List of Planning Applications

Borough of Poole

Planning Committee

9 September, 2010

1 BOROUGH OF POOLE

Planning Committee

DATE: 09 September 2010 at 14:00

NOTES:

1. Items may be taken out of order and therefore no certain advice can be provided about the time at which any item may be considered.

2. Applications can be determined in any manner notwithstanding the recommendation being made.

3. Councillors who are not members of the Planning Committee but who wish to attend to make comments on any application on this list or accompanying agenda are required to give notice by informing the chairman or Head of Planning and Regeneration Services before the meeting.

4. Councillors who are interested in the detail of any matter to be considered should consult the files with the relevant officers to avoid queries at the meeting.

5. Any members of the public wishing to make late additional representations should do so in writing or by contacting their Ward Councillors prior to the meeting.

6. Letters of representation referred to in these reports together with any other background papers may be inspected at any time prior to the Meeting and these papers will be available at the Meeting.

7. For the purposes of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, unless otherwise stated against a particular report, “background papers” in accordance with section 100D will always include the case officer’s written report and any letters or memoranda of representation received (including correspondence from all internal Borough Council Service Units).

8. Councillors are advised that if they wish to refer to specific drawings/plans which are not part of these papers to contact the relevant case officer at least 24 hours before the meeting to ensure these can be made available.

9. Members are advised that, in order to reduce the size of the agenda, where conditions are marked on the plans list as Standard these will no longer be reported in full. The full wording of the condition can be found either in hard copy in the Members rooms, or via the following link on the Loop http://bopwss3/sus/ww/Shared%20Documents/Standard%20Conditions.doc

TABLE OF CONTENTS Planning Committee 09 September 2010 at 14:00

Not before 14:00 01 Alexandra Park Lodge, 47A Palmerston Road, APP/10/01008/F JRG Poole, BH14 9HQ 02 The Cottage, Kingsgate, 7 The Avenue, Poole, APP/10/00700/F KAC BH13 6AA 03 446-450a Ashley Road, Poole, BH14 0AD APP/10/00405/P KAC 04 36 Brownsea Road, Poole, BH13 7QP APP/10/00418/F KAC 05 36 Brownsea Road, Poole, BH13 7QP APP/10/00540/F KAC 06 84 Fontmell Road, Broadstone, BH18 8NP APP/10/01010/F LA 07 216 West Way, Broadstone, BH18 9LL APP/10/01014/F JMLS 08 34 Creekmoor Lane, Poole, BH17 7BS APP/10/01001/F LA

Not before 16:00 09 Port Of Poole, Berth 1, Poole, Dorset. BH15 4AJ APP/10/00914/F JRG 10 9 Christopher Crescent, Poole, BH15 3HP APP/10/00915/F EM 11 56 Blake Dene Road, Poole, BH14 8HH APP/10/01040/F EM

3 ITEM NO 01 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/01008/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS Alexandra Park Lodge, 47A Palmerston Road, Poole, BH14 9HQ PROPOSALS Construction of a new Children's Centre in Alexandra Park to include the demolition of the existing Park Lodge (No 47a) REGISTERED 3 August, 2010 APPLICANT Borough of Poole, Childrens Services AGENT Kendall Kingscott

WARD Penn Hill

CASE OFFICER James Gilfillan

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before the Planning Committee because the proposals are not in accordance with the Development Plan and the applicant is Borough of Poole

REPORT TO FOLLOW

4 ITEM NO 02 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/00700/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS The Cottage, Kingsgate, 7 The Avenue, Poole, BH13 6AA PROPOSALS Erect a detached house on land adjacent to The Cottage and erect detached garage to The Cottage. REGISTERED 27 May, 2010 APPLICANT Seven Developments

WARD Canford Cliffs

CASE OFFICER Kevin Chilvers

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before committee at the request of Councillor Deas due to residents concerns, intensification on a land locked site, and planning history of site.

1.2 Recommendation for Grant Section 106

THE PROPOSAL Erect a detached house on land adjacent to The Cottage and erect detached garage to The Cottage.

MAIN ISSUES  Impact on character and appearance of the area.  Amenity of neighbouring properties  Relationship to trees  Adequacy of access

SITE DESCRIPTION The application site is sited to the rear of no. 7 The Avenue 'Kingsgate' which is a 6 storey block of flats, and comprises land severed from a two storey detached dwelling known as "The Cottage" which is built abutting the north boundary of its site. There is garaging provided to serve the residents of Kingsgate in a block at the rear of the flats which abuts the application site. The access to the application site is via the access for Kingsgate. Views from the dwelling are south over the garden and swimming pool. There is a detached flat roof garage within the garden adjacent to the west boundary of the application site. There are TPO trees (Pine trees) along the north boundary of the application site and adjacent to the entrance into the site from the shared access of no. 7 The Avenue. These trees have a large canopy spread. There is boundary hedging along the southern boundary of the plot.

5 The surrounding area on the Avenue is typically flatted development, no. 5 'Headinglea' to the north is 7 storeys in height, and no. 47 'Park Court' on Western Avenue is 3 storeys. The Borough boundary with Bournemouth is along the east boundary of the site, running north to south. To the east of the application site (within Bournemouth) is Christ Church with the church hall sited at the rear which is within the Westbourne Conservation Area. The church hall is a single storey building. To the north east is a 2 storey building which is associated with the Alumhurst Day Centre. The character of the area is flatted blocks within large rectangular plots with mature landscaping along the boundaries of the plots providing seclusion.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 2009 An application to demolish the existing and erect 5 x 4 storey town houses was withdrawn in November (09/01299 refers).

2010 Pre application advice was sought in January on principle of demolition of the Cottage and development for 3 houses or a flatted scheme showing 5 apartments. It was considered that housing did not make best use of land and would be out of character, a flatted scheme would be more appropriate for the area.

An application to demolish existing and erect 5 x 3 storey town houses (revised scheme) was withdrawn in February (09/01437 refers).

An application to Demolish existing and erect a four storey block of 5 apartments and associated garages was refused by Planning Committee in April and is currently subject of an appeal (10/00170).The reasons for refusal related to concerns about site coverage, inadequate usable amenity space, overdevelopment of a restrictive site that was out of keeping with the predominant spacious character of the flatted development within the Avenue, and absence of contributions towards heathland, recreation and transportation mitigation requirements.

An application to Demolish existing and erect a block of 5 apartments and associated garages was withdrawn in May 2010 (10/00508 refers).

PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE None

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION Site notices were posted.

CONSULTATIONS Bournemouth Borough Council- To be reported.

Head of Transportation Services No objection subject to contribution in accordance with South East Dorset Contributions Scheme and condition to secure parking/turning provision.

6 Head of Leisure Services Borough wide and Ward based contributions required in accordance with Recreational Provisions SPG.

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours A petition has been received from the residents of 14 flats in Kingsgate raising the following concerns:  Contrary to Govt. stance on Garden Grabbing  One reasonably sized dwelling only acceptable if no subsequent applications/modifications followed In response to this point the applicants have stated that they would be prepared to sign a legal document restricting the future development of the site to a two storey (above ground) dwelling.  Impact on bats and swifts  Impact on trees bordering driveway leading to Cottage  Impact on welfare of elderly residents in Kingsgate

Three letters of representation have been received raising the following concerns:  Identification of access as having a two way width does not take account of current parking arrangement at Kingsgate and submission of "lawful use" certificate application.  Proposal contrary to planning history of area's flatted development and would set a precedent for single dwellings within the grounds of flats.  Hazards associated with access drive and parking at Kingsgate, restricted access point between Kingsgate parking area and the refuse area.  Provision for refuse collection/emergency access  Contrary to Govt. stance on Garden Grabbing  There is a defined right of way to Headinglea apartments over part of the application site.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

POLICY AND GUIDANCE

STRATEGIC CONTEXT PPS1 and PPS3

LOCAL CONTEXT The following policies are listed as applying to this application.

Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS05 Broad Locations for Residential Development PCS23 Local Distinctiveness PCS28 Dorset Heaths International Designations PCS08 Lifetime Homes PCS31 Sustainable Energy - General PCS35 Energy And Resources Statements

7 Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 BE02 Landscaping L17 Provision for Recreational Facilities T13 Traffic Generated by Development NE27 Individual or Grouped Trees NE28 Tree Preservation Orders

Planning Policy Statement PPS03 Housing PPS01 Delivering Sustainable Development

PLANNING JUDGEMENT Impact on character and appearance of the area  The character of the area is typically flatted blocks within large rectangular plots sat within a sylvan setting.  The application site is an anomaly within the area, with clearly defined boundaries separating it from the adjacent flats it is occupied by a single dwelling with its access through no. 7 (Kingsgate).  Surrounding flatted development varies between 3 and 7 stories in height. To the east of the application site and within the Borough of Bournemouth is a Church and church hall which has planning consent for a alterations and erection of a 3 storey extension (7-2009-13367-c) on the northern end of the hall which would face onto the application site and the length of the hall would be a two storey extension. The rear elevation of the 3 storey element would be approximately 2.5m off the common boundary with the application site.  The area to the east of the application site is within Westbourne Conservation Area. Bournemouth Borough Council have not commented on the proposal but the extant consent for the extension to the church hall will to a large degree limit views of the application site from the Conservation Area.  There are glimpses of the site from The Avenue and the site is visible from neighbouring plots e.g. no. 5 and no. 7 The Avenue, and from plots to the east of the application site where boundary screening diminishes.  The proposal is for a 2 storey detached dwelling (with basement) utilising the existing access into the north western part of the site.  The proposed scale and mass of building is in keeping with the existing cottage and although of smaller scale and different character to the surrounding flatted development is not considered to result in demonstrable harm to the area as it utilises an existing site already differentiated from the surrounding flats.  The proposal is not considered to adversely impact on setting of adjacent buildings or Westbourne Conservation Area.

Privacy and amenity  The proposed dwelling would be approximately 15m away from the front elevation of the Cottage but the windows in the north elevation facing the Cottage would serve the stairwell and can therefore be obscured in order to prevent any mutual overlooking with the Cottage. Given the two storey height of the new dwelling and the intervening presence of the new garage to the Cottage the physical relationship between the Cottage and the new dwelling is considered to be mutually acceptable.

8  Adequate amenity space would be provided for the two dwellings.  There is approximately 38m separation distance between the proposed west elevation of the new dwelling and the closet point (balcony edges) of the east elevation of Kingsgate. This distance is more than adequate to prevent any material loss of privacy (mutual). The separation distances also prevents a material loss of light to the occupants at Kingsgate or any overbearing impact to the occupiers of the proposed dwelling.  There is a high hedge on the common boundary with 47 Western Avenue which subject to its retention/suitable replacement, would obscure any views. It is considered that the proposal would not give rise to unacceptable loss of privacy and views would partly be over the car park of no. 47.

Highways and parking No highway objection is raised subject to contribution in accordance with South East Dorset Contributions Scheme and condition to secure parking/turning provision.

Trees The arboricultural officer advises that all of the tree constraints of the site have been addressed fully and sufficient information has been provided to demonstrate how they will be protected in accordance with British Standards. Subject to conditions to secure tree protection there is no arboricultural objection to this proposal.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS The applicant has prepared a Unilateral Undertaking securing the contributions to mitigate the increased demand on heathlands and, transportation infrastructure and recreation facilities.

CONCLUSION Notwithstanding the flatted character of the area, the application site is an existing self contained curtilage which appears distinct from and separate to the adjacent curtilage for the flats. The subdivision of the plot and erection of a two storey (with basement) detached dwelling is not considered harmful to the character of the area, amenities of neighbouring properties or to trees on/adjacent to the site.

BACKGROUND PAPERS Application for flats ref APP/10/00170

10.0 RECOMMENDATION 10.1 It is therefore recommended that this application be Grant Section 106 subject to the following:

Details of Section 106 Agreement.

1.A financial contribution of £2,260 (plus administration fee) towards the provision of recreational facilities in accordance with Policy L17 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

2.A financial contribution of £1,724 (plus administration fee) towards mitigating the harm to the SSSI protected Dorset Heathlands in accordance with the Dorset

9 Heathlands Interim Planning Framework 2006-2009 and policies NE16 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State direction September 2007) and PCS28 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted on 19th February 2009.

3.A financial contribution of £4,838 (plus administration fee) towards the South East Dorset Transport Contributions Scheme Adopted 2009 and Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction 20th September 2007).

Conditions

1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))

2. GN030 (Sample of Materials)

3. TR030 (Implementation of Details of Arb M Stmt)

4. TR040 (Arboricultural Supervision)

5. TR050 (Tree Protection-No Fires/Mixing/Storage)

6. TR060 (Tree Protection - No Trenches/Pipe Runs)

7. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

8. DR040 (Sustainable Urban Drainage)

9. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)

Informative Notes 1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) Order 2003

The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of the Development Plan and, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in conflict with the following policies:

a) The proposal will make best use of a backland site without significant detriment to adjacent properties or the character and appearance of the area - Policies PCS05 and PCS23 b) Residential Amenity will be preserved - Policy PCS05 c) Adequate measures have been taken to preserve protected trees - Policy NE28 d) Adequate parking and access is provided - Policy T13 e) Recreation, Heathland and Transportation contributions have been secured by Unilateral/106 agreement - Policies L17, NE16, PCS28 and T13

2. IN43 (Section 106 Agreement)

10 ITEM NO 03 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/00405/P APPLICATION TYPE Outline SITE ADDRESS 446-450a Ashley Road, Poole, BH14 0AD PROPOSALS Outline application to demolish existing building and erect 2 retail shops and 10 flats. REGISTERED 29 March, 2010 APPLICANT Ashley Investments (UK) Ltd. AGENT Ms P Hewett

WARD Newtown

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 Recommendation for Grant Section 106

THE PROPOSAL Outline application to demolish existing building and erect 2 retail shops and 10 flats - approval sought for access, layout and scale. Appearance and landscaping reserved

MAIN ISSUES Given previous resolution to approve the scheme - history refers - the main issues to consider with regard to this proposal are:  whether there have been any material changes to the context of the site since the consideration of the last application;  whether there have been any significant changes to the policy context for consideration of the application; and  whether there is any significant additional information submitted in support of the application that constitutes a new consideration since the Committee considered the last application.

SITE DESCRIPTION The application site is situated on the corner of Ashley Road and Victoria Road. There are two storey properties (including a public house) on the opposite corners of the junction.

The existing property comprises a terrace of 5 ground floor commercial units, three of which are single storey (including one fronting Victoria Road) whilst 2 others have first floor offices above (nos. 448a and 446a Ashley Road).

Vehicular access to the site is from Victoria Road and there is car parking for 12 cars and service area shared by all units at the rear of the building.

11 Adjacent to the site there is a two storey commercial building with a blank brick elevation (with small high level windows) on the northern boundary and a recently completed 2.5 storey mixed use development abuts the western boundary.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 2007 An application (ref. 06/20199/10) to demolish the existing buildings and erect a mixed development comprising a retail unit (310m2) and 14 flats with associated parking, cycle and bin store was refused because it was considered to : - be a cramped form of development with a poor relationship to the neighbouring properties; - be harmful to the character of the area and the amenities of the occupiers of no.452 Ashley Road; - increase on street parking problems and adversely affect road safety and free flow of traffic; - be contrary to policy T15 because of the loss of rear servicing.

This application was subsequently dismissed on appeal with the Inspector concluding that: - large scale development would not be inappropriate or harmful to character and appearance of street scene - in urban environment lower levels of residential amenity may be expected - acceptable level of overlooking to rear of adjacent property but concerned about relationship of side elevations of proposed and existing properties - proximity of windows to one another or to blank walls would result in lack of privacy or unsatisfactory outlook - there were traffic and parking problems along Ashley Road and in vicinity of site - demonstrable shortage of off street and on street parking and impact of car ownership in this suburban setting can not be ignored not an appropriate location for zero parking - large retail unit (365m2) and amount of commercial traffic could be considerable adversely affecting traffic flows close to busy junction constituting a safety hazard - not a location where it is necessary to provide on site parking for customers and employees but delivery arrangements unsatisfactory - unsatisfactory provision of parking and servicing contrary to H4, T13 and T15

2008 An application (ref. 20199/11) to demolish the existing buildings and erect a mixed development comprised of 3 commercial A2 units and 14 residential apartments with associated access and car parking arrangements was refused because it failed to make contributions in accordance with SPG and because: - inadequate provision of parking, delivery and refuse storage/collection facilities is likely to increase on street parking problems and adversely affect road safety and free flow of traffic - the removal of the rear servicing area and failure to provide adequate rear servicing facilities is contrary to T15 - the building would appear cramped on the site by virtue of its footprint, proximity to no.1 Consort Close and the absence of landscaping, in combination with the inadequate provision of parking and servicing facilities this results in a scheme that overdevelops the site

12 This application was subsequently dismissed on appeal with the Inspector concluding that: - insufficient residential and business parking and servicing has been allowed for the proposed development - the requirement for rear servicing is not unreasonable and the proposed development would be detrimental to the free flow of traffic and highway safety. - the development would not be inappropriate or harmful to character and appearance of street scene and would not be cramped or detrimental to the living conditions of the occupiers of adjacent dwellings.

2009/2010 In June 2009 the Committee resolved to grant Outline consent subject to a Section 106 Agreement to demolish existing building & erect 2 retail shops & 10 flats. Details of access, layout, scale and appearance was considered with landscaping reserved (APP/09/00041/P). The Legal Agreement sought to secure contributions to mitigate impact on heathlands, recreation and transportation and the resolution also required the Agreement to secure 40% affordable housing provision. The applicants did not conclude a Legal Agreement and subsequently withdrew the application prior to a decision being issued.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION Adjacent properties notified and site notice posted

CONSULTATIONS Head of Transportation Services No objection because: 10 parking spaces will be provided for the residential and 2 for the retail and a space that could be used for servicing/delivery vehicle up to the size of a large transit type vehicle. All vehicles would be able to turn on site so vehicles could enter and leave in a forward gear. Previous appeal decisions on this site have supported the Council on it stance for the need to provide adequate parking for the development and the need to provide rear servicing. Considering that 10 of the flats will be 8 x 1 bedroom units and the development is within a shopping centre and a high frequency bus service the level of residential parking is considered adequate. Secure sheltered cycle parking is proposed and suggest that the applicant provides 2 Sheffield stands along the Ashley Road frontage. Transportation Contribution required and conditions needed to secure parking/turning provision, access crossing and building operatives parking. An Informative is recommended re the need to lower the Kerb Crossing.

Head of Housing Services Based on the additional evidence and information provided for this scheme it is clear that because of the time that the site was acquired (prior to Core Strategy being adopted) and the price that the site was acquired for, the scheme is not financially viable, and therefore can not afford to contribute towards affordable housing. The previous recommendation that the scheme could afford to contribute was based on evidence of the existing use

13 value of the site which is £445,000 less than what was actually paid. REPRESENTATIONS None received

POLICY AND GUIDANCE

STRATEGIC CONTEXT PPS1, PPS3 and PPS4

Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS05 Broad Locations for Residential Development PCS06 Affordable Housing PCS08 Lifetime Homes PCS13 Retail Growth Outside The Town Centre PCS15 Access and Movement PCS19 Other Prime Transport Corridors And Main Routes PCS22 Local Centres PCS23 Local Distinctiveness PCS28 Dorset Heaths International Designations PCS31 Sustainable Energy - General PCS32 Sustainable Homes PCS35 Energy and Resources Statements

Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 BE04 Shopfronts BE20 Upper Floors S04 Retail Development in Local Centres LC2 Commercial and Retail Frontage NE01 Pollution and Noise NE16 Sites of Special Scientific Interest L17 Provision for Recreational Facilities T02 Cycling Provision in New Development T03 Provision for Pedestrians in New Development T04 Key Public Transport Routes T05 Bus Priority Measures T13 Traffic Generated by Development NE21 Legally Protected Species

PLANNING JUDGEMENT  There is no objection to the principle of redevelopment of this site and given the most recent planning history of the site, no objection is raised to the scale, access and layout of the proposal which is similar to the earlier schemes (where on appeal the Inspector had no objection), and the same as the scheme previously considered acceptable by the LPA under application ref 09/00041.

14  The applicant has addressed the concerns raised by the Planning Inspectorate with regard to the parking and servicing of the development by reducing the amount of built form and a net reduction in the number of units from 14 to 10, which enables adequate parking and turning space to be provided. No highway objection is raised to the proposal.

 Whilst the applicants viability appraisal on the previous scheme sought to demonstrate that the scheme could not sustain the provision of affordable housing this assessment was independently verified and the Council concluded that 40% provision could be sustained on the basis of 4 1-bed units, with the use of a HCA grant. It was therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to a Unilateral to secure recreation, heathland and transportation contributions, as well as the provision of 40% affordable housing on-site.

 The applicant has submitted a draft unilateral undertaking to address the requirements for contributions in accordance with the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance and a viability appraisal has been submitted to address the obligation for affordable housing as set out in Policy PCS06. The applicants have submitted a revised scheme viability for the site which has been verified by an independent RICS qualified chartered surveyor. The Head of Housing Services has advised that the scheme can not afford to contribute towards affordable housing.

 There have been no material changes to the neighbouring properties since the last application was considered and the context for the development therefore remains the same as previously considered with regard to application 09/00041.

 Since the last application was considered by Committee there have been amendments to PPS3 which are not considered significant in regard to this proposal and the Government have published PPS4 on Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth. The proposal would provide for a mixed use scheme which would comprise a sustainable redevelopment of this site and the proposal would assist in the promotion of the vitality and viability of this part of Ashley Road.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS The applicant has prepared a Unilateral Undertaking securing the contributions to mitigate the increased demand on heathlands, transportation and recreation facilities and to secure 2 Sheffield cycle stands along the Ashley Road frontage.

CONCLUSION The scheme is the same as the previous application which the Committee resolved to approve. There have been no significant changes to the site context, and policy changes since the previous application was considered do not materially alter the way the application should be considered. The Head of Housing has verified that the scheme viability can not sustain the provision of affordable housing.

BACKGROUND PAPERS Application ref APP/09/00041/P

10.0 RECOMMENDATION 10.1 It is therefore recommended that this application be Grant Section 106 subject to

15 the following:

2.A financial contribution of £10,340 (plus administration fee) towards mitigating the harm to the SSSI protected Dorset Heathlands in accordance with the Dorset Heathlands Interim Planning Framework 2006-2009 and policies NE16 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State direction September 2007) and PCS28 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted on 19th February 2009.

4. The provision and erection of 2 Sheffield type cycle stands (or £500 towards their provision) on the public footway along Ashley Road.

Conditions

1. OL010 (Submission of Reserved Matters) No development shall take place until approval of the details of the external appearance of the building(s), and the landscaping of the site including both soft and hard landscapes (hereinafter called 'the reserved matters') has been obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason - This condition is required to be imposed by the provisions of Article 3(1) of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995.

2. OL020 (Timing of Reserved Matters Submission)

3. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access, turning space, vehicle parking including the undercroft parking and cycle parking shown on the approved plan have been constructed, and these shall thereafter be retained and kept available for those purposes at all times. Reason - In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

4. HW080 (First 4.5 Metres Constructed)

16 5. GN030 (Sample of Materials)

6. LS030 (Implement Landscaping Scheme) Upon approval of the landscaping details (including provision for landscape planting, materials for hardsurfacing, walls, fencing and other means of enclosure and any changes in levels) pursuant to Condition 1:

a) the approved scheme shall be fully implemented with new planting carried out in the planting season October to March inclusive following occupation of the building(s) or the completion of the development whichever is the sooner, or in accordance with a timetable to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority; b) all planting shall be carried out in accordance with British Standards, including regard for plant storage and ground conditions at the time of planting; c) the scheme shall be properly maintained for a period of 5 years and any plants (including those retained as part of the scheme) which die, are removed or become damaged or diseased within this period shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and the same species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation; and d) the whole scheme shall be subsequently retained.

Reason - In the interests of visual amenity, to ensure that the approved landscaping scheme is carried out at the proper times and to ensure the establishment and maintenance of all trees and plants in accordance with Policy BE2 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

7. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Prior to the commencement of demolition/development the existing buildings should be checked for bats by a suitably licensed individual and the results of the check along with any necessary mitigation measures should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Subsequently all approved mitigation measures shall be implemented and completed in full.

Reason To ensure the protection of protected species and in accordance with policy NE21 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

8. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)

The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of

17 the Development Plan and, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in conflict with the following policies: a) The proposal maximises the use of a brownfield site in a local centre. It respects the setting and character of the site and surrounding area and will not significantly affect the amenities of the area - Policies SO4, LC2, PCS05, PCS13, PCS22 and PCS23 b) Landscaping can be secured as a Reserved matter - Policy BE2 c) The viability of Affordable Housing provision has been assessed and the scheme is unable to support the provision of affordable housing - Policy PCS06 d) Recreation, Heathland and Transportation contributions have been secured by Unilateral/106 agreement - Policies L17, NE16, PCS28 and T13 e) An appropriate condition is attached so that protected species will not be harmed - Policy NE21 f) Subject to conditions the proposal supports the principles of sustainable development, access and movement - Policies PCS15, PCSS19, TO2-TO5, T15, PCS31, PCS32, PCS35

2. IN13 (Kerb Crossing to be Lowered)

3. IN43 (Section 106 Agreement)

18 ITEM NO 04 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/00418/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 36 Brownsea Road, Poole, BH13 7QP PROPOSALS Erect two detached dwellings. REGISTERED 26 April, 2010 APPLICANT Seven Developments

WARD Canford Cliffs

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before committee at the request of Councillor Deas due to concerns about the change in character of the streetscene and appropriateness of design .

1.2 Recommendation for Refuse

THE PROPOSAL Demolish existing house and erect two detached dwellings.

MAIN ISSUES The main issues to consider with regard to this proposal are: - acceptability of detached properties and plot subdivision in context of site characteristics - appropriateness of design and appearance of dwellings - impact on neighbouring amenities and protected trees

SITE DESCRIPTION This site is situated at the junction of Brownsea Road, Panorama Road and Grasmere Road and is occupied by a large chalet style bungalow. Vehicular access is from Grasmere Road serving a detached garage and carport. There is also pedestrian access off Brownsea Road.

Four Scots Pine trees on the Panorama Road frontage of the site are covered by a TPO.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 2003- Planning permission refused for demolition and the erection of 2 detached 4 bed- houses

2004- Planning permission refused for demolition and the erection of a detached house and a chalet bungalow(04/11673/006). A subsequent appeal was dismissed in July 2005 with the Inspector stating that it would be harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The following comments from the Inspector's decision letter are relevant to the current application:

19 The appeal site is larger than adjoining plots. The neighbouring area contains a variety of mainly detached dwellings set in generous plots and a feeling of spaciousness is particularly evident in the case of corner plots. The two new dwellings would occupy smaller plots than other plots in the vicinity. The development would occupy much of the open area between the existing dwelling and no.24 Grasmere Road, and would extend development significantly closer to the Brownsea Road and Panorama Road frontages. The gap between the 2 new dwellings would be less than 2m at its closest point and the spread of development across the site would result in a significant change in the street scene. Creating 2 new plots and spreading development across the site would detract from the spacious feeling that prevails in the street scene in this location. The reduced plot sizes and the proximity of dwellings to one another would also give the proposed development a cramped appearance out of keeping with the surroundings. The proposal would be likely to cause damage to the root systems of protected trees.

2006- Planning permission approved to demolish the existing dwelling and erect a detached house with integral garage accessed from Grasmere Road.

2007- Planning permission refused to demolish the existing dwelling and garage and erect two link-detached houses accessed from Grasmere Road because flood risk was not adequately addressed as required by PPS25. The proposals also failed to secure the necessary contributions towards recreation provision and Heathland mitigation.

2008- Planning permission approved following consideration by Planning Committee in June to demolish existing dwelling and garage. Erect pair of semi-detached dwellings with basement parking (07/11673/009 refers).  This development was considered to be similar in size and siting to the replacement house approved in 2006.  Although the new building would have a greater mass and scale due to the enlarged roof and second floor accommodation it was considered that the proposal would not materially harm either the existing street scene or the character of the area.

An application for two detached dwellings with ridged roofs is considered in ITEM 05 on this agenda (10/00540 refers).

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION NA

CONSULTATIONS Environment Agency No objection subject to conditions and informatives to ensure that the basement is not altered to habitable accommodation and shall be protected on all sides by walls and ramps set to provide a minimum crest level of 3.7m above Ordnance Datum. Other conditions suggested to ensure that there are no reductions in ground levels around the buildings or cill levels and defences below 3.7m AOD.

20 Natural England Based on findings of protected species survey no objection is raised, but would advise that the advice given within the comments section of the report are followed. In addition we would recommend a resurvey in 12 months time if no development has taken place.

Poole Harbour Commissioners Hold a covenant over the property. Before any alterations are made the applicant will also require written approval from the Commissioners

Sandbanks Association Object to two detached houses. Site is not large and resulting sites would be very narrow and proposed three storey houses could appear disproportionately tall. Cramping of a prominent open corner site.

Head of Transportation Services Parking for at least two cars per property satisfies the parking guidelines and the access incorporates pedestrian visibility within the design and location of the front wall and gates. The existing access in Grasmere Road will become redundant and a condition should require the developer to reinstate the footway. No highway objection subject to condition to secure parking/turning provision, and contributions in accordance with SEDTCS.

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours One letter of objection raising concern with regard to distortion on drawings regarding proximity of plot 2 to 24 Grasmere Road which is 1.95m from the boundary rather than 3.2m as indicated. Proximity is also significant in view of planned excavation Proposal exceeds approved scheme in terms of height and proximity to boundary and will impact on privacy to no.24.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS POLICY AND GUIDANCE

Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS05 Broad Locations for Residential Development PCS23 Local Distinctiveness PCS28 Dorset Heaths International Designations PCS29 Poole Harbour Spa and Ramsar Site PCS31 Sustainable Energy - General PCS32 Sustainable Homes PCS35 Energy And Resources Statements PCS34 Flood Risk

21 Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 NE28 Tree Preservation Orders BE02 Landscaping T13 Traffic Generated by Development L17 Provision for Recreational Facilities NE16 Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Planning Policy Statement PPS25 Development and Flood Risk PPS03 Housing

PLANNING JUDGEMENT  The existing house is not in a Conservation Area and is of no particular architectural merit and there is no objection to its demolition.  There are a variety of property styles and sizes in vicinity of the site but the dwellings are predominantly detached two storey buildings with ridged roofs.  The site is in a prominent corner location and is marginally larger than the average plot in the area.  Compared to the appeal proposal the current scheme proposes approximately 30m2 less built footprint and provides for a better building plot relationship particularly when viewed from Panorama Road and Brownsea Road. The proposed buildings have a flat roofed design rather than the ridge roofs on the appeal scheme.  Notwithstanding the earlier dismissed appeal, subsequent consent for redevelopment of this site has allowed a scheme for a pair of semi detached dwellings and this consent is still capable of implementation so it is a material consideration. It is therefore not considered that an in principle objection to two dwellings could be sustained.  The issue therefore is the extent to which the current proposal differs from the built form and characteristics of development previously approved, in terms of its impact in the street scene and on neighbouring properties.  Compared to the extant consent the proposed detached houses would have a similar first floor "eaves" level and the roof of the second floor would be below the previously approved ridge height. The footprint would be similar but the detached properties would have less bulk and mass compared to the single building previously approved and this would be a visual improvement in the street scene.  Although the new buildings would appear as three storey in character compared to the two and a half/three storey appearance of the extant scheme it is considered that the current proposal would reinforce the characteristic of single dwelling houses in the area and the buildings would have an acceptable building/plot relationship.  The proposed building on plot 2 would be approximately 0.9m from the common boundary with no.24 Grasmere Road but this is only marginally closer (0.2m) to the boundary than the extant consent.  The ground floor rearward projecting element of the proposed building on plot 2 would be 0.7m further away from the common boundary with no.24 and given the limited difference between the proposed and extant building's relationship to no.24 it is considered that the physical relationship of the proposed scheme would not result in any significant additional harm to the amenities of the occupiers of no.24. However, the glazing and balcony arrangements of the upper storey are likely to result in

22 overlooking and loss of privacy to no.24 and obscured glazing and balcony screening would be required to mitigate this concern. Although these matters could be dealt with by condition it is likely that the additional screening would increase the bulk and mass of the building's upper storey.  It is considered that the contemporary flat roofed design of the proposed buildings combined with their visual prominence on a corner site would be visually incongruous in this location and the proposal would therefore be contrary to policies PCS05 and PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy.  No highway objection or arboricultural concerns have been raised and subject to conditions to secure the parking layout and tree protection the proposal is considered acceptable with regard to these matters.  The flood risk has been addressed and conditions are required to ensure implementation and retention of the stipulated measures.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS The applicant has not yet submitted a signed Unilateral Undertaking to secure the contributions to mitigate the increased demand on heathlands, transport infrastructure and recreation facilities.

CONCLUSION The design of the proposed dwellings is considered incongruous in this location and given the visual prominence of the site the proposed development would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area contrary to policies PCS05 and PCS23.

BACKGROUND PAPERS Appeal case 04/11673/006, consent ref 07/11673/009 and current application ref10/00540

10.0 RECOMMENDATION 10.1 It is therefore recommended that this application be Refuse for the following reasons: Reasons 1. RR000 (Non Standard Reason) The design and appearance of the proposed dwellings on a prominent corner plot would be visually incongruous and harmful to the character and appearance of the area contrary to policies PCS05 and PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted 2009.

2. RR010 (Recreational Contribution)

3. RR060 (5Km of a Site of Specific Interest)

4. RR090 (SE Dorset Transport Contribution Scheme)

Informative Notes

1. IN66 (Rec/Transport/Heathland Combined)

23 ITEM NO 05 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/00540/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 36 Brownsea Road, Poole, BH13 7QP PROPOSALS Demolish existing house and erect two detached dwellings with basement garages. Amended plans received 06/07 and 15/07 REGISTERED 26 April, 2010 APPLICANT Seven Developments

WARD Canford Cliffs

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before committee at the request of Councillor Deas due to concerns about the change in character of the streetscene and appropriateness of design .

1.2 Recommendation for Grant Section 106

THE PROPOSAL Demolish existing house and erect two detached dwellings with basement garages.

MAIN ISSUES The main issues to consider with regard to this proposal are: - acceptability of detached properties and plot subdivision in context of site characteristics and history - appropriateness of design and appearance of dwellings - impact on neighbouring amenities and protected trees

SITE DESCRIPTION This site is situated at the junction of Brownsea Road with Panorama Road and Grasmere Road and is occupied by a large chalet style bungalow. Vehicular access is from Grasmere Road serving a detached garage and carport. There is also pedestrian access off Brownsea Road.

Four Scots Pine trees on the Panorama Road frontage of the site are covered by a TPO.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 2003 Planning permission refused for demolition and the erection of 2 detached 4 bed-houses

2004 Planning permission refused for demolition and the erection of a detached house and a

24 chalet bungalow(04/11673/006). A subsequent appeal was dismissed in July 2005 with the Inspector stating that it would be harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The following comments from the Inspector's decision letter are relevant to the current application: The appeal site is larger than adjoining plots. The neighbouring area contains a variety of mainly detached dwellings set in generous plots and a feeling of spaciousness is particularly evident in the case of corner plots. The two new dwellings would occupy smaller plots than other plots in the vicinity. The development would occupy much of the open area between the existing dwelling and no.24 Grasmere Road, and would extend development significantly closer to the Brownsea Road and Panorama Road frontages. The gap between the 2 new dwellings would be less than 2m at its closest point and the spread of development across the site would result in a significant change in the street scene. Creating 2 new plots and spreading development across the site would detract from the spacious feeling that prevails in the street scene in this location. The reduced plot sizes and the proximity of dwellings to one another would also give the proposed development a cramped appearance out of keeping with the surroundings. The proposal would be likely to cause damage to the root systems of protected trees.

2006 Planning permission approved to demolish the existing dwelling and erect a detached house with integral garage accessed from Grasmere Road.

2007 Planning permission refused to demolish the existing dwelling and garage and erect two link-detached houses accessed from Grasmere Road because flood risk was not adequately addressed as required by PPS25. The proposals also failed to secure the necessary contributions towards recreation provision and Heathland mitigation.

2008 Planning permission approved following consideration by Planning Committee in June to demolish existing dwelling and garage. Erect pair of semi-detached dwellings with basement parking (07/11673/009 refers).  This development was considered to be similar in size and siting to the replacement house approved in 2006.  Although the new building would have a greater mass and scale due to the enlarged roof and second floor accommodation it was considered that the proposal would not materially harm either the existing street scene or the character of the area.

An application for two detached dwellings of contemporary flat roofed design is considered in ITEM 4 on this agenda (10/00418 refers).

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION NA

25 CONSULTATIONS Environment Agency No objection subject to conditions and informatives to ensure that the basement is not altered to habitable accommodation and shall be protected on all sides by walls and ramps set to provide a minimum crest level of 3.7m above Ordnance Datum. Other conditions suggested to ensure that there are no reductions in ground levels around the buildings or cill levels and defences below 3.7m AOD.

Natural England Based on findings of protected species survey no objection is raised, but would advise that the advice given within the comments section of the report are followed. In addition we would recommend a resurvey in 12 months time if no development has taken place.

Poole Harbour Commissioners Hold a covenant over the property. Before any alterations are made the applicant will also require written approval from the Commissioners

Sandbanks Association Object to two detached houses. Site is not large and resulting sites would be very narrow and proposed three storey houses could appear disproportionately tall. Cramping of a prominent open corner site.

Head of Transportation Services Parking for at least two cars per property satisfies the parking guidelines and the access incorporates pedestrian visibility within the design and location of the front wall and gates. The existing access in Grasmere Road will become redundant and a condition should require the developer to reinstate the footway. No highway objection subject to condition to secure parking/turning provision, and contributions in accordance with SEDTCS.

REPRESENTATIONS Neighbours One letter of objection raising concern with regard to distortion on drawings regarding proximity of plot 2 to 24 Grasmere Road which is 1.95m from the boundary rather than 3.2m as indicated. Proximity is also significant in view of planned excavation Proposal exceeds approved scheme in terms of height and proximity to boundary and will impact on privacy to no.24.

POLICY AND GUIDANCE

26 Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS05 Broad Locations for Residential Development PCS23 Local Distinctiveness PCS28 Dorset Heaths International Designations PCS29 Poole Harbour Spa and Ramsar Site PCS31 Sustainable Energy - General PCS32 Sustainable Homes PCS34 Flood Risk

Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 NE28 Tree Preservation Orders BE02 Landscaping T13 Traffic Generated by Development L17 Provision for Recreational Facilities NE16 Sites of Special Scientific Interest

PLANNING JUDGEMENT  The existing house is not in a Conservation Area and is of no particular architectural merit and there is no objection to its demolition.  There are a variety of property styles and sizes in vicinity of the site but the dwellings are predominantly detached two storey buildings with ridged roofs.  The site is in a prominent corner location and is marginally larger than the average plot in the area.  Compared to the appeal proposal the current scheme proposes approximately 36m2 less built footprint and provides for a better building plot relationship particularly when viewed from Panorama and Brownsea Roads.  Notwithstanding the earlier dismissed appeal, subsequent consent for redevelopment of this site has allowed a scheme for a pair of semi detached dwellings and this consent is still capable of implementation so it is a material consideration. It is therefore not considered that an in principle objection to two dwellings could be sustained.  The issue therefore is the extent to which the current proposal differs from the built form and characteristics of development previously approved, in terms of its impact in the street scene and on neighbouring properties.  Compared to the extant consent the proposed detached houses would have a similar ridge height, footprint and gabled roof forms. The detached properties would however, have less bulk and mass compared to the single building previously approved and this would be a visual improvement in the street scene.  Although the new buildings would appear as three storey in character compared to the two and a half/three storey appearance of the extant scheme it is considered that the current proposal would reinforce the characteristic of single dwelling houses in the area and the buildings would have an acceptable building/plot relationship that would not be visually incongruous in this location.  The proposed building on plot 2 would be approximately 0.9m from the common boundary with no.24 Grasmere Road but this is only marginally closer (0.2m) to the boundary than the extant consent. The current proposal indicates a limited realignment of the gabled elevations at third floor of the building on plot 2 (0.9m at rear, 1.1m at front). Given the limited difference between the proposed and extant building's relationship to no.24 it is considered that the proposed scheme would not

27 result in any significant additional harm to the amenities of the occupiers of no.24.  No highway objection or arboricultural concerns have been raised and subject to conditions to secure the parking layout and tree protection the proposal is considered acceptable with regard to these matters.  The flood risk has been addressed and conditions are required to ensure implementation and retention of the stipulated measures.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS The applicant has prepared a Unilateral Undertaking to secure the contributions to mitigate the increased demand on heathlands, transport infrastructure and recreation facilities.

CONCLUSION There is no objection to the loss of the existing building, an extant consent allows for two dwellings on the site in a single building and the proposal would result in a built form with less scale and mass compared to the single building previously approved on the site.

BACKGROUND PAPERS Appeal case 04/11673/006, and consent ref 07/11673/009

10.0 RECOMMENDATION 10.1 It is therefore recommended that this application be Grant Section 106 subject to the following:

2.A financial contribution of £1,724 (plus administration fee) towards mitigating the harm to the SSSI protected Dorset Heathlands in accordance with the Dorset Heathlands Interim Planning Framework 2006-2009 and policies NE16 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State direction September 2007) and PCS28 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted on 19th February 2009.

Conditions 1.GN150 (Detailed Permission - Time Expiry 3 Year)

2. GN030 (Sample of Materials - Submission of Details)

3. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s)) Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the first floor

28 windows in the east side elevation of plot 1 and the west elevation of plot 2 shall be glazed with obscured glass in a form sufficient to prevent external views and shall either be a fixed light or hung in such a way as to prevent the effect of obscure glazing being negated by reason of opening.

Reason - To protect the amenity and privacy of the adjoining properties and in accordance with Policy PCS05 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted 2009.

4. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

5. TR070 (Tree Protection - Protective Fencing)

6. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) In the event that demolition does not commence within a year of this consent, a further bat survey shall be carried out and submitted to the Local Planning Authority in order to confirm that the building(s) is/are not occupied by bats. If bats are found during the survey the applicants should contact Natural England and no demolition shall take place until a scheme of mitigation to address the impact on bats has been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason In order to ensure that adequate survey and mitigation arrangements are in place to address the impacts of the development on bats and in accordance with Policy NE21 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

7. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) Prior to occupation of the dwellings hereby approved, the walls, vehicular and pedestrian access thresholds along the boundaries of the site with Grasmere Road and Brownsea Road shall be constructed to provide a minimum crest level of 3.70m above Ordnance Datum. These crest levels shall thereafter be retained unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason To minimise flood risk to the basements through out the design life of the buildings hereby approved and in compliance with the flood risk assessment submitted in accordance with PPS25.

8. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Prior to occupation the basements shall be protected on all sides by formal walls and ramps to the approval of building control and set to provide a minimum crest level of 3.7m Above Ordnance Datum and this flood level protection shall thereafter be retained.

Reason To minimise flood risk to the basement throughout the building's design life in accordance with PPS25.

29 9. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) 0rder 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no internal or other alterations shall be made to the basement, including any change of use to bedrooms or other habitable areas.

Reason To minimise risk of loss of life and in accordance with PPS25.

10. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) 0rder 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), there shall be no reduction in ground levels around the buildings or the creation of external access or additional windows into the basement. There shall be no reduction in cill levels and defences below 3.7m AOD.

Reason To minimise future flood risk and in accordance with PPS25

11. LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)

12. LS050 (Hard Landscaping)

Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) Order 2003

a) The proposal will compliment or enhance the character and appearance of the area - Policies PCS05 and PCS23 b) Residential Amenity will be preserved - Policy PCS05 c) Adequate measures have been taken to preserve protected trees - Policy NE28 d) Recreation, Heathland and Transportation contributions have been secured by Unilateral/106 agreement - Policies L17, NE16, PCS28 and T13 e) Flood risk has been addressed - PCS34 and PPS25

2. IN00 (Non Standard Informative) Poole Harbour Commissioners have advised that they hold a covenant over the property and before any alterations are made the applicant will also require written approval from the Commissioners.

30 31 ITEM NO 06 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/01010/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 84 Fontmell Road, Broadstone, BH18 8NP PROPOSALS Erect single storey extension at the rear and side to create garage and additional living accommodation. Demolish existing garage and chimney stack. REGISTERED 29 July, 2010 APPLICANT Mr P Pinhorne

WARD Broadstone

CASE OFFICER Laura Archer

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before committee due to the applicants being employees of the Borough of Poole.

1.2 Recommendation for Grant with Conditions

THE PROPOSAL Erect single storey extension at the rear and side to create garage and additional living accommodation. Demolish existing garage and chimney stack.

MAIN ISSUES  Whether the proposal would complement the character and setting of the site and locality  If there is a materially impact upon neighbouring privacy and amenity  Whether the proposal would have an adverse impact upon the health and vitality of protected trees

SITE DESCRIPTION The application site is a detached bungalow with L-shape footprint, with a detached garage to the side. Fontmell Road is a residential road characterised by bungalows predominantly with hipped roof.

There is a protected tree within the neighbouring property No.86 Fontmell, which extends into the site.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY An application to erect single storey extensions to the side and rear, and demolish existing garage and chimney stack was submitted in October 2009. In the absence of any arboricultural information, it was considered likely, that the proposal would have had an adverse impact upon a tree sited along the boundary with No.86. The application was subsequently withdrawn and a tree preservation order was served in respect of the tree.

32 PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE None.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION All neighbouring properties were notified of the proposal and a site notice was displayed to the front of the property for public interest on open space. The consultation period will not expire until 9th September 2010.

CONSULTATIONS None.

REPRESENTATIONS No letters of representation have been submitted at the time of writing this report.

POLICY AND GUIDANCE There are no significant strategic implications however the following local policies are listed as applying to this application:-

Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS23 Local Distinctiveness

Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 H12 House Alterations and Extensions NE28 Tree Preservation Orders

PLANNING JUDGEMENT

Character and Setting The proposal would result in a significant increase to the footprint of the bungalow, however this would not be largely apparent within the streetscene of Fontmell Road.

The proposals would retain the height of the existing and continue the hipped roof design, which is characteristic of the surrounding area. As such, it is considered that the proposal would complement the character and setting of the site and locality.

Neighbouring Privacy and Amenity Alterations to windows within the South-East elevation (side) are set largely within the original dwelling with the exception of a window towards the rear, which would face onto the flank wall of the garage within the neighbouring property (No.82). Similarly the doors opening from the sitting room on the North-West elevation (side) are also within the original dwelling.

The extension at the rear would project by a further 4.7 metres. Impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of No.82 would be mitigated by the sitting of the garage. The demolition of the existing garage of No.84 is likely to have a positive impact for the occupiers of No.86 as the built form would be recessed from the boundary.

33 Trees The current proposal is revised from the previous scheme, in that the extension is recessed from within the root protection area of the tree. An arboricultural impact assessment and method statement has also been submitted to support the proposal. Provided that the proposal is carried out in accordance with the arboricultural method statement, it is unlikely to have an adverse impact upon the health and vitality of this tree.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS Not applicable.

CONCLUSION The proposal will complement the character and setting of the site and locality and would not materially impact upon the privacy and amenities of occupiers of neighbouring properties. Adequate trees measures would be secured to protect preserved trees.

10.0 RECOMMENDATION 10.1 It is therefore recommended that this application be Grant with Conditions subject to the following:

Conditions

2. GN050 (Matching Materials)

3. TR030 (Implementation of Details of Arb M Stmt)

Informative Notes

a) The proposal will positively compliment or enhance the character and appearance of the area - Policy PCS23 b) Residential Amenity will be preserved - Policy H12 c) Adequate measures have been taken to preserve protected trees - Policy NE28

34 ITEM NO 07 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/01014/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 216 West Way, Broadstone, BH18 9LL PROPOSALS Erect a two storey side extension and single storey front extension. REGISTERED 2 August, 2010 APPLICANT Mr & Mrs R Spark AGENT Mr R J Griffin

WARD Broadstone

CASE OFFICER Julie Shearing

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before committee due to the site proximity to a Local Councillor.

THE PROPOSAL Erect a two storey side extension and single storey front extension.

MAIN ISSUES To assess the impact on residential amenity and the streetscene and character of the area.

SITE DESCRIPTION The application site is a detached two storey dwelling in a cul de sac location with off road parking, and a detached garage to the side. The cul de sac is open plan with the houses set back from each other. The area is predominantly two storey dwellings, with bungalows immediately to the rear of the application site.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY None relevant to the application site itself.

PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE None requested

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION

CONSULTATIONS None received.

35 REPRESENTATIONS Neighbouring properties to the application site were notified of the application. No letters of representation have been received.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS POLICY AND GUIDANCE

The following policies are listed as applying to this application. Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS23 Local Distinctiveness

Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 H12 House Alterations and Extensions

PLANNING JUDGEMENT

Streetscene and Character The character of the area is detached two storey dwellings located on a residential housing estate. The cul de sac where the application site sits is open plan with houses set back from the road. There is an existing two storey side extension at 214 West Way. The proposal is close to the boundary with 214 West Way, but as the property is set forward of 214, both properties will maintain their detached appearance, rather than create a terracing affect which would cause material harm. The proposal will be visible within the streetscene, however the scale and mass of the proposal fits with the original dwelling, the extension will appear subservient to the original dwelling and the materials will match the existing property. The proposal is therefore considered to maintain the character and appearance of the area.

Residential Amenity As there are no windows in the side elevation of 214 West Way, the two small windows proposed are unlikely to cause any additional harm. The new window which serves the landing is proposed to be obscure glazed. However, it is not considered necessary to ensure this window is obscure glazed as any views will be to the front garden area which is not considered to be harmful to the occupiers residential amenity. The additional 1st floor bedroom window at the rear will not cause any additional harm with regards to overlooking or loss of privacy to the occupants of 248 West Way as adequate back to back separation distances will be retained. As the properties are staggered, 218 West Way is unlikely to be adversely affected by the proposal.

Car Parking The proposal will demolish the existing detached garage, but a new garage is proposed. In addition off road parking will remain for two cars on site.

CONCLUSION The two storey side extension and part single storey front extension are close to the boundary, but are not considered to cause any material harm to residential amenity or the character of the streetscene due to the staggered relationship of the properties to the road in this cul de sac.

36 10.0 RECOMMENDATION 10.1 It is therefore recommended that this application be Grant with Conditions subject to the following:

Conditions

1.GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))

Informative Notes

a) The proposal will positively compliment or enhance the character and appearance of the area, the materials will match the existing, and the scale and mass of the proposal is in keeping with the existing - Policy PCS23 b) Residential Amenity will be preserved - Policy H12

37 ITEM NO 08 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/01001/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 34 Creekmoor Lane, Poole, BH17 7BS PROPOSALS Alterations to form rooms in the roofspace REGISTERED 29 July, 2010 APPLICANT Mr & Mrs J Rampton AGENT R Wilkinson Arch & Bldg Serv.

WARD Creekmoor

CASE OFFICER Laura Archer

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before committee as the applicant is a Councillor of the Borough of Poole.

THE PROPOSAL Alterations to form rooms in the roofspace.

MAIN ISSUES  Whether the proposal would complement the character and setting of the site and locality  If there is a materially impact upon neighbouring privacy and amenity  Whether the proposal would have an adverse impact upon the preservation of protected trees

SITE DESCRIPTION The application site is a detached residential bungalow with hipped roof form and small fronting gable. Within this part of Creekmoor Lane, the area is predominantly residential comprised of bungalows.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY None relevant.

PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE None.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION None. CONSULTATIONS

38 None applicable.

REPRESENTATIONS All neighbouring properties were notified of the proposal. No letters of representation have been received.

POLICY AND GUIDANCE There are no significant strategic implications however the following local policies are listed as applying to this application:-

Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 H12 House Alterations and Extensions NE28 Tree Preservation Orders

PLANNING JUDGEMENT

Character and Setting The prevailing character in this part is bungalows with hipped roofs, however the adjoining row of 6 properties to the South of No.34 are bungalows with fronting gable design. The proposed alterations to the roof, would form a gable formation similarly.

Whilst a number of properties have converted the roofspace into additional accommodation, this is generally in a discreet manner, however there are a number of properties with dormer windows to the front and side. The current proposal would create further accommodation within the roofspace, with a dormer window to the side and glazing to the arch of the gable on the front elevation. Whilst these features would be evident within the streetscene, the bungalow would retain the existing height, and it is considered the proposal would complement the modest character and setting of bungalows within the locality. Neighbouring Privacy and Amenities The proposed dormer window to the side elevation is proposed to be obscure glazed. The window would serve a shower room and as such, would be reasonable to obscure glaze and should be further secured by condition. There are velux windows proposed within both side elevations, which given their design within the roof slope, views to the ground floor windows of the neighbouring properties would be largely limited. The footprint and height of the bungalow would be generally retained as existing. The alterations to the roof to form a gable may be evident to neighbouring occupants, though it is not likely to cause any significant impact upon their amenities.

39 Trees There is an Oak tree within the front of the site, which is separated from the bungalow by brick paving. There is a significant clearance between the canopy of the tree and the bungalow, and the proposal would not require significant construction below ground level. It is however possible, that the tree could be harmed during construction of the proposal, and tree protection fencing would provide adequate mitigation. Details of which, could be secured by condition. INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS Not applicable.

CONCLUSION The proposal would complement the character and setting of the site and locality. Neighbouring privacy and amenities would not be materially impacted. Adequate measures could be imposed to mitigate impact upon protected trees.

Conditions 1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))

4. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s)) Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the dormer window on the side elevation (serving the shower room) shall be glazed with obscure glass in a form sufficient to prevent external views and shall either be a fixed light or hung in such a way as to prevent the effect of obscure glazing being negated by reason of opening.

Reason - To protect the amenity and privacy of the adjoining properties and in accordance with Policy H12 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

40 a) The proposal will positively compliment the character and appearance of the area - Policy PCS23 b) Residential Amenity will be preserved and appropriate conditions imposed to mitigate harm - Policy H12 c) Adequate measures have been taken to preserve protected trees and appropriate conditions imposed to mitigate harm - Policy NE28

41 ITEM NO 09 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/00914/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS Port Of Poole, Berth 1, Poole, Dorset. BH15 4AJ PROPOSALS Conversion of redundant ferry berth to a 59 berth Marina REGISTERED 12 July, 2010 APPLICANT Mr Ramsbottom

WARD Hamworthy East

CASE OFFICER James Gilfillan

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before committee due to the proposal being a departure from the Development Plan.

THE PROPOSAL Conversion of redundant ferry berth to a 59 berth Marina.

The works include: Siting of tubular steel piles to support the floating structures; Installing a breakwater consisting of concrete pontoons, to enclose the marina; Concrete floats with timber decking to provide access and a layout of finger pontoons for berths; Versadock berths for smaller craft; An access bridge would link between the existing Ro-Ro bridge onto the pontoons; Car parking, toilets, admin and waste disposal facilities would be provided immediately adjacent to the berth on existing Port land.

MAIN ISSUES Loss of industrial, port related, deep water frontage. Provision of a leisure/tourism facility. Impact on protected important natural habitats and species.

SITE DESCRIPTION The scheme is proposed for the ferry berth basin in the south-east corner of the Port. The infrastructure for the Roll On - Roll Off ferry service is still in place and the berth has been used as a back up to the conventional 'alongside' quays and a lay-by berth for tankers.

The Port is designated as Employment Land and specifically Port Related Development. The deep water around the edge of the Port are identified.

The site is surrounded by port based activities, the infrastructure for the channel ferries, warehouses and infrastructure for the goods, freight and aggregate ships and Sunseeker

42 boat building activities.

The harbour is identified as accommodating habitats and species warranting its designation as a SSSI, Ramsar and SPA.

Access to the site is possible from the north, from New Quay Road, New Harbour Road and across the Port Rail Link.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY None to this proposal or this section of the Port.

PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE Verbal discussion regarding the proposal not being 'Port Related' and therefore planning permission would be required and that the impact on the natural environment would be major consideration.

EIA regulations Screening Opinion, inconclusive due to lack of response from Natural England.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION Applicant engaged with Natural England to consider the implications on the Harbour SSSI, Ramsar and SPA.

CONSULTATIONS The Head of Transportation Services: No objection subject to details of secure cycle storage.

Natural England: No objection, subject to conditions, citing the proposals are unlikely to have a significant effect on the SSSI, Ramsar and SPA, detrimental to the purpose of those designations.

Environment Agency: Object to the lack of Flood Risk Assessment. (An FRA has been received and a further response is expected from the EA and will be reported).

Wessex Water: No objection.

Network Rail: No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS One letter of representation has been received objecting to the proposal due to the impact of light pollution, lack of cycling provision and safe access for pedestrians. The proposed office accommodation is insufficient and the potential contamination.

Poole Tourism Management Board: Support the proposal for the improved opportunities and facilities for visitors to arrive by boat and the chance of attracting further water based 'events'. Also acknowledging the benefit to the local economy of visiting yachts and contributing towards the aspirations of the Poole Tourism Partnership Strategy.

43 POLICY AND GUIDANCE

STRATEGIC CONTEXT EIA (England Regulations) Habitats Regulations 1994

LOCAL CONTEXT Poole Harbour Aquatic Management Plan 2006

The following policies are listed as applying to this application.

Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS02 Existing Employment Areas PCS03 Poole Port PCS23 Local Distinctiveness PCS29 Poole Harbour Spa and Ramsar Site PCS34 Flood Risk

Strategic Objective 3: - To Nurture Economic Prosperity

Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 E10 Deep Water Frontage E16 Layout of Potentially Polluting Uses L11 Marina, Jetty, Slipway NE01 Pollution and Noise T13 Traffic Generated by Development NE16 Sites of Special Scientific Interest NE23 Coastal Zone and Shoreline Character TO1 Tourism Assets

PLANNING JUDGEMENT The scheme proposes to use an underused area of the port. As indicated above it has been used as a temporary haven/berth for cargo and fuel tankers since the original Ro-Ro ferry was withdrawn. The proposal would provide additional boat/yacht mooring close to the Town Centre. The applicants, who run the existing Town Quay Yacht Haven, indicate that there is a need for additional mooring. Such a facility would provide for additional water borne visitors to the town and contribute towards achieving the 'Tourism Strategy for Poole' aim of improving the competitiveness of Poole as a tourism destination.

The requests for moorings have been for permanent berthing for 12-15m vessels as well as for super yachts, 30-60m. The existing basin already has a slipway allowing an opportunity to launch/remove boats.

Policy Whilst the proposal is water related, the Port has been designated for Marine related industry and employment. PCS03 seeks to protect Poole Port as a regionally significant feeder port, able to accommodate cruise, passenger and freight ships. The deep water frontages around the edge of the port are reserved for uses and activities requiring such frontage. The proposal would not deliver an industrial related activity and is not one that

44 would require the deep water frontage in which it is located. Therefore the proposal would not be in accordance with this Core Strategy Policy.

However, Strategic Objective 3 of the Core Strategy specifically references the Port as a valuable asset to the town, who's role needs to be supported. Key outcomes of the objective are maintaining the role of the Port and supporting its ability to adapt to new challenges. It is considered that this proposal will bring back into active use an under utilised part of the port, bringing valuable economic, tourism and leisure benefits to the town.

The design of the scheme involves driving piles into the sea bed and then attaching a series of floating pontoons from which the boats would be moored. A larger set of pontoons would extend out across the mouth of the existing basin, to provide a breakwater, sheltering the marina. An access bridge would link the pontoons to the original 'Linkspan' to the Ro-Ro ferry.

This form of development and construction, whilst permanent, could be relatively easily removed and would not compromise the future use of the deep water frontage or ferry basin in the event they are required for use in the future.

The applicant is responsible for, and manages the Port Estate, as such they act in the interests of the Port and need to ensure it is successful as a commercial port. In the event other opportunities come forward to use this site or adjacent areas it would not be difficult to remove or revise the layout and arrangement to ensure most efficient use of the port is achieved.

The land based elements of the proposals (toilet/shower block etc.) would also be of a relatively temporary nature. The applicant is clearly satisfied that they will provide adequately for the marina and they would not compromise the land for future port related development.

Natural Environment In expressing their acceptance of the proposals Natural England have recommended a variety of conditions, these fall in to two categories, those related to the construction of the marina and then those relating to its operation. They are all designed to protect the integrity of the protected species and habitats throughout Poole Harbour SPA and Ramsar sites.

Those relating to the construction are reasonable and could be imposed. Those relating to activities and operation of the marina could also be imposed. There are however several placing an onus on the applicant to undertake monitoring, patrolling, raising awareness and engagement with users that would be difficult for the Local Planning Authority to monitor or enforce, it would therefore be unreasonable for them to be imposed as conditions.

Further to this the applicant as Competent Authority for works within Poole Harbour are party to and bound by the Poole Harbour Aquatic Management Plan 2006.

Highways

45 The size of the marina would not give rise to numbers of vehicle movements above those that would occur if the original Ro-Ro ferry returned. A secure access route would be provided across the port to the public highways to the north. In the event the proposed parking spaces are insufficient additional parking could be provided within the red line or extended across adjacent land, in control of the applicant.

Appearance The works would not have a significant impact on the appearance of the coastline and would be conducive with the section of coastline against which they would be seen.

Flooding Whilst the development would be located within the flood risk area around the edge of the harbour, the water based elements would not be at risk, the land based facilities would. It has been proposed to raise the buildings above the existing ground level. Furthermore the buildings are temporary in their nature and easily replaceable.

Lighting No information has been provided regarding the nature and extent of lighting to be installed, any lighting would be considered against the back drop of the floodlights in existence on the Town Quay and Port, where some operations are 24hr. It is therefore unlikely that any lighting would cause greater light spillage or disturbance.

Economics With the very recent withdrawal of the Barfleur by Brittany Ferries, within the port, this offers Poole Harbour Commissioners a revenue stream and an opportunity to benefit from the additional demand for moorings generated by the Olympic Games sailing events, being hosted by Weymouth.

This application reflects the Commissioners attempts at adapting to the challenges facing them and on balance it is deemed to have wider benefits for the town without compromising future options for port related development, due to the relatively temporary nature of the construction of the proposal.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS None

CONCLUSION Whilst the proposals do not accord with the principal policy designation, managing development on the site for port related industrial and employment activities, they do offer leisure, tourism and economic benefits to the town without undermining or harming the natural environment or long term use of the Port Estate.

BACKGROUND PAPERS Poole Tourism Partnership: A Tourism Strategy for Poole 2006-2015

Conditions

46 1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))

Further conditions to be reported to committee in the Addendum

Informative Notes

a) The proposal will positively compliment or enhance the character and appearance of the area - Policies PCS23 & NE23 b) Due to the 24hr operations at the port any new lighting would not cause greater light pollution than at present - Policy NE01 c) Through the imposition of conditions as required by Natural England to protect the Harbour SPA and Ramsar during construction and operation the integrity of the internationally habitats will be preserved - Policies PCS29, E16 & NE16 d) Highway safety will be maintained - Policy T13 e) The design of the land based operations will minimise the potential for harm/damage to be caused in the event of a flood - Policy PCS34 f) Whilst the proposals are not Port related employment/industrial, they offer economic, leisure and tourism benefits to the town, without compromising the future use of the site for Port related development - Policies PCS02, PCS03, E10 & TO1

47 ITEM NO 10 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/00915/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 9 Christopher Crescent, Poole, BH15 3HP PROPOSALS Demolish existing garage. Erect conservatory to rear and construct a two storey extension to side. REGISTERED 13 July, 2010 APPLICANT MRs C Shears AGENT Mark Le Grand & Co

WARD Oakdale

CASE OFFICER Emma MacWilliam

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before committee at the request of Councillor Gillard due to concerns of neighbours.

THE PROPOSAL Demolish existing garage. Erect conservatory to rear and construct a two storey extension to side.

MAIN ISSUES The main issues for consideration are the impact upon the streetscene, character of the area and neighbouring amenity.

SITE DESCRIPTION The site is occupied by a semi-detached house and is located on the south west side of Christopher Crescent. The surrounding area is residential and is characterised by a mix of detached and semi-detached houses of similar age and style. Properties are set back from the street with a linear building line. There are examples of similar extensions within the surrounding area.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY None.

PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE N/A.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION Standard neighbour consultation letters.

48 CONSULTATIONS None received.

REPRESENTATIONS One letter of objection from a neighbouring property, No. 7 Christopher Crescent raising concerns regarding the following:  Loss of amenity caused by the loss of the existing use of the current shared access into the rear gardens as a result of the extension.  Sense of enclosure and loss of useable space on the driveway due to the proximity of the extension  Loss of light to first floor side window and ground floor kitchen side entrance door  No other properties along the road have similar extensions  If the application is approved a precedent will be set for other properties to carry out similar extensions, which will create a terraced look in the street and alter the existing character and increasing property prices

POLICY AND GUIDANCE The following policies are listed as applying to this application:

Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 H12 House Alterations and Extensions T11 Car Parking Maxima

PLANNING JUDGEMENT

 The concerns raised by the neighbour at No. 7 regarding loss of use to the access area to the rear of their property and the loss of useable space on the driveway to No. 7 are not matters that can be considered as material planning considerations.  Should similar applications for extensions to properties along Christopher Crescent be submitted they will be assessed and determined on their own merits.  The design of the extension is in keeping with the existing property and surrounding area and no harm will be caused to the external appearance of the building. Materials proposed are also in keeping with the building and surrounding area.  The two storey side extension will cause no harm to the appearance of the streetscene and is similar in style and design to other extensions in this area of Christopher Crescent. It is considered that the development will positively contribute to and enhance the character of the area.  It is considered that the proposals will not appear unduly overbearing when viewed from any neighbouring properties.  There will be loss of light and outlook to the side door of No.7, however it is considered that no material harm will be caused. The main window serving the room is on the rear elevation and would be unaffected. There will be no significant increase in overshadowing due to orientation.

49  Loss of outlook and light will also occur to the first floor side window to No.7, however since this serves a landing and not a habitable room this is not considered to be materially harmful. The proposed windows will cause no further levels of overlooking than already exists.  The conservatory to the rear will give not give rise to materially harmful loss of light, outlook or privacy to any neighbouring properties due to the single storey nature of the development. Boundary fencing will mitigate any overlooking and protect privacy.  The proposed development will result in the loss of the garage for car parking and one car parking space on the drive. However, there would still be facility for car parking on the property frontage if this were required and there is unrestricted parking along Christopher Crescent. Therefore the proposals will not be contrary to council parking guidelines or result in a conflict with highway safety.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS N/A

CONCLUSION The extension will cause no material harm to the streetscene, will compliment and enhance the character of the area and preserve the amenity of neighbouring properties. As such the application is recommended for approval.

BACKGROUND PAPERS N/A

Conditions 1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))

2. GN040 (Match Materials to the Existing Building)

a) The proposal will positively compliment and enhance the character and appearance of the area - Policy PCS23 b) Residential Amenity will be preserved - Policy H12 c) Car parking is satisfactory - Policy T11

2. IN52 (Works Affecting Adjoining Land)

50 ITEM NO 11 APPLICATION NO. APP/10/01040/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 56 Blake Dene Road, Poole, BH14 8HH PROPOSALS Extension of dwelling (Revised Scheme) REGISTERED 11 August, 2010 APPLICANT Mr & Mrs Lamb AGENT Samways Surveying Ltd

WARD Penn Hill

CASE OFFICER Emma MacWilliam

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This application is brought before the Planning Committee due to being adjacent to a Councillor's property.

THE PROPOSAL Extension of dwelling (Revised Scheme). Alterations and extensions to the existing dwelling including alterations to the roof to form a bedroom with en-suite in the roofspace, extension to front gable end level with roof ridge height, two-storey side extension with front gable end dormer, veranda at ground floor level and balcony at first floor level and a single storey rear extension.

MAIN ISSUES The main issue for consideration is whether the proposed alterations would cause any additional materially harmful impact upon the streetsene, character of the area, neighbouring amenity, protected trees or protected species than the previously approved scheme.

SITE DESCRIPTION The site is occupied by a detached house with a steep sloping rear garden. The residential area consists of houses and bungalows on regular shaped plots. Soft landscaping is a predominant feature along the road.

The property is bound to the rear by a public footpath and an area of land covered by mature trees.

There are several trees on the application site, covered by a TPO. The property is raised approximately 1.5m above street level, due to the topography of the Blake Dene Road.

Many of the properties along the road have been extended and altered giving each property an individual appearance..

51 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY February 2010 - Erect two storey front/side extension (to include rooms in roofspace). Erect conservatory at rear. Granted. Conditions attached included obscure glazing of windows and submission of details of tree protection measures and bat survey. Ref: APP/10/00041/F.

PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE None received.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION None.

CONSULTATIONS Natural England - Object due to possible impact upon bats.

REPRESENTATIONS Consultation expires on 10th September. Comments to be reported at Committee.

POLICY AND GUIDANCE

The following policies are listed as applying to this application:

Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 H12 House Alterations and Extensions NE21 Legally Protected Species NE28 Tree Preservation Orders

PLANNING JUDGEMENT  The footprint, height and design of the proposals are identical to that granted in Planning Permission APP/10/00041/F. The changes proposed are; amendments to the internal layout on the first and second floors, addition of pitched roofs over existing first floor windows on the rear elevation and the addition of a further window to the south elevation serving the stairwell/landing areas of the staircase between first and second floors.  The revised design would not alter the relationship or impact of the extensions on the appearance of the house and streetscene already considered acceptable by the existing consent.  The new windows in the south elevation and roofslopes would not give rise to harmful or intrusive overlooking detrimental to the amenities of the neighbours.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS N/A

52 CONCLUSION The proposed development will cause no further impact upon the streetscene or character of the area than the previously approved scheme and will preserve the amenity of neighbouring properties. As such the application is recommended for approval.

BACKGROUND PAPERS N/A

Conditions

2. GN040 (Match Materials to the Existing Building)

3. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s)) Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the window coloured pink on the approved plan (drawing no's. 003 and 004) on the south elevation shall be glazed with obscure glass in a form sufficient to prevent external views and shall either be a fixed light or hung in such a way as to prevent the effect of obscure glazing being negated by reason of opening.

Reason - To protect the amenity and privacy of the adjoining properties and in accordance with Policy H12 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

5. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Prior to development commencing, a visual inspection for evidence of bats by a suitably qualified and experienced persons holding the appropriate, necessary license shall be carried out and the findings reported to the Local Planning Authority for its approval. Where evidence of species protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 are concluded details of the timing and method of proposed rescue, protection and relocation of protected species shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Such works shall be subsequently carried out in strict accordance with the agreed details of methodology and programme.

Reason - To ensure the protection and rescue of species protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the Habitats Regulations and the Berne Convention and in accordance with Policy NE21 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted March 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

53 Informative Notes 1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) Order 2003

a) The proposal will positively compliment and enhance the character and appearance of the area - Policy PCS23 b) Residential Amenity will be preserved - Policy H12 c) No harm will be caused to any protected trees or protected species - Policies NE28 and NE21