Appeal 3307608

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the extension of existing 4.4m dropped kerb to 6.5m to allow the existing driveway to be used to park 2 vehicles. No change to drive required at [site address] , Buckinghamshire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/06403/FUL, dated 22 May 2022, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following condition:

The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location plan ref TQRQM22178101408305.

The effect on parking and the safe and efficient operation of the highway network.

The appeal site is a detached two-storey dwelling within an existing built-up residential street. The dwelling is set back from the highway with a low boundary wall. Much of the frontage is covered in hardstanding with a small flowerbed. [address] is a straight road where the majority of dwellings have off-street parking. The road is subject to parking restrictions, including resident and school permit holders.

I note the Council’s concern that the proposal would add to on-street parking stress. The proposed extension to the dropped kerb would reduce the length of the on-street parking space outside of the site, however, a parking space would remain, albeit below the minimum size set out in the Buckinghamshire Countywide Parking Guidance 2015 (SPD). The retained parking space would still provide parking for smaller cars. The proposed development would enable a vehicle to be parked off the road at the appeal site and as such would reduce pressure for on-street parking demand in the locality.

My attention has been drawn to two existing marked parking bays in [address] (outside Nos 7 and 15-17) that measure less than the guidance set out in the SPD. The reduced parking space would be of similar dimensions to these spaces.

I do not agree that the proposal would give rise to additional pressures which would be unacceptable, resulting in potential dangerous and obstructive parking to the detriment of highway safety. Consequently, I see no conflict with Policy DM33 of The Wycombe District Local Plan 2019 (development plan) as the development would not result in a significant adverse impact from overspill parking.

I conclude that the extension to the dropped kerb would not have a significant effect on parking and the safe and efficient operation of the highway network. As such, the proposal accords with Policy DM33 of the development plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) which states that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.

The Council has suggested a condition for a scheme of biodiversity net gain on site for mitigation for the loss of planting. The Appellant states that no planting is to be removed to facilitate the development. In any event, I consider the request to be disproportionate to the scale of development proposed and as such would not be reasonable or necessary.

To meet legislative requirements, a condition shall be imposed to address the period for commencement. I shall also impose a condition specifying the relevant drawing as this provides certainty.

For the reasons set out above, and having had regard to all other matters raised, the proposal would comply with the Framework and the development plan as a whole. The appeal is therefore allowed.