Appeal 3272479

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted to drop the curb to allow vehicular access to the front of the house for off road parking in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 20/02153/HOU, dated 20 November 2020, and subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: Site location plan and Drawing 21:2133:1

No shrubs, trees or other vegetation shall be allowed to grow above one metre in height along the frontage of the site.

Notwithstanding submitted details, prior to the beneficial use of the parking area hereby approved, the pillar to the right when entering the property through the existing pedestrian gate shall be removed.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

On my site visit I noted that the front boundary wall of the appeal property has been removed and the front garden is surfaced with gravel. The appeal proposal seeks to use this area for parking, which would involve the installation of a dropped kerb to allow a vehicle to drive onto the front garden.

A number of properties on [address], including the other dwellings in the group of properties within which the appeal site sits, retain original front boundary walls. However, many other properties in the vicinity benefit from frontage parking, a good level of which appear to have been achieved through the removal of front boundary enclosures.

I acknowledge that original boundary treatments make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the street scene, particularly where they include soft landscaped front gardens. However, given that the front boundary of the appeal dwelling has already been removed, and that this in itself would not have required planning consent, I have afforded limited weight to the loss of this feature in consideration of this appeal.

I recognise that parking a vehicle in the appellant’s small front garden would obscure the ground floor of the property and would appear prominent in the context of the dwelling. However, taking into account the level of other properties with frontage parking in the vicinity, the addition of one more such facility would not significantly harm the overall character or appearance of the street scene.

In conclusion, the proposal would not harm the character or appearance of the area. Therefore, it would not conflict with Policy DM2 of the Island Plan: The [site address] Council Core Strategy (including minerals and waste) and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (2012) and Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework which, taken together, seek to secure high quality design which responds to local context.

I impose conditions in regards to timescales and setting out the approved plans to provide certainty. I have attached conditions restricting the height of vegetation along the front boundary of the site and requiring removal of a gate pillar in order to secure/safeguard visibility when exiting the site in a vehicle. I have not attached a condition restricting the height of structures along this frontage as this would be adequately controlled by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(England)Order 2015.

For the reasons given, I allow the appeal.