Appeal 3364307

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for construction of kerb drop to create vehicular access at [site address] , in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 24/04097/HSE and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not 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: 00 Site Location, 01 Existing Building, 02 Proposed and [address] Scene received 02.12.2024.

Prior to the commencement of the development the approval of the Local Planning Authority shall be obtained with respect to the following matters: Highway access demonstrating [name]. Once approved in writing, these matters shall be provided in accordance on site prior to occupation and retained for the lifetime of the development.

Prior to the commencement of development, a full arboricultural assessment including tree survey and tree protection plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

I consider that the main issues in this case are its effect on highway safety and on the character and appearance of the area, having regard to the impact on the health of a nearby tree.

[site address] is a two storey terraced house set back approximately 5m from the pavement on the northeast side of the street. It is typical of the terraced properties on this side of the street as far as [address] to the southeast. There is a large vehicular entrance to a car wash facility located to the west of the site. The southwest side of the street is a mix of terraced and semi-detached houses.

The relevant policies in this case include T4 of the London Plan 2021 and SP8 and DM29 of the Croydon Local Plan 2018 (the local plan) which relate to highway safety. Policy G7 of the London Plan and policies SP4, DM10 and DM28 relate, among other things, to the design and character of development and include particular reference to the protection of important trees.

The whole front garden area of No. 328 is paved. A car was parked on it at the time of my visit and a car was also parked on the street in front of the site. A large majority of the houses along the street, especially on the northeast side have some form of hardstanding in the front garden. Many of these have dropped kerbs and at the time of my visit several cars were parked in the front gardens. There were also many cars parked on the street.

I consider that the proposed dropped kerb would not have an adverse effect on highway safety in terms of causing accidents in the context of the numerous similar arrangements along the street. It is clear that the existing hardstandings along the street both with and without dropped kerbs are in frequent use.

The provision of a dropped kerb would result in a smoother entry and exit to the property. I have considered this case on its merits and find that it would be a practical solution to the existing imperfect situation where none of the properties along this side of the street have the desirable minimum of space to allow for entry and exit to the site in forward gear but are nevertheless able to make offstreet provision for cars. It would not result in a discernible adverse cumulative impact on safety.

I note from the Council’s diagram showing the number of accidents over an unspecified period of time in the vicinity that the large majority of them have occurred close to the roundabout, with some by the bus stop and the entrance to the car wash. The diagram has no key to the colour of the dots which indicate the severity of the accidents. In any case, there were very few along the road towards the southeast where there are numerous front garden parking areas. This would indicate to me that the users of the existing parking areas commonly negotiate the entry and exit to their properties without incident.

I conclude that the proposed dropped kerb would not have an adverse effect on highway safety and that in this respect it is consistent with London Plan policy T4 and local plan policies SP8 and DM29.

The street scene in [address] is enhanced by large mature street trees spaced at intervals along both sides which at the time of my visit appeared to be undergoing a programme of pollarding. There is no indication in the information before me that these trees are subject to Tree Preservation Orders but it is clear that they are valued and development which would damage them would harm the character and appearance of the area and would not be supported by the Council.

One of these trees is directly in front of No. 330, the adjoining property to the northwest. Its base is close to the edge of the carriageway and surrounded by a small area of rough earth, with a low set kerb separating it from the surrounding hard surfaces of the road and the pavement.

I consider that the presence of the tree is not a major factor in the visibility available along the street for vehicles emerging as greater obstacles are presented by the number of parked cars on the street.

The appellant has expressed a willingness to accept a condition requiring the provision of an [name] and root survey and to employ construction methods which would avoid damage to the roots. I saw during my visit that there are several dropped kerbs in a similar or closer proximity to trees and I consider that with the appropriate precautions, the proposed dropped kerb would not adversely affect the tree.

I conclude the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the area and that it is consistent with policy G7 of the London Plan and local plan policies SP4, DM10 and DM28.

For the reasons given above, the appeal is allowed.

I have considered the conditions put forward by the Council, having regard to the tests set out in the Framework. A condition detailing the plans is necessary to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and for the avoidance of doubt. A condition relating to the visibility splays is necessary in the interests of highway safety and one relating to the Arboricultural survey is necessary to ensure that the tree and the visual amenity that it provides are sufficiently protected.