A HOME owner wants planning permission for a set of 7ft high gates – that won't actually open.

The 10ft-wide double gates at Britannia House in College Way, Dartmouth, have already been installed without planning permission, along with the decking behind them.

Town councillors are concerned that any attempts to drive cars in and out of the entrance onto busy College Way will be dangerous.

Now the latest planning application has been submitted claiming the gates are fixed shut and showing poles inserted behind the gates to prevent them from being opened.

Meanwhile, Dartmouth and Kingswear Society is claiming that an old stone wall was torn down to make way for the gates – and should be rebuilt.

Town councillors are calling for the planning application to be thrown out – whether the gates can open or not.

The council's planning committee chairman David Gent said the council had opposed a previous application last August which had been withdrawn before South Hams councillors could make a final decision.

At that time, town councillors claimed the exit would create a road danger, while the Dartmouth and Kingswear society condemned it as 'ugly, intrusive and inappropriate'.

Cllr Gent pointed out there was 'very little difference' with the new application.

The planning application has been submitted by a Mr Keep whose address was given as Great Amwell, Ware in Hertfordshire.

A statement from Dartmouth architect Robert Seymour Associates accompanying the application, said: 'It should be noted that the gates inserted into the widened opening are fixed shut across the width with the exception of a personnel sized gate access.'

The statement points to an accompanying photograph which 'illustrates the securing the gates with two square galvanised posts set in concrete behind the gates'.

Dartmouth and Kingswear Society's planning secretary Kathy Stansfield pointed out that the society had already objected to the previous planning g application saying that the 'the applicant had, without planning permission, removed part of an old stone wall and pedestrian access and replaced it with gates wide enough to give a car access onto a busy main road and created hardstanding where there had been planting, destroying much of the garden'.

The society also said that a condition forcing the owner to reinstate the stone wall and planting which had been removed 'should be imposed forthwith'.