# 132 Chiswick High Road, Chiswick

- **Decision:** dismissed, 22 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: K Dryden
- **Authority:** Hounslow (London)
- **Appeal reference:** 6012542
- **Application reference:** P/2025/3419
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Permanent timber enclosure to front outdoor seating area of a Class E premises, with shopfront door alterations
- **Site context:** inside-settlement, conservation-area
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** HE6, TR4, S4(1)
- **Development plan policies:** Hounslow Local Plan 2015-2030 CC1, CC2, CC4, EC2, London Plan 2021 HC1, D4, T2
- **Main issues:** conservation area, pedestrian safety
- **Tags:** tier-2, s4-within-settlement, s4-substantially-outweighed, heritage-harm-decisive, conservation-area, e2-substantial-weight, pedestrian-safety, parties-consulted-on-2026-framework

## Summary
The appeal was for a permanent timber enclosure around outdoor dining in front of a Chiswick High Road restaurant, in a conservation area. It was dismissed. The inspector found low harm to the CA, which unquantified business benefits did not outweigh. The enclosure was also a TR4 pedestrian-safety failure on a busy footway. The E2 and TC2 substantial-weight benefits were "substantially outweighed" under S4 (DL ¶31).

## What made the difference
The mature street tree right in front of the premises. It left only a 2 m pinch-point on a busy shopping and bus-stop footway. The inspector used Active Travel England guidance to require more than 2 m there (DL ¶20). Together with harm to the wide-pavement character the CA appraisal values, heritage harm (HE6) and TR4 outweighed two substantial-weight economic policies. This is the same inspector and reasoning pattern as PINS-6011521.

## Policy findings
- **HE6: harm (considerable weight).** low harm to Chiswick High Road CA - bulky enclosure erodes the wide footway and street trees the appraisal identifies as important; unquantified economic benefits do not outweigh (DL 9-16)
- **TR4: fail.** 2m clear width retained next to a mature tree, but Active Travel England guidance seeks wider footways on busy shopping streets near bus stops; unsafe for disabled and visually impaired pedestrians (DL 18-21)
- **S4(1): fail.** E2 and TC2 substantial-weight benefits substantially outweighed by heritage and pedestrian-safety harm (DL 29-31)

## Key facts
- Enclosure projects into a busy footway beside a mature street tree; 2m kept past the tree trunk, about 2.8m beyond it (DL 18-19)
- Temporary street-trading licence for tables gives limited weight - it is a different regime from a permanent structure (DL 22)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6012542
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/74479b3a-9a48-44ff-bba0-54a61125d988

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6012542.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.