To have kerb dropped and front garden block paved to park car off road. Change of use in place

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 11 December 2018 by Lynne Evans BA MA MRTPI MRICS an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 17 December 2018 Appeal Ref: APP/A2280/D/18/3214155 6 Weeds Wood Road, Chatham, Kent ME5 0QR  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.  The appeal is made by Mr Paul Marsh against the decision of Medway Council.  The application Ref: MC/18/1688 dated 17 July 2018, was refused by notice dated 13 September 2018.  The development proposed is to have kerb dropped and front garden block paved to park car off road. Change of use in place. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposal on the street scene. Reasons 3. The appeal property is a mid-terraced house on the north side of Weeds Wood Road, within a predominantly residential area, with a school on the south side of the road, accessed from Weeds Wood Road. There is on-street parking and a layby outside the properties on the southern side of the road, opposite the appeal site. The appeal property and its immediate neighbours on the north side of the road have modest front garden areas, with a footpath and then a generous grass verge adjoining the highway. Along the northern length of Weeds Wood Road, this grass verge is continued with only a small number of examples of where there have been access points cut through the verge. The grass verge links with more extensive areas of open grass to provide a clear separation between the properties and the highway and on-street parking, contributing to a verdant and spacious feeling to the street scene. 4. I agree with the Appellant that the treatment of his own front garden area is, within certain bounds, largely a matter of personal taste and there were examples of different treatments in the local area. However, and although there are a small number of exceptions, the continuation of the grass verge along the road and in surrounding streets makes, in my view, a significant contribution to the characteristic pattern of development in the local area. I have taken into account the Appellant’s contention that one further crossover would not have a material impact on the street scene and that the crossover has been designed to minimise the reduction in the amount of grass verge to be removed and replaced with hard surfacing. However, it would, nonetheless, Appeal Decision APP/A2280/D/18/3214155 2 be a noticeable interruption to the continuous length of grass verge, replacing the existing grass verge with hard surfacing. The change from grass verge to hard surfacing would impact on the beneficial contribution that the grass verge makes to the street scene, through providing a verdant separation between the dwellings and the highway and on-street parking. 5. I therefore conclude that the proposal would harm the street scene. This would conflict with Policy BNE1 of the Local Plan together with the design objectives set out at paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework, both of which seek a high quality design which respects the local context. 6. The Appellant has drawn my attention to other examples of permission being granted for crossovers which included for the removal of part of an existing grass verge. However, it is not clear to me where these examples are in relation to the appeal property and the circumstances relating to those permissions. The existence of these other permissions does not therefore persuade me that planning permission should be granted in the particular circumstances of this case given the harm I have found. 7. I have noted that there have been no local objections to the proposal. I agree that the proposal would not harm the living conditions of adjoining residents and that there would be no harm to highway safety. The Council also raised no issue in these regards. However, none of these considerations outweighs the harm I have concluded to the street scene. 8. For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed. L J Evans INSPECTOR