Creation of vehicular access

1 Appeal Decision Site visit made on 8 August 2026 by J Somers BSocSci (Planning) MA (HEC) MRTPI IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 24 August 2026 Appeal Ref: 6009815 115 Oulton Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR32 4QW • 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 Miss Emily Martin against the decision of East Suffolk Council. • The application Reference is DC/26/0860/FUL. • The development proposed is described as the ‘creation of vehicular access.’ Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Procedural Matters 2. I have taken the description of the development from the Council’s Decision Notice as this concisely describes the elements requiring planning permission. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the host building and the surrounding locality. Reasons 4. The appeal site is one half of a pair of semi-detached dwellings which appears to date from the mid-twentieth century as part of a planned housing estate. Oulton Road is one of the main spine roads through the estate were dwellings typical of this period are functionally designed, and have a relatively regimented placement with setbacks from the street and between dwellings which provides an emphasis of spaciousness in and around dwellings. Many dwellings have vegetated front gardens, with this section of road having grass verges between the footpath and the road, and also areas of greenspace on corners. These are some of the positive features of the area that contribute to the character, appearance and local distinctiveness of the area. 5. In undertaking development, the Waveney Local Plan (LP) Policy WLP8.29 is a design-led policy that contains a number of considerations around high quality design such as demonstrating an understanding of local character and distinctiveness, responding to the local context and form of surrounding buildings, particularly the relationship between buildings and spaces, and avoiding perceptions of car dominated environments amongst others. Additionally, the appeal site is within the Lowestoft Neighbourhood Plan (NP) area where NP Policy LOW9 is also associated with design and seeks that development respond to Appeal Decision: 6009815 2 topography and an integrated approach to spaces and buildings, setback from the road and local context, amongst others. 6. The appeal site displays a number of positive qualities of the area, being one of the semi-detached dwellings along the main spine road. The topography of the area means that the footpath is at a higher level which then slopes down to the front of the dwelling. The dwellings along this side of the road also have the same characteristics, with small front gardens and an emphasis of vegetated spaces in and around the dwellings. To the rear of these properties along Oulton Road is a rear vehicular accessway from Harps Close Road where many dwellings along Oulton Road have a parking space for vehicles to the rear of their property. 7. In its current situation the undeveloped and open front gardens and grass verges along this section of Oulton Road dominates the character and appearance of this particular location. The proposal which would result in a dropped kerb, raised platform1 for vehicles and the removal of the grass verge and front garden would give an awkward and car dominated appearance which detracts from this distinctive open character. Given the topography of the site the raised platform would look quite dominant which can currently be experienced at No.123 Oulton Road. In this particular case the raised platform is almost as tall as the front window of the dwelling, and creates a distraction from the front of the dwelling which has caused harm to the character and appearance of the location. Whilst I can appreciate the confusion caused to the Appellant from the Council approving this development, according to the Officer’s Report the development had been in place for 4 years, meaning that at the time it was assessed, it was exempt from enforcement action, rather than it being judged as appropriate from an assessment against development plan policies. 8. Despite this, the development at No.123 highlights the poor visual appearance and detriment caused to the street scene, which does not provide adequate justification for the development at the appeal site to cause further detriment. Whilst I note that the Appellant has also referred to No.125 as well I am unclear of whether any planning permission exists for this site. I note that the Appellant’s Statement also seeks that there is a need for the driveway whereby there is a need to cross a busy road with young children in order to access on street parking and that there is a need to consider the safety of children above the character and appearance of the dwelling. Whilst the safety of children is also a consideration to the determination, I have not been presented with all available options demonstrating that this is the only option available. As previously mentioned, there is a vehicular access to the rear of the property, and neighbours to the appeal site utilise this access to park their vehicles which would also appear to be an alternative option which would provide safe access for children whilst preserving the character and appearance of the area. 9. Taking the above into account, the proposed scheme would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the dwelling and the surrounding locality. Consequently, the proposal would be contrary to LP Policy WLP8.29 and NP Policy LOW9. 1 Whilst no elevation plan has been supplied, the Appellant’s statement and email correspondence states that the platform would look identical to No.123 Oulton Road and would be 80cms tall. Appeal Decision: 6009815 3 Conclusion 10. For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal be dismissed. J Somers INSPECTOR