Appeal 3294499

The appeal is dismissed.

At my site visit I saw that the hardstanding in the front garden has been completed.

The main issues are the effect of the development having regard to: a) highway safety; and b) the character of the dwelling and the surrounding area.

The appeal property is a mid-terrace house that fronts [address], a class 'B' road that runs through Northfleet where on-street parking restrictions apply. The dwelling lies opposite the pedestrian entrance to a primary school and there are 'keep clear' markings on the tarmac outside the entrance.

At the time of my site visit, whilst only a snap shot in time, [address] appears to be a busy thoroughfare, as expected of a main route. Given the overall size of the available space, and based on all I have seen and read, I am satisfied that a vehicle could not manoeuvre within the driveway, and as such would need to either reverse into or out of the area. _________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________

The lack of turning facility on site would mean that reversing into the drive would lead to vehicles slowing, stopping and turning off the busy road in reverse gear. This would be detrimental to the free flow of traffic along the road, and cause inconvenience to other drivers and pedestrians. Reversing out of the space into the road would be hazardous to other highway users already driving along [address], and pedestrians using the footway or nearby pedestrian crossing.

The appellant states that forecourt parking is available at other houses along the road, although I note that none have dropped kerbs outside. I am also aware that the County Council Highways Authority raise no objection, nevertheless I have read that Dartford Borough Council's Highways Officer has recommended refusal.

I conclude that the scheme would result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety. It would be contrary to Policy CS11 of the Gravesham Local Plan Core Strategy 2014 (CS), saved Policy T5 of the Gravesham Local Plan First Review 1994, and to the Council's Planning Guidance Note 6: Planning Policy for [name] to [name] (February 2009), which promote safe access for vehicles and pedestrians. It would also be inconsistent with the advice in the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), which seeks to ensure development has an acceptable impact on highway safety.

The existing front garden has been hard landscaped to create the parking area, this is similar in its design and extent to other forecourt areas in the locality. Whilst the loss of the low level brick wall is unfortunate, the alteration to the frontage is not significant taking into account the local context. I consider that the hardstanding is not sufficiently harmful as to warrant a refusal of permission on this ground.

The extent of hard landscaping would not be detrimental to the character of the dwelling and the surrounding area. Consequently, the proposal would meet Policy CS19 of the CS, which seeks to secure new development of acceptable scale and appearance. It would also be consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework which states that good design is a key aspect of sustainable development.

Having regard to all matters raised and based on the reasoning above, the appeal is dismissed.