Planning – Application Comments

Comment Date: Thu 07 Apr 2022

In order to overcome my previous highway recommendation of refusal on the basis of Loss of Parking, the applicant has sought to increase the width of the driveway area to 5m so that it can accommodate 2 vehicles parked side by side.

Whilst the width of the driveway is acceptable (and colleagues in the Network Management have confirmed that there would be no objections to widening the existing dropped kerb access to 5m), the length of the driveway is just 4.5m. This is less than the required minimum length of 4.8m. Furthermore it should be noted that the 4.5m measurement has been taken from the building line and as vehicles using the driveway would be unlikely to park with their bumper physically touching the front wall to the property (most drivers would leave a gap of around 200-300mm), the 'effective' length of the driveway is reduced even further to around 4.2-4.3m in length.

The substandard length of the driveway would therefore result in vehicles parked on it overhanging the adjoining adopted footway causing a hazard to pedestrians and obstructing movement along the footway. Therefore I would have to maintain my highway recommendation of refusal on this application as stated in my previous highway consultation response.

Comment Date: Tue 08 Mar 2022

The proposed side extension will not only increase the size of the property (from a 3 bed property to a four bed), it will also lead to the loss of the existing side garage, thereby reducing the number of off-street car parking spaces serving the property from 2 to 1.

The JLP SPD indicates that a property of 4 bedrooms would require 3 off-street car parking spaces in order to meet potential car parking demand generated by the property. However in this case the property would only be served by 1 space (existing driveway) which would lead to vehicles of occupiers having to park on-street along Rockingham Road. This would add to the high levels of kerbside car parking that already takes place along this road, particularly during evenings and weekends.

Therefore I would have to recommend that this application be refused for the following reason:

Loss of Car Parking
The proposed development will result in the loss of existing off-street car parking provision serving 12 Rockingham Road. This is likely to lead to such vehicles having to park on the public highway resulting in interference with the free flow of traffic on the highway and giving rise to conditions likely to be detrimental to public and highway safety which is contrary to the adopted guidance contained within the Supplementary Planning Document (July 2020) and Policy DEV29 of the Plymouth and South West Devon JLP (March 2019).