Case 3311236

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY

London Borough of Hounslow — appeal allowed

Outcome
Allowed
Decision date
30 May 2023
Authority
London Borough of Hounslow
Inspector
Couper C
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Full
Development type
Minor retail and services
Appellant
Endeavour Automotive Limited
LPA reference
00890/111/P1
ONS LPA code
E09000018
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
6 March 2023

Summary AI

The appeal was allowed as the development did not harm the character and appearance of the host property or the area. The inspector found that the scheme had given the building a more contemporary feel, assimilating with nearby development and refreshing the host property's appearance.

Generated from the decision letter — check against the original before relying on it.

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 Appeal Decision

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 16 May 2023 by Chris Couper BA (Hons) Dip TP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date:30 May 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/F5540/W/22/3311236 110 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London W4 5PY • 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 John Caney (Endeavour Automotive Limited) against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Hounslow. • The application Ref 00890/111/P1, dated 1 June 2022, was refused by notice dated 11 October 2022. • The development is described as an alteration and infill extension to create additional showroom space at ground floor level of the existing car dealership, including new exterior cladding and new external glazed doors. Decision 1.

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Appeal Decision

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Appeal Decision The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for an alteration and infill extension to create additional showroom space at ground floor level of the existing car dealership, including new exterior cladding and new external glazed doors at 110 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London W4 5PY in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 00890/111/P1, dated 1 June 2022, and drawing numbers A21-121-SLP01-A, A21-121-EX01-A, A21-121-EX02-A, A21-121-EX03-A, A21-121-EX04-B, A21-121-EX05-B, A21-121-PL01-B, A21-121-PL02-B, A21-121-PL03-B, A21-121-PL04, A21-121-PL100, A21-121-PL101 and A21-121-SP001-A. Procedural Matters 2. On the application form and the submitted drawings the site address was erroneously given as 111 Power Road. However, the submitted location plan clearly identifies the site with a red line, and I have therefore amended the address in this decision letter. 3. Amended plans were submitted as part of the appeal. As well as correcting the site address, and showing cosmetic internal changes such as to the furniture, these depict a slight change to the scheme’s projecting side walls on the building’s southern and western elevations. 4.

Page 1 · Chunk 2 Appeal Decision

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Appeal Decision The Planning Inspectorate Procedural Guide: Planning Appeals – England 2023 states that the appeal process should not be used to evolve a scheme, and that what is considered by the Inspector should be essentially what was considered by the Council and interested parties at the application stage. However, in this case, the amendments are very slight, involving a reduction in the depth of the side walls. They do not significantly change the external appearance of the building. Consequently, I am satisfied that my acceptance of the amended plans would not prejudice anyone involved in the appeal. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 1 · Chunk 3 Appeal Decision

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Appeal Decision The Planning Inspectorate Procedural Guide: Planning Appeals – England 2023 states that the appeal process should not be used to evolve a scheme, and that what is considered by the Inspector should be essentially what was considered by the Council and interested parties at the application stage. However, in this case, the amendments are very slight, involving a reduction in the depth of the side walls. They do not significantly change the external appearance of the building. Consequently, I am satisfied that my acceptance of the amended plans would not prejudice anyone involved in the appeal. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 2 · Chunk 4 Appeal Decision

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/F5540/W/22/3311236 5. Since the Council issued its decision, the development the subject of this appeal, as depicted on the amended plans, has been undertaken. I have therefore dealt with the appeal on the basis of its retention. 6. The advertisements, as depicted on the drawings, are the subject of a separate appeal (Ref: APP/F5540/Z/23/3317840). I have not therefore considered their impact in this appeal, and I have had no further regard to Policy CC5 of the Hounslow Local Plan 2015-2030 (2015) (‘HLP’), which was cited in the Council’s decision, but which addresses advertisements and hoardings. 7. Finally, since refusing this scheme, the Council has granted planning permission for a central infill extension at the property (Ref: 00890/110/P5). Given that decision, and the Council’s reason for refusal of application Ref: 00890/111/P1, I have focused on the impact of the alterations that have been undertaken to the building’s principal front and side facing elevations. Main Issue 8. The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the host building and the area. Reasons 9. The host property sits at the end of a cul-de-sac on a commercial estate.

Page 2 · Chunk 5 Appeal Decision

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Appeal Decision The buildings here are eclectic in their form, style, size and facing materials. The large adjacent building at ‘The Light Box’, for instance, is principally finished with red brick, but it also has a second floor with dark cladding, and a prominent glazed projection. There is also a distinct contrast between the form and materials of the original building at 109 Power Road and its metal clad, rectilinear extension. Elsewhere on Power Road I observed buildings finished in a variety of materials including paint, render and various types of cladding. 10. As demonstrated by the submitted drawings, the host building had a balanced front face, with regular fenestration, and a mainly white painted finish. The scheme before me, with its large areas of ground floor glazing and cladding, and the screening of two first floor windows, has reduced that sense of symmetry. Parts of the building’s principal front and side elevations have thus markedly changed. 11.

Page 2 · Chunk 6 Appeal Decision

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Appeal Decision However, in my view, the introduction of that glazing, along with the modestly projecting timber surrounds and rockpanel cladding, have given the resultant building a much more contemporary feel, which assimilates with, and responds to, some nearby development on this diverse estate. 12. It has created a successful contrast between the host’s retained sections of white painted brickwork, and much more modern materials, whilst still enabling the original building’s form and style to be read. As a result, rather than detracting from the host, the development has refreshed it and given it a more distinctive look. 13. The scheme has not therefore harmed the character and appearance of the host property or the area; and it does not conflict with HLP Policies CC1 and CC2 which, amongst other things, support high quality urban design, and which expect proposals to have regard to their urban context and to respond to local character. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Page 3 · Chunk 7 Appeal Decision

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/F5540/W/22/3311236 14. The Council has suggested various conditions in the event that the appeal is allowed. The first three of these relate to the statutory time limit for commencement, require the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans, and stipulate the approved facing materials. However, given that the development is already in place, and that I have found its facing materials to be acceptable, they are neither necessary nor appropriate. 15. The Council’s fourth suggested condition states that no additional windows, doors or other glazed openings shall be formed in the single storey infill extension or the front and side extensions. However, as a material affect to the building’s external appearance would require planning permission, that condition is also unnecessary. 16. Summing up, the scheme, as carried out, has not harmed the character and appearance of the host property or the area. Consequently, having regard to all other matters raised, including representations by interested parties both in support and opposed to the development, the appeal is allowed.

Page 3 · Chunk 8 Chris Couper

111 Power Road, Chiswick, Hounslow, London, W4 5PY — London Borough of Hounslow — Chris Couper INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Extracted from the decision letter PDF and shown in full, chunk by chunk.

Main issues and findings

Character and appearance
For appellant
¶11

The inspector found that the introduction of glazing and cladding had given the building a more contemporary feel, assimilating with nearby development and refreshing the host property's appearance.

Character and appearance
For appellant
¶12

The inspector found that the scheme had created a successful contrast between the host's retained sections of white painted brickwork and modern materials, enabling the original building's form and style to be read.

Policies relied on

Reference Weight
HLP Policies CC1 and CC2
Substantial

Site constraints from the Casework Database

Conservation area
Green belt
Listed building setting
AONB
SSSI
Flooding an issue

Source

Decision letter, 3 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 30 May 2023 under the Open Government Licence.