Appeal 3352024

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues are the effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area and the safe and efficient use of the highway.

The description of development used in the heading above differs from that used on the original application form and instead the description is that as used by the Council’s decision notice. I consider that the description of development used by the Council more accurately reflects the proposal before me and as such I have used this description accordingly.

The appeal property is a mid terrace house with a front bow window that is located along an attractive suburban tree lined street. The appeal property appears raised slightly higher than the existing street level and two street trees and highway verge exist immediately outside the property. To the rear there is rear access to this property even though it is gated and it appeared that garages exist here. On my site visit I saw a motorhome parked in this area also.

The proposal before me seeks to remove the front garden and any landscape features that it possesses other than the boundary hedging that will be pruned and lowered so as to create a dropped kerb and vehicle hardstanding for the parking of cars.

This part of Brownhill Green Road gains considerable distinctiveness from the fact that the road is tree lined with grass verges and several front gardens that Appeal Decision Appeal Ref: APP/U4610/D/24/3352024 remain intact and in use as such. The appeal property and its neighbours exemplify this character and I consider that this is overwhelmingly positive for the character and appearance of the streetscene as a whole.

The proposal would however remove much of this landscape character. It would likely need to remove the existing grass verge and would also run the risk of putting street trees under threat. Although the Appellant suggests that the trees could be relocated, I consider that it would not simply be a case of transplanting a tree from one place to another, primarily due to factors such as the presence of servicing or proximity to other trees etc. As such I do not consider that this would be a suitable solution.

Although the case Officer felt that the character of the street was one of many vehicle crossings, I did not notice this to particularly be the case in the immediate vicinity of the appeal property and its neighbours. As such, I consider that there would actually be harm to the character and appearance of the streetscene through the loss of landscaping and the dominance of property frontages with vehicles were this appeal to be granted. These issues would therefore bring this scheme into conflict with Policy DE1 of the Coventry Local Plan.

With regards the effect of the proposal upon highway safety, I saw on my site visit that the road here is a relatively busy one. I also noticed the presence of a nearby junction onto [address]. The Council have not only raised an issue with the existing trees but also with the effect of the proposal upon other road users through the inability to exit from the site in a forward gear.

In this respect, due to the relatively fast moving traffic and pedestrian movements along this stretch, I am unable to see how it would be safe for a driver to reverse from this site in complete safety either for themselves or other road users, including those more vulnerable users. Ofcourse it would be possible for the residents to reverse onto the drive, but I consider that this could raise its own issues, especially when faced with the pressure of reversing when the road is busy.

Although the scheme could lead to the removal of some on street parked cars, which could allow slightly more visibility, there would still be several vehicles parked on street and as such any such benefit would be largely negligible.

As a result, this proposal would fail to meet the criteria within Policies DE1, AC2 and AC4 of the Coventry Local Plan 2016 which seek to protect the safe and efficient use of the highway and that reflect the National Planning Policy Framework in its efforts to encourage good design. As such the appeal must fail.

For the reasons given above, and taking into account of all other matters raised, I dismiss the appeal.