompson INSPECTOR