Appeal 3282879

The appeal is dismissed.

Although the proposal is described as partly retrospective, at the time of my site visit, I saw that the development of the driveway was complete. I have dealt with the appeal on that basis.

The main issue is the effect of the development upon highway and pedestrian safety.

[name] is a relatively narrow road with housing on one side and what the Council describe as Victorian allotment gardens on the opposite side, which slope down to [address]. No [address] of houses with relatively shallow front curtilages set behind the pavement. Car parking is generally on the street in front of the houses. The appeal site is a strip of allotment garden across the road from No 6 and adjacent to a narrow footpath that links [name] to [address]. It is part lawn with steps down to a gravel driveway which extends to the footway on [address], providing one, off road, parking space. According to the appellant, vehicles reverse from [address] into the space and drive out in forward gear and no problems have arisen since the driveway has been in use.

The appeal site is close to the junction with [address] and on a slight bend in the road. There is a section of narrow footway running from the junction which crosses in front of the site and continues along [address]. The allotment gardens between the appeal site and [address] extend down to the edge of the footway on [address] where they are bordered by fences, high hedges, and some trees. These hedges and trees, combined with the angle of [address], prevent views of the driveway when turning left from [address] onto [address]. Consequently, vehicles reversing into, or driving out of, the driveway are only visible to a driver whilst making the turn or pulling out substantially forward of the junction. Also, vegetation blocks the view from the driveway looking right towards the junction. To see oncoming traffic, vehicles leaving the site must cross the pedestrian footway and nose out partially into the road.

The appellant suggests that bends in the road, nearby junctions, and narrow sections of road mean that traffic approaching the site is likely to be travelling at speeds below the 30 mile per hour speed limit. Nonetheless, even at relatively low speeds, poor visibility for vehicles leaving the driveway and turning towards it from the nearby junction, and resultant need to pull out into the highway to see on-coming traffic, would lead to conflict between vehicles and pedestrians harming highway and pedestrian safety. The development therefore conflicts with Policy TR1 of the Warwick District Local Plan (2017) which only permits development that provides safe and suitable access.

The appellant has referred to other driveways approved by the Council which in his opinion have poor visibility, and issues raised at the meeting at which the application was determined, including whether a traffic survey had been carried out by the Council. However, I have come to my own view regarding the development based on the evidence before me and rather than relying on the approach the Council may have taken elsewhere.

The appellant’s intention to install an electric charging point to facilitate the purchase of an electric car would have environmental benefits. However, such benefits would not outweigh the harm to highway and pedestrian safety that I have identified.

For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.