Tribunal prefers a shop rather than a one-car garage

Following the said decision, the applicant lodged an appeal before the Environment and Planning Tribunal, stating that the garage in question catered solely for parking one car. The applicant added that should his proposal be accepted, "the required parking provision will be accommodated in front of the existing garage". The applicant pointed out that the road in question was a one-way road with access fronting a government school. In this context, a shop would create less potential hazard, as opposed to a garage.

In reaction, the Authority reiterated that the proposal was in conflict with Structure Plan Policy TRA 4 (parking requirements), which essentially seeks to ensure that appropriate provision is made for off-street parking.

In this case, a single parking space is required on site because of the dwelling above. According to the Authority, such a proposal would have been considered favourably if the garage opening was located within 4.25 metres from a corner splay (this is not the case).

As a final point, the Authority added that the predominant use in the area is "residential" and there are no sound planning justifications which could justify a breach of policy with regards to traffic hazards.

For his part, the applicant kept on insisting that the Commission had issued several permits where a "change of use" from a garage to a shop had been conceded, since only one parking space would be lost. (A number of 2008 permits were quoted to this effect, regulated by the same pertinent policies and Local Plan provisions.)

In its conclusions, the Environment and Planning Tribunal agreed that the site under review was located in a residential area. But even so, the Tribunal observed that an on-street parking provision would be available in front of the premises if the garage were turned to a shop.

To conclude, the Tribunal held that once the garage was no longer in use, the resulting car space fronting the premises would add "more value" (in planning terms) since it was not owned exclusively.