250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH
Coventry City Council — appeal allowed
- Outcome
- Allowed
- Decision date
- 8 August 2025
- Authority
- Coventry City Council
- Inspector
- Brennan P
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Casework type
- Planning Appeal
- Type detail
- Unknown
- Development type
- Householder developments
- Appellant
- Mr Levi Swift
- LPA reference
- PL/2025/0000398/HHA
- ONS LPA code
- E08000026
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
- Start date
- 14 May 2025
Summary AI
The appeal for a dropped kerb for vehicular access at 250 Allesley Old Road, Coventry CV5 8GH was allowed due to insufficient evidence of harm to highway and pedestrian safety. The proposal would allow a vehicle to enter and exit the site in a safe manner, without detriment to highway safety.
PDF text
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 29 July 2025 by P Brennan BSc (Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 8th August 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/U4610/W/25/3365449 250 Allesley Old Road, Coventry CV5 8GH • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Levi Swift of Swift Pave Ltd against the decision of Coventry City Council. • The application Ref is PL/2025/0000398/HHA. • The development proposed is described as: Dropped kerb for vehicular access. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a dropped kerb for vehicular access at 250 Allesley Old Road, Coventry CV5 8GH in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref PL/2025/0000398/HHA, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan, Block Plan and Proposed Block Plan reference TQRQM25057111553056. Preliminary Matters 2.
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision The description of development has been taken from the application form, although the proposed plans also show an area of permeable block paving to form a driveway in front of the dwelling house, included as part of the appeal proposal. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on highway and pedestrian safety with particular regard to safe access and egress. Reasons 4. Allesley Old Road is a wide, tree-lined classified ‘B’ dual carriageway and bus route to and from the city centre. On street vehicle parking is available on both sides of the carriageway. In front of the appeal site, the speed restriction is 30mph. At the time of my visit, on a midweek morning, there were a number of vehicles parked along Allesley Old Road. However, I observed that on-street parking was available, and speeds and traffic levels did not appear excessive for a road of this nature. The appeal site is set back from the carriageway and is separated by a grass verge and footway. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/25/3365449 5. Most dwellings along this part of the road, near to the appeal site, do not have on- plot parking spaces within their frontages. However, there are several existing dropped kerbs within the vicinity that would result in vehicles reversing onto the highway. Whilst these plots may have been subject to historical planning decisions, they nevertheless form part of the highway context. As a result, manoeuvring into and out of parking spaces, and the need to reverse onto the street, similar to that proposed, is an established characteristic of the area. 6. As observed on my visit, the appeal site is located adjacent to an existing shared driveway that provides vehicle access to the rear of the properties in Allesley Old Road. Many of these properties have garages located to the rear which are accessed via this shared driveway which allows users to exit in a forward gear. 7. The existence of alternative on-plot parking for the property does not in itself provide a compelling reason to prevent a new driveway to the front of the property.
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Furthermore, the Council has not drawn my attention to any policy or guidance that refers to the provision of new driveways and dropped kerbs or that restricts their provision where existing parking is provided elsewhere. 8. On review of the submitted plans, it appears that the proposed dropped kerb would be adjacent to but separate from the adjacent dropped kerb serving the shared access. Conflict between the two access points is unlikely to occur as visibility between the accesses is suitable and drivers and users, would sensibly allow passage between them rather than both users attempting to enter or exit at the same time. 9. Despite the noted on-street parking, the visibility of oncoming traffic would not be unduly restricted for emerging vehicles from the proposed access. Also, given the limited speed of approaching cars, other road users would have ample opportunity to react to a vehicle reversing on or off the appeal site frontage. The users of the dropped kerb would also have adequate visibility of the footway in both directions to observe oncoming pedestrians. As such, it is likely that pedestrians and drivers would be alert to potential conflict around the appeal site if applying due care and attention. 10.
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision No substantive evidence has been provided in relation to traffic flows and speeds, nor have any records of accidents been provided to show where reversing onto the highway was found to have been a contributing factor. As a result, it has not been demonstrated that the use of the proposed access would increase the risk of collision with pedestrians, cyclists, and other motorists or result in harm to highway and pedestrian safety. 11. Consequently, in view of the above, it is unlikely that the proposed access and its use associated with one dwelling would cause an unacceptable impact on highway safety. In the absence of such evidence, a driver exercising the degree of caution that it is reasonable to expect when using the dropped kerb to reverse onto or off the carriageway, would have sufficient view of oncoming highway users to avoid collision. Therefore, whilst recognising the concerns raised by the Highway Authority, I am satisfied that the proposal would allow a vehicle to enter and exit the site in a safe manner, without detriment to highway safety. 12.
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Even though the proposal would involve the loss of one on-street parking space in front of the appeal site, which currently has unrestricted public usage, this space would be displaced within the appeal site. Whilst my site visit only represents a https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Even though the proposal would involve the loss of one on-street parking space in front of the appeal site, which currently has unrestricted public usage, this space would be displaced within the appeal site. Whilst my site visit only represents a https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/U4610/W/25/3365449 snapshot in time, there were spaces available on Allesley Old Road. No evidence has been presented that the proposal would reduce the provision of on-street parking to such an extent that it would cause parking stress or prejudice highway safety. 13. For the above reasons, I conclude that the proposal would not have an adverse impact on highway and pedestrian safety with particular regard to safe access and egress. Accordingly, I find no conflict with Policies AC2 and AC4 of the CLP, which requires proposals to mitigate any negative impact on the safety of the highway network and supports the expansion of safe walking and cycling networks. Conditions 14. Having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance, in addition to the standard implementation condition, it would be necessary in the interests of certainty to define the plans with which the scheme should accord. Conclusion 15. For the reasons given above, I conclude that the proposal would not conflict with the development plan and there are no material considerations that indicate that the development should be determined otherwise than in accordance with it.
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — Appeal Decision Therefore, the appeal is allowed.
250 Allesley Old Road, COVENTRY, CV5 8GH — Coventry City Council — P Brennan INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3
Main issues and findings
Highway safety Against appellant ¶4
Allesley Old Road is a wide, tree-lined classified 'B' dual carriageway and bus route to and from the city centre.
Highway safety Against appellant ¶5
Most dwellings along this part of the road, near to the appeal site, do not have on-plot parking spaces within their frontages.
Highway safety Against appellant ¶6
The appeal site is located adjacent to an existing shared driveway that provides vehicle access to the rear of the properties in Allesley Old Road.
Highway safety Against appellant ¶7
The Council has not drawn my attention to any policy or guidance that refers to the provision of new driveways and dropped kerbs or that restricts their provision where existing parking is provided elsewhere.
Highway safety Against appellant ¶9
Visibility of oncoming traffic would not be unduly restricted for emerging vehicles from the proposed access.
Highway safety Against appellant ¶10
No substantive evidence has been provided in relation to traffic flows and speeds, nor have any records of accidents been provided to show where reversing onto the highway was found to have been a contributing factor.
Highway safety Against appellant ¶11
It has not been demonstrated that the use of the proposed access would increase the risk of collision with pedestrians, cyclists, and other motorists or result in harm to highway and pedestrian safety.
Highway safety Against appellant ¶12
Even though the proposal would involve the loss of one on-street parking space in front of the appeal site, this space would be displaced within the appeal site.
Highway safety For appellant ¶13
The proposal would not have an adverse impact on highway and pedestrian safety with particular regard to safe access and egress.
Planning obligations For appellant ¶14
It would be necessary in the interests of certainty to define the plans with which the scheme should accord.
Other For appellant ¶null
No material considerations that indicate that the development should be determined otherwise than in accordance with the development plan.
Policies relied on
| Reference | Weight |
|---|---|
| CLP AC2, AC4 |
Moderate |
Site constraints from the Casework Database
Source
Decision letter, 3 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 8 August 2025 under the Open Government Licence.