Planning application · Harrow
PL/0634/26.
43 Old Church Lane, Stanmore, Harrow, HA7 2RG
Householder at 43 Old Church Lane, Stanmore, Harrow, HA7 2RG, received 10 Mar 2026 — refused on 5 May 2026 (delegated, Lee Connor).
ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationHarrow profile →
Refused
Outcome
5 May 2026
8 wks
Decision time
inside the 8-week target
—
Conditions
not captured
6
Documents
6 linked
—
Objections
not captured
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Harrow planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application
What is it?
Single storey outbuilding in rear garden for use as garage and storage room (demolition of outbuilding); proposed vehicle crossing
Reference
PL/0634/26
Type
Householder
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
HA7 2RG
Ward
Council
Received
10 Mar 2026
Target date
5 May 2026
Decision date
5 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Reference
PL/0634/26
Type
Householder
Show all 15 rows
Applicant
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
HA7 2RG
Ward
Council
Received
10 Mar 2026
Target date
5 May 2026
Decision date
5 May 2026
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Decision Issued
Council register
Documents
What was filed?
Document
Published
View
Documents open on the Harrow portal. View the application page ↗
Decision
What happened?
Refused on 5 May 2026, delegated decision by Lee Connor — 8 weeks from submission.
Timeline
Date
Event
10 Mar 2026
Application received
5 May 2026
Statutory target date
5 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Lee Connor
10 Mar 2026
Application received
5 May 2026
Statutory target date
5 May 2026
Delegated decision: Refused · Lee Connor
Why it was refused
Reason
As stated on the decision notice
1
- The proposed development of a garage on the boundary would result in a door opening on The Ridgeway
appearing out of character with the prevailing pattern of development in the area. As such, the development is
considered contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy GR1 of Harrow Local Plan
2021-2041 (2026) and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guide (2010).
2
- The proposed garage is located on the boundary and therefore lack adequate and robust sightsplays to
protect pedestrians and other road users to the detrimental of highway safety standards. As such, the
development is contrary to the National Planning Policy, Policy T2, T6.1 of The London Plan (2021) and Policy
M2 of Harrow Local Plan 2021-41 (2026).
3
- The proposed crossover has failed to evidence and demonstrate that the loss of on-street parking as a
result of the crossover would not create a detrimental on-street parking capacity reduction and the
implications on the wider highway parking capacity as a result. As such, the development is contrary to
Policies T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (2021), and policies GR1 and M2 of the Harrow Local Plan 2021-
2041 (2026).
1
- The proposed development of a garage on the boundary would result in a door opening on The Ridgeway
appearing out of character with the prevailing pattern of development in the area. As such, the development is
considered contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), Policy GR1 of Harrow Local Plan
2021-2041 (2026) and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guide (2010).
2
- The proposed garage is located on the boundary and therefore lack adequate and robust sightsplays to
protect pedestrians and other road users to the detrimental of highway safety standards. As such, the
development is contrary to the National Planning Policy, Policy T2, T6.1 of The London Plan (2021) and Policy
M2 of Harrow Local Plan 2021-41 (2026).
3
- The proposed crossover has failed to evidence and demonstrate that the loss of on-street parking as a
result of the crossover would not create a detrimental on-street parking capacity reduction and the
implications on the wider highway parking capacity as a result. As such, the development is contrary to
Policies T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (2021), and policies GR1 and M2 of the Harrow Local Plan 2021-
2041 (2026).
Policies cited
GR1NPPFT2T6.1M2T6
Public response
Comment counts were not captured for this application.
People
Who is involved?
Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place
What affects it?
Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.
Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)
No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.