Borough of Poole Planning Committee 22 February 2012

BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

BOROUGH OF POOLE

PLANNING COMMITTEE

22 FEBRUARY 2012

The Meeting commenced at 2:00pm and concluded at 6:08pm.

Present:

Councillor Eades (Chairman) Councillor Pawlowski (Vice-Chairman) Councillors Brown, Burden, Mrs Clements, Potter, Trent (until 5:35 pm), Mrs Stribley (substituting for Councillor Parker) (until 5:50pm), Mrs Walton (substituting for Councillor Woodcock) and Mrs Chris Wilson.

Others in Attendance

Councillors Brooke, Meachin, Mrs Parkinson, White and Wilkins

Members of the public present: approximately 37

The Team Leader (Regulatory) advised visitors of the arrangements in case of a fire alarm, the switching off of mobile phones and stated that filming and/or recording of the Meeting’s procedures was not allowed.

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Parker and Woodcock.

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillors Brown, Burden, Mrs Clements, Eades, Potter, Pawlowski, Mrs Stribley and Mrs C Wilson declared a personal interest in Plans List Item No.1, 5 Excelsior Road, having received written representations.

Councillors Brown, Burden, Mrs Clements, Eades, Potter, Trent and Mrs C Wilson declared a personal interest in Plans List Item No.2, 95 Evering Avenue, having received written representations.

Councillors Brown, Burden, Mrs Clements, Eades, Pawlowski, Potter and Mrs C Wilson declared a personal interest in Plans List Item No.3 and No.4, 200 Blandford Road, having received written representations.

Councillor Mrs Walton declared a personal interest in Plans List Item No.5, Tatnam Farm, Oakdale Middle School, as Portfolio Holder for Children, Families and Young People and as a result would leave the Meeting for this item.

1 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

Councillor Potter declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Plans List Item No.5, Tatnam Farm, Oakdale Middle School, as his wife was a governor of the school. Councillor Potter informed Members that he would leave the Meeting for this item.

Councillors Burden, Mrs Clements, Eades, Pawlowski and Potter declared a personal interest in Plans List Item No.9, 5 and 5A Moor Road having received written representations.

Councillors Brown and Mrs Clements declared a personal interest in Plans List Item No.8, Land adjacent to 78 Churchill Road, having received written representations.

Councillors Burden, Mrs Clements, Eades, Pawlowski, Potter, Mrs Stribley and Mrs Chris Wilson declared a personal interest in Plans List Item No.11, The Bays, having received written representations.

Councillor Trent informed the Meeting that he had received three unopened envelopes that he believed to be written representations.

3. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Planning Committee dated 26 January 2012, having been previously circulated, be taken as read, approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

4. OLD ORCHARD HOUSE, HIGH STREET – DEED OF VARIATION MADE PURSUANT TO SECTION 106 AND SECTION 106A OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 OF AN AGREEMENT DATED 11 NOVEMBER 2005

Darryl Howells, Senior Planning Officer, presented a report requesting that Members of the Planning Committee consider the request of the Applicant to vary the Deed of Variation to the Section 106 Agreement dated 11 November 2005.

Reference was made to the background information and, in particular, details of the clauses regarding payments of contributions in the Section 106 Agreement and the subsequent request in 2008 to vary the original payments.

It was noted that despite the agreed changes to the payment structure, the Applicant had found it difficult to meet the payments, due to the continuing economic downturn. The previous payment of £150,000, due on 1st January 2011, was not paid on time. This payment was made in mid November 2011, the Council having issued formal notice of proceedings on 14th September 2011.

On 1st January 2012, the Applicant failed to make the final payment of £200,000 plus the Administration fee.

2 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

Members noted that the Applicant had now submitted a written request asking that the Council withdraws its final invoice for payment and reschedules phased payments.

The Senior Planning Officer referred to the Addendum Sheet and, in particular, the amended recommendation.

A Member stated that the recommendation made perfect sense as the Council “could not get blood out of a stone”.

RESOLVED that the Council enter into a Deed of Variation to secure phased payments of the remaining £200,000. The phased payments would be £50K (plus RPI) to be paid upon the first anniversary of the Deed of Variation, a further payment of £70K (plus RPI) to be paid upon the second anniversary of the Deed of Variation, and a final balance of £80K (plus RPI) to be paid upon the third anniversary of the Deed of Variation. Upon completion of the Deed of Variation, the invoice would be withdrawn.

Voting: Unanimous

5. SUCH OTHER BUSINESS, AS IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIRMAN IS OF SUFFICIENT URGENCY TO WARRANT CONSIDERATION

There was no other business.

6. PLANNING APPLICATIONS

The Committee considered the Planning Applications as set out in the Schedule to the Minutes and dealt with them therein.

CHAIRMAN

3 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

APPENDIX

SCHEDULE TO THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 22 FEBRUARY 2012

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

ITEM NO 01 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/00609/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 5 Excelsior Road, Poole, BH14 8TT PROPOSALS Demolish existing buildings and erect 1 No 4 bed house with integral garage (as amended plans received 13th Jan 2012). REGISTERED 17 May, 2011 APPLICANT Mr Cox AGENT Anders Roberts & Assoc WARD Penn Hill CASE OFFICER Darryl Howells

The Application was brought before the Committee by Councillor Mrs Dion in response to concerns raised by neighbours and its dominance on the character and appearance of the area and the skyline.

The Application was the subject of a Member Site visit on 22 February 2012, which commenced at 12:30pm and concluded at 1:30pm. Councillors Eades, Pawlowski, Brown, Burden, Mrs Clements, Potter, Mrs Stribley, Trent and Mrs C Wilson were in attendance.

Darryl Howells, Senior Planning Officer, gave a Site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding area. Images of the Site, as viewed from Whitecliff Park, were also displayed.

The Architect’s plans detailing the various elevations and floor plans of the Proposal were considered.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet, and, in particular, details of the additional representations received, details of revised northwest elevations removing full height floor to ceiling window to kitchen and replacing it with a block wall and window with conventional height sill, and revised wording to Case Officer’s Report to page 4, fourth paragraph, and page 10, second paragraph. In addition, the Senior Planning Officer detailed a revised condition No.3.

Reference was made to amendments to the final paragraph on Page 10, and a Site coverage comparison chart was highlighted. Particular reference was made to the Proposals at No.5 and that the Site coverage was 23 percent, twice as large as the existing property.

4 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

A summary of the relevant planning history, pre-application advice, consultations and representations were noted.

The Senior Planning Officer continued by detailing the planning judgement, making particular reference to the impact upon the character and appearance of the area, impact to the ridges and slope/topography, impact on neighbouring amenities, loss of natural light and other considerations raised by public representations.

In conclusion, the Senior Planning Officer stated that the Proposal consisted of built form which was different to the established street scene, however, planning policies did not require Proposals to mimic surrounding properties but to respect them. He added that the Proposal would not materially harm amenities of neighbouring occupiers by reason of loss of privacy. It was recognised that there would be some loss of light, and the development would appear larger than the property it replaced, however, on balance, the community benefit of providing a quality family home in a sustainable location accorded with planning policies.

Ms Ingram and Dr Simpson, objectors, expressed their views, including:

 60 letters of objection  Proposals too large, too high and out of character  No.6 would be 3.3 times smaller than Proposal  Referred to plan, highlighting mass and bulk  Proposal 9 metres wide and 11 metres deep  Referred to images of Proposal viewed from Flambard Road and colour illustrations of mass and bulk, plus a view from Whitecliff Road  Proposal out of context with locality  Highlighted images showing parking problems in Excelsior Road  Produced an image from the living room at No.4 Excelsior Road showing a pole with 2 balloons indicating the height of the proposed development  Referred to plan highlighting which local resident had objected to the Proposal

Mr Parke, Agent for the Applicant, expressed his views, including:

 Straightforward and simple application  Replacement dwelling “not an issue”  No concerns regarding parking  Proposal respected steep nature of Site  Contemporary design  Appropriate design  No higher or bulkier than neighbouring properties  Proposal sat comfortably within the Site, therefore, passed the character test  Proposal proportionate to other properties in the area  Proposal did not adversely affect the skyline  Care had been taken to take into account neighbour concerns  Proposal improved relationship to No.6

The Senior Planning Officer provided clarification regarding information in the

5 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 previous presentations.

- Details of carport were misrepresented. - Objector’s image of skyline was misleading as the top floor was not full width, and not all of the neighbour’s balconies were highlighted.

Following a Member’s request for clarification, the Senior Planning Officer confirmed that the road did run north to south on the Plan.

Councillor Mrs Walton informed the Meeting that she was unable to attend the Site visit and, consequently, was unable to see the views from inside the neighbouring property and, therefore, would abstain from voting.

A Member stated that the increase in bulk was misleading, as in real terms she felt it would not look out of place. The Member added that, when viewed from Whitecliff Park, a view that was already an eyesore, the new property would be “prettier”.

A Member referred to the perceived loss of light and stated that when taking into account the orientation of the properties, there would be some overshadowing in the morning, however, from noon onwards there would be very little effect.

A Member agreed with comments regarding enhancement of views from Whitecliff Park. He added, however, that he had some concern regarding size, loss of public views and the materials proposed.

A Member stated that the Proposal had merit as the street scene would not be affected, however, he wanted assurance regarding screening.

Darryl Howells, Senior Planning Officer, referred Members to condition No.7 on page 16 of the Officer’s Report regarding materials and the non standard condition on page 15 regarding the existing hedge.

Ms Ingram/Dr Simpson summed up their views, including:

 Proposed development would be three storeys when viewed from the road  Proposal should have a pitched roof  No-one in the area liked the design  Mass of roof was enormous  There would be significant overlooking

Mr Parke summed up his views, including:

 There would be no unacceptable harm  Public views would be maintained  No policy for maintaining public views  Proposal was appropriate  Requested that Members approve the Application

RESOLVED that this Application be Granted with Conditions subject to the

6 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 following Conditions:

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

2. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))

3. GN080 (Screening to Balcony)

4. GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)

5. LS080 (Retention and Protection) The existing hedge that exists between the application Site and no.10 Flambard Road shall be retained unless consent is first obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority for its removal or partial removal and reinforced with additional planting to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

These features shall also be safeguarded by the erection of protective of a type and along a line to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority throughout the development phase. Such fencing shall be erected in accordance with the agreed details before any equipment or machinery are brought on to the Site and before any ground clearance, demolition or construction work, including the erection of Site huts, is commenced and shall not be removed or breached during construction operations without prior written approval, but shall remain in place for the entire development phase and until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the Site. Within the areas so fenced there shall be no development or development- related activity of any description, including the deposit of spoil, the storage of materials and the mixing of concrete.

Reason - To maintain and enhance the appearance of the Site/locality and to ensure that the existing landscape features to be retained are adequately protected from damage during the construction works in accordance with Policy BE2 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

6. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Prior to the commencement of development or other building works commencing a construction method statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall demonstrate that the existing boundary landscaping can be retained during the construction process and that this landscaping will not be lost or otherwise damaged during building works. Furthermore the construction method statement shall identify the storage location of materials, Site huts, other machinery and a temporary car park within or near the Site to accommodate operatives and construction vehicles to be provided in accordance with the agreed details for the whole contract period, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning

7 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

Authority.

Reason - To ensure that the application Site retains its existing mature landscaped features to preserve the visual amenities which at present exist on the Site and in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted February 2009 and Policies T13 & BE02 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

7. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Notwithstanding the materials specification set out in Section 9 of the planning application form and the approved drawings, prior to the commencement of development, details and samples of all external facing and roofing materials to be used shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority before any on-Site works commence. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason - To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Core Strategy (adopted February 2009).

8. GN160 (Sustainable Homes - Code Level 3)

9. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition) Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010

Policies PCS05 & PCS23: -

Policy PCS05 requires redevelopment Proposals should contribute positively to those attributes of a particular street which distinguish it, including building materials, height, roof form, fenestration, Site coverage, car parking arrangements, space of buildings, retention of front and rear gardens, tree cover and other vegetation. PCS23 reinforces those principles, requiring redevelopment Proposals to exhibit a high standard of design which will complement or enhance Poole's character and local identity. Proposals need to respect the setting and character of the Site, surrounding area and adjoining buildings by virtue of its function, siting, landscaping and amenity space, scale, density,

8 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 massing, height, design details, materials and appearance.

The redevelopment will continue the use of the Site as a single residence. The architectural design of the building is contemporary yet respects the established form of development within Excelsior Road. The roof form consists of a shallow mono-pitch roof which differs from the dual pitched roof forms that exist within the street scene however no material harm will be established. Whilst the massing of the proposed development will be substantially larger than the existing dwelling, and neighbouring properties, the bulk of the massing will be positioned to the centre of the Site and not materially harmful. No material harm to neighbouring amenities will occur due to the design and position and its orientation.

T11: -

The proposed development provides adequate on Site car parking provision to meet the Council's adopted parking standards

Policies PCS31, PCS32 & PCS35:-

These policies require residential development to reduce energy demands by 10% through the orientation and design of developments, and other renewable energy resources. The orientation of the building is effectively gain south will the primary habitable accommodation positioned on with a southerly outlook. As such the design of the building will encourage solar gain and natural heating of the building. Restricting the amount of glazing on the rear elevation will prevent the need for artificial cooling equipment. The building will be constructed to meet the relevant code standard and therefore accords with adopted planning policies.

BE3: -

The existing house and its neighbours at nos. 4 and 6 & 6A Excelsior Road are visible from Whitecliff Recreation Ground and amongst the roads within Conifer Avenue. The proposed dwelling will be 1.78 metres higher than the existing dwelling, but 30mm higher of nos. 6 & 6A Excelsior Road. Its appearance will not become a dominant feature on the hillside, by reason of its design, reduced glazing and external surfacing materials to be controlled to limit its prominence. The proposed redevelopment of the Site does not result in the loss of any trees, nor will there will a requirement to materially alter the shape of the land or to install retaining walls.

Voting: For – 8 Against - 1 Abstentions - 1

9 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

ITEM NO 02 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01509/F APPLICATION TYPE Householder SITE ADDRESS 95 Evering Avenue, Poole, BH12 4JG PROPOSALS Front and rear extensions and alterations to property frontage to include parking provision (as amended plans received 12th and 17th January 2012). REGISTERED 24 November, 2011 APPLICANT Mr A Cutler AGENT DJM Design WARD Alderney CASE OFFICER Emma MacWilliam

The Application was brought before the Committee due to it being red carded by Councillor Meachin due to concerns of local residents and impact upon the character of the area.

The Application was the subject of a Members’ Site visit on 22 February 2012, which commenced at 11:55am and concluded at 12:20pm. Councillors Eades, Pawlowski, Brown, Burden, Mrs Clements, Potter, Mrs Stribley, Trent and Mrs C Wilson were in attendance. Ward Councillor Meachin was also in attendance.

Emma MacWilliam, Planning Assistant, gave a Site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding area.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet and, in particular, amended plans received on 15 February 2012 and 17 February 2012, plus details of two further letters of representation.

The Architect’s Plans detailing the various elevations/floor plans of the Proposal were considered.

A summary of the consultations, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

In conclusion, the Planning Assistant stated that the Proposal would have an appropriate relationship to the host property and would not adversely impact on the street scene or character of the area.

Kath Carroll, Objector, expressed her views, including:

 Only found out about the Proposal after speaking to neighbours  No public notice had been displayed  Objected to the garage being so close to the bedroom window  Referred to images highlighting the position of the proposed garage  No similar style bungalows would be in the area

Ward Councillor Meachin, expressed his views, including:

10 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

 Area of special character  Site backed onto heathland  Proposal would stand out as a “carbuncle”  Proposal would be almost twice the size of neighbouring bungalows with 40% more floor space  Natural England had not objected but were “sceptical”  Proposed garage was not in keeping and was an inappropriate design  Proposal was overbearing  Proposal would cause a loss of daylight for neighbours

In response to a question from a Member, Mr D Evans, Team Manager, informed the Meeting that the 400 metre heathland ruling only applied to new development / dwellings and not extensions.

In response to a request from a Member, the Planning Assistant detailed the exact position of the proposed garage on the plans. The Planning Assistant stated that the Objector’s image of the position of the proposed garage portrayed it “reasonably well”.

A Member stated that, in his opinion, the area had a certain character and the Proposal did not fit in well with its surroundings.

A Member stated that he had no objections to the majority of the Proposal, although he was surprised that the garage was not set further back, as it was, in its present position, it was totally out of character and not acceptable.

A Member stated that when viewed from the street, he had no problems with the Proposal, he added that it could be argued that the revised property would be more attractive. He added, however, that he had full sympathy with the Objectors regarding the positioning of the proposed garage.

On being put to the vote, the Officer recommendation to approve was LOST.

Voting: For – 1 Against – 9

Members continued by discussing the reasons for refusal. Particular reference was made to the following:

 Poor design  Inappropriate massing/layout  Proposal failed to enhance character of the area/street scene  Inappropriate design of garage  PCS5 and 23 of the Poole Core Strategy  Too close to neighbour’s bedroom window

RESOLVED, contrary to Officer recommendation, to refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

11 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

1. By reason of their design, massing and layout the proposals fail to preserve or enhance the prevailing character of the area and the streetscene generally, most particularly by reason of the intrusive forward projection of the flat roofed integral garage beyond the front elevation of the adjacent bungalow. The proposals are therefore contrary to the provisions of PCS5 and PCS23 of the Core Strategy (adopted February 2009) and the Borough of Poole's Characterisation Study (April 2010).

2. By reason of their relationship to the adjacent bungalow, and most particularly its bedroom window in the south elevation, the proposals would result in increased disturbance to the occupiers of the adjacent bungalow to the detriment of their reasonable residential amenities and contrary to the provisions of PCS23 of the Core Strategy (adopted February 2009) and Policy H12 of the Poole Local Plan adopted 2004 (as amended by the Secretary of State September 2007)

Voting: For – 9 Against – 1 Abstentions – 0 ______

ITEM NO 03 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01497/F APPLICATION TYPE Time Limit Extension SITE ADDRESS 200 Blandford Road, Poole PROPOSALS Application for a new planning permission to replace extant permission 08/19383/019/F to erect new retail super market and 3 storey building accommodating 8 self contained flats with undercroft parking. Vehicular access off Hinchcliffe Close. As amended by plans rec'd 01/07/08 and 02/07/08 and extend the time limit for implementation. REGISTERED 22 November, 2011 APPLICANT The Co-op Group AGENT NJL Consulting WARD Hamworthy East CASE OFFICER James Gilfillan

The Application was brought before the Committee at the request of Councillor White due to the importance of the Proposal for Hamworthy and the history of the Site.

James Gilfillan, Planning Officer, gave a Site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report.

Architect’s plans detailing the Proposal were considered.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet, and, in particular, additional planning history, further letters of representation, and comments from the Head of Leisure Services and the Head of Housing and Community Services and an amended Condition No.4.

12 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

A summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

In conclusion, the Planning Officer stated that the renewal of the existing Scheme was supported by and was in accordance with adopted development plans. The design proposed added key benefits to the Site and the wider area.

Mr Winwood, Objector, expressed his views, including:

 Thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to speak  Represented Hamside Residents Association  Not all relevant planning history was included in the Case Officer’s Report.  Reduction in floor space qualified for a change in circumstances and should be sufficient reason to refuse  Applicant should rebuild a supermarket to the same size as the one destroyed by the fire  Co-op using the Application as a bargaining tool for the future  Requested that Members refuse the Application

Mr Saunders, Agent for the Applicant, expressed his views, including:

 Welcomed Officer’s Report  Requested Members grant approval subject to Section 106 Agreement  Material considerations in Officer’s Report were accurate  Requested that Members approve the Application

Ward Councillor White expressed his views, including:

 Reminded Members of the Site history  Fifth anniversary of the supermarket fire  Original Application was the subject of extensive debate  Original Application voting was 5 For, 3 Against  Since the original Application, the Council had tightened its Core Strategy  New Proposal should be better than what was originally there  Proposal was out of character  Proposal had less retail space than the original  Unimaginative design  Requested Members to refuse the Application

Ward Councillor Mrs Parkinson expressed her views, including:

 Keen to see the supermarket rebuilt  Plans were poorly designed  Why had the proposed supermarket not already been built?  Proposal was a back-up plan if the new application did not get approved  Had concerns regarding parking  Hoped that the new store would be better than the one which burnt down

13 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

In response to a question from a Member, the Planning Officer stated that an alternative application had been received approximately one week ago, with a similar size store with additional commercial retail units.

A Member stated that she thought the Co-op had a “social conscience” and was surprised that nothing had happened in the last 5 years.

A Member stated that she had safety concerns regarding delivery lorries on Site, and added that the Proposal was poorly designed with a reduced retail provision.

Mr Winwood summed up his views, including:

 Welcomed Ward Councillor White’s comments  Previous store was 10,000 square feet, Proposal was for only 7015 square feet

Mr Saunders, summed up his views, including:

 Proposal complied with Poole policies  Transportation Services had no objections  Modern retailing/stocking was more advanced than before and therefore loss of retail space was not an issue.

RESOLVED that this application be Granted subject to a Section 106 agreement to secure the following:

1.A financial contribution of £9,584(plus admin fee) towards the provision of recreational facilities accordance with Policies PCS36 and PCS37 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009 and Policy L17 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction Sept 2007).

2.A financial contribution of £8,272.00 (plus admin fee) towards mitigating the harm to the Dorset Heathlands SPA and SSSI in accordance with the Dorset Heathlands SPG 29.01.10 (amendments adopted April 2010), Policies PCS28, PCS36 and PCS37 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009 and Policy NE16 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State direction Sept 2007).

3.A financial contribution of £33,176.00 (plus admin fee) towards the South East Dorset Transport Contributions Scheme (as amended) in accordance with Policies PCS15, PCS36 and PCS37 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009 and Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction Sept 2007).

4.A financial contribution of £21,291.00 (plus admin fee) towards affordable housing in the Borough in accordance with Policy PCS06 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009 and the Affordable Housing SPD Nov 2011

Conditions

14 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

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

15 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

2. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) The shop windows on the west (Blandford Road) and south elevations shall be clear glazed and thereafter retained as such, at no time shall internal display or storage racks be positioned so as to obscure the windows, unless with prior planning permission of the Local Planning Authority to any variation.

Reason:- In the interests of the appearance of the scheme and to create an active frontage and in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009.

3. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) The access/parking for the residential and retail uses as shown on the approved plans shall be implemented prior to commencement of use and thereafter retained.

Reason:- In order to provide adequate parking facilities are available and to avoid conflict with the free flow of traffic and highway safety in accordance with Policy T13 of the Poole Local PLan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (As amended by Secretary of State direction Sept 2007) and the Parking and Highway Layout SPD 2011.

4. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) In addition to customers the retail car park shall be available between the hours of 18:00 and 09:00, for the parking of the vehicles of residents of the approved Scheme.

Reason:- In order to mitigate for the shortfall provided on Site for the flats and to meet the transportation needs of the development and in accordance with Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (As amended by Secretary of State direction Sept 2007) and the Parking and Highway Layout SPD 2011.

5. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) Notwithstanding the approved drawings, prior to the commencement of development, detailed Proposals for the design and treatment of the service yard entrance and the adjacent footway shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall then be implemented unless with prior written approval to any variation.

Reason:- In order to ensure a safe, attractive and pedestrian friendly scheme is delivered to maintain the character and appearance of Hinchliffe Close and ensure the safety of pedestrians and in accordance with Policies T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (As amended by

16 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

Secretary of State direction Sept 2007) and PCS15 & PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009.

6. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) Prior to the first commercial opening of the retail element and occupation of the residential flats, the relevant bin storage facilities shall be completed and available for use, and thereafter retained as such, unless with prior written approval to any variation.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the residents of the scheme, adjoining residents and to ensure highway safety, in accordance with Policies T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (As amended by Secretary of State direction Sept 2007).

7. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) The retail building shall be used primarily for the sale of food goods only. The retail building shall not be altered in any way that results in an increase in net retail floor space without prior planning permission being granted.

Reason - In order to retain control over the nature of goods sold and to avoid increased need for parking and in accordance with Policies PCS13 of the Poole Core Strategy and T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (As amended by Secretary of State direction Sept 2004).

8. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) Prior to the commencement of development details of the plant equipment, including any sound proofing measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall then be implemented and thereafter retained and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.

Reason: In the interest of the amenities of nearby residents and in accordance with Policy NE1 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (As amended by Secretary of State direction Sept 2007)

9. GN030 (Sample of Materials - Submission of Deta) Details and samples of all external facing and roofing materials, doors, windows and frames, balustrades and grills/louvres to be used shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority before any on-Site works commence. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason - To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009.

17 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

10. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to the commencement of works, final Proposals for the phasing of works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, these shall include details of the storage of equipment and materials and Proposals for the parking, off road, of building operatives vehicles.

Reason:- In the interests of the amenities of local residents and to ensure highway safety is maintained during construction and in accordance with Policies T13 and NE1 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (As amended by Secretary of State direction Sept 2007).

11. HW110 (Cycle Provision)

12. LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted) No development shall take place until Proposals for the landscaping of the Site have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The landscaping scheme shall include provision for landscape planting, including no less than 6 trees and layout details and materials of hard landscaping the car park and pedestrian accesses to the building. Upon approval: 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 Policies BE2 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction Sept 2007) and PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009.

13. RC070 (Restriction on Hours of Use/Deliveries) No deliveries shall be taken at or despatched from the Site otherwise than between 07:00 and 17:00 on Mondays to Saturdays, and not at any

18 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 time on Sundays, Bank and other national Public Holidays.

Reason - In the interest of the amenities of adjoining and nearby residential properties and in accordance with Policy NE1 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction Sept 2007).

14. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Prior to the commencement of development details of the construction and measures to deliver an energy efficient and sustainable development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed details and measures shall then be implemented, installed or carried out, as appropriate, and retained.

Reason. In the interests of delivering an energy efficient, sustainable development and reducing the Carbon footprint of development in the Borough and in accordance with Policies PCS31, PCS32 and PCS33 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009.

Informative Notes

1. N620 (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:

Due to its design, siting and height the Proposal will preserve the character and amenities of the area and represent a distinctive development enhancing the appearance of the Site and local centre - Policies PCS23, BE2 & BE4

Through the imposition of conditions restricting hours of deliveries and sound attenuation the amenity of neighbouring and future residents will not be affected adversely - Policy NE1

Through the provision of sufficient parking and access, securing shared use of the customer car park and imposing conditions requiring revised access treatment highway and pedestrian safety will be maintained - Policies T13 & PCS15

A scheme of mitigation is being implemented to reduce harm to protect lowland heathlands in and around Poole - Policies NE16 and PCS28

The scale of the development is appropriate to the local centre location as such Town centre vitality and viability will be maintained - Policies

19 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

PCS22, PCS13, LC1 & S4

2. IN00 (Non Standard Informative) The applicants attention is drawn to the comments of the Dorset Police Crime Prevention Design Officer and whilst conditions are not necessarily appropriate, the incorporation of his advice would be positive to the safety of the occupiers.

3. N120 (Kerb Crossing to be Raised)

4. N130 (Kerb Crossing to be Lowered)

5. N430 (Section 106 Agreement)

Voting: For – 5 Against – 4 Abstentions - 1 ______

ITEM NO 04 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01496/F APPLICATION TYPE Time Limit Extension SITE ADDRESS 200 Blandford Road, Poole PROPOSALS Application for a new planning permission to replace extant permission 10/00677/F for Re planning permission 09/00665/F - Varied condition 1 to read as follows 'The building hereby permitted shall be removed on or before the lst April 2012 and any works for the reinstatement of the land to its condition prior to the implementation of this permission shall be carried out within one month of the date of expiry in accordance with a scheme of work to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.' and extend the time limit for implementation. REGISTERED 23 November, 2011 APPLICANT The Co-op Group AGENT NJL Consulting WARD Hamworthy East CASE OFFICER James Gilfillan

The Application was brought before the Committee at the request of Councillor White due to the history of the Site and the significance of the Proposals for Hamworthy.

James Gilfillan, Planning Officer, provided the Meeting with a brief presentation outlining the Proposals.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet, and, in particular, a further letter of representation.

Mr Winwood, Objector, expressed his views, including:

20 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

 Disappointed that the Co-op had applied for further extension  Temporary buildings had “passed their sell by date”  Temporary buildings had wet patches and dripping water  There was a rodent problem on Site  If to be extended, limit it to 6 months

Mr Saunders, Agent for the Applicant, expressed his views, including:

 Requested that Members approve the Application

Ward Councillor White stated that he did not want the Co-op to implement the previous approval and would welcome a new, improved application.

In response to a question from a Member, Mr D Evans, Team Leader, informed the Meeting that the length of the extension in the Application was one year form the date of consent.

The Chairman informed the Applicant’s Agent that the Borough of Poole were disappointed about the inaction by the Co-op and asked that the Planning Committee’s comments and views be passed on to the relevant people.

Mr Winwood thanked Members for their support.

Mr Saunders had nothing further to add.

RESOLVED that this application be Granted with Conditions subject to the following Conditions:

1. OL060 (Temporary Buildings Removal/Uses Cease) The building hereby permitted shall be removed on or before the expiry of 1year from the date of this permission and any works for the reinstatement of the land to its condition prior to the implementation of this permission shall be carried out within one month of the date of expiry in accordance with a scheme of work to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority or in accordance with any other planning permission for the use of the land that may be approved in the meantime.

Reason - Because the building is inappropriate for long term retention in this location and in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009. Furthermore the continued renewal of this temporary consent would fail to meet the long term aspirations for comprehensive redevelopment of this Site under Core Strategy Policy PCS22.

2. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) The extract ventilation and refrigeration systems shall be retained as existing and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations until the removal of the approved buildings.

21 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

Reason- In the interests of the amenities of adjoining residential properties and in accordance with Policy NE1 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (As amended by Secretary of State direction 2007).

3. ZZZ (Non Standard Condition) All refuse bins shall be stored within the compound as indicated on the approved plans until the time they are due for collection and thereafter returned.

Reason- In the interests of the appearance of the area and the amenities of the local residents and to avoid conflict with highway safety, in accordance with Policies NE1 & T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (As amended by Secretary of State direction Sept 2007) and PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009.

4. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access, turning space, vehicle parking and servicing provision 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 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction Sept 2007).

Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010

Due to the quality of the appearance and maintenance of the temporary buildings the character, appearance and amenity of the area is preserved - PCS23

The retention of the buildings ensures the service and contribution to the amenities of local residents is ensured - PCS22

The parking layout preserves highway safety - T13

The layout and position of air conditioning and refrigeration plant and equipment ensures not harm is caused to residential amenity - NE01

22 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

Voting: For – 9 Against – None Abstensions - 1

The Meeting adjourned at 4pm and reconvened at 4:15pm. ______

ITEM NO 05 APPLICATION NO. APP/12/00043/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS Tatnam Farm, Oakdale South Road Middle School, Oakdale, Poole BH15 2DT PROPOSALS Erect a portable covered Arena Grand Stand REGISTERED 17 January, 2012 APPLICANT Poole Town (1991) Ltd AGENT Mr R Taylor WARD Oakdale CASE OFFICER Laura Archer

Councillors Potter and Mrs Walton withdrew from the Meeting.

The Application was brought before the Committee as the Head of Planning and Regeneration Services did not consider it prudent to exercise delegated powers due to the significance of the Proposals and the history of the Site.

James Larson, Planning Officer, gave a Site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding area.

Reference was made to the illustrations of the proposed Stand and the Planning Officer informed the Meeting that the Application was for a standing covered area rather than a seated area.

A summary of the relevant planning history, consultations, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

Mr D Evans, Team Manger, informed the Meeting that following last minute discussions with the Applicants, Officers proposed to amend the removal date of the stand in Condition No.1 to 31st May 2014 in order to synchronise the consent with the end of the 2013/14 football season.

Mr Taylor/Mr Reeves, Applicants, expressed their views, including:

 Proposal was of a temporary nature  Standing covered area would accommodate approximately 84 people  Stand was required to abide by Football Association rules  There would be no lee way regarding deadlines imposed by the Football Association  If not approved, the Club would be forcibly relegated.

RESOLVED that this application be Granted with Conditions subject to the

23 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 following Conditions:

1. OL060 (Temporary Buildings Removal/Uses Cease) The building hereby permitted shall be removed on or before 31/05/2014 and any works for the reinstatement of the land to its condition prior to the implementation of this permission shall be carried out within one month of the date of expiry in accordance with a scheme of work to be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

Reason - To encourage a more comprehensive and higher quality design in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted 2009.

Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010 The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of the Development Plan, including any relevant policies contained within Planning Policy Statements, and in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in conflict with the following policies:

PCS23, PCS24, PCS26, L5, L9, BE3, NE28 - The Proposal would support the existing use of the Site and a condition is secured for a temporary consent in order to encourage a more comprehensive and high quality design. Protected trees will be preserved. T13, PCS15, PCS26, NE1 - The Proposal is not likely to result in a significant increase in visitors and therefore will not materially impact upon traffic movements or neighbouring amenity.

Voting: For - Unanimous

Note: Councillors Potter and Mrs Walton rejoined the Meeting. ______

ITEM NO 06 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01508/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 58 Canford Cliffs Road, Poole, BH13 7AA PROPOSALS Form new vehicular access and parking/manoeuvring area. Construction of new electronic gate. REGISTERED 23 November, 2011 APPLICANT Mr & Mrs R Farrant AGENT Proctor Watts Cole Rutter WARD Penn Hill CONSERVATION AREA Branksome Park CASE OFFICER Julie Shearing

24 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

The Application was brought before the Committee at the request of Councillor Mrs Dion, due to concerns of local residents.

Julie Shearing, Planning Assistant, gave a Site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding area.

The Architect’s Plans detailing the various elevations of the Proposal were considered.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet and, in particular, comments received from Leisure Services.

A summary of the relevant Planning History, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

In conclusion, the Planning Assistant stated that the Proposal would not have an adverse effect on the street scene and character of the area or any neighbouring residential privacy or amenity and there was no adverse impact on protected trees on Site.

Dr Smith and Mr Strong, Objectors, expressed their views, including:

 The Planning Authority had not given local residents the proper notice  Boulnois Avenue was not a quiet side street, in fact, it was a heavily used short cut.  Application Site was on a hazardous cross road  Visibility was restricted  Most accidents had not been reported to Police  Applicant already had ample vehicular access  Area had a special character  Had recorded 35 cars using Boulnois Avenue in one minute

Mr Rutter, Applicant, expressed his views, including:

 Needed separate business and residential vehicular access  Previous reasons for refusal had been addressed  The best of the birch trees would be retained  Other trees would be replaced

In response to a request for clarification, the Team Assistant informed the Meeting that the proposed entrance was approximately 18 metres from the cross roads and that the gap between the road and the gates was 6.6 metres.

The Chairman stated that normally, he was against the removal of Council owned trees, however, in this case the trees had been planted too close together and he was content that they would be replaced further down the Avenue.

Dr Smith and Mr Strong summed up their views, including:

25 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

 Very busy crossroads  Many accidents on the crossroads  Heavy traffic in the area  Restricted views

Mr Rutter did not take up his option to sum up.

RESOLVED that this Application be Granted with Conditions subject to the following Conditions:

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

2. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

3. HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)

4. TR040 (Arboricultural Supervision)

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

Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010

The Proposal will not adversely affect the streetscene or character of the area -PCS23 The Proposal is not considered to have an adverse affect on any neighbouring residential privacy or amenity - H12 Protected trees on Site will be preserved, and their future health retained - NE27 and NE28

2. IN10 (28 Days Notice - Works on Highway) A minimum of 28 days notice is required for works on the highway associated with the development. Application is to be made to the Head of Highways and Transportation Services. Only contractors approved by the Council can carry out this work.

Under no circumstances shall the following occur:-

1.Damage to the highway as a result of excavation within the Site. 2.The highway be used for storage of materials. 3.The footway be crossed or used by delivery vehicles without a properly formed crossing provided.

26 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

4.The highway be used for plant carrying out works to or near the boundary of this Site.

If any of the above are observed, the Council's maintenance contractor will carry out the necessary work to rectify the situation and all costs incurred recovered from the Contractor. The onus will be on the Contractor to prove that any damage to the highway has not been caused by the works.

Voting: For – 8 Against – 1 Abstentions - 1 ______

ITEM NO 07 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01679/C APPLICATION TYPE Change of Use SITE ADDRESS 15 Bournemouth Road, Poole, BH14 0EF PROPOSALS Variation of Condition 3 of permission APP/99/018614/006/C - extension of opening hours REGISTERED 5 January, 2012 APPLICANT Golden Kebab WARD Parkstone CONSERVATION AREA Ashley Cross CASE OFFICER Shelley Barnett

The Application was brought before the Committee due to the proximity of the Site to a Councillor’s home.

(Note: Councillor Mrs Stribley temporarily left the Meeting at 4:47pm).

Shelley Barnett, Planning Assistant, gave a Site description and a summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement.

The Chairman stated that he was uncertain why Officers were recommending a second temporary extension of the opening hours when the Applicant had complied fully with the previous temporary consent.

Councillor Eades proposed the following Amendment to Condition No.1:

“The use shall not operate other than between the hours of:

 Sunday to Thursday, 12:30pm – midnight  Sunday, when the following day is a public holiday, 12:30pm – 3am Monday  Friday, 12:30pm – 3am Saturday  Saturday, 12:30pm – 3am Sunday

Unless otherwise approved on Application to the Local Authority”.

The Amendment was seconded.

27 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

RESOLVED that this application be Granted subject to the following Conditions:

1. The use shall not operate other than between the hours of:

 Sunday to Thursday 12.30pm. – Midnight  Sunday, when the following day is a public holiday: 12.30pm. – 3.00am. Monday  Friday: 12.30pm – 3.00 Saturday  Saturday: 12.30pm – 3.00am. Sunday

Unless otherwise approved on application to the Local Planning Authority.

Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010

The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of the Development Plan, including any relevant policies contained within Planning Policy Statements, and in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in conflict with the following policies: a) The hours have been operated for a temporary 12 month period. Both the records of Environmental and Consumer Protection Services and the Enforcement records of Planning and Regeneration Services have been reviewed and show a significant reduction in complaints during the temporary 12 month period in which these hours have been operated. In this context and given the hours of other establishments in Ashley Cross, the proposal is considered to be acceptable with regard to the impact on residential amenity, to the impact on the viability and vitality of Ashley Cross and on the Conservation Area - Policies NE1, BE16 & PCS22.

Voting: For – 8 Against – 1 Abstentions – 0 ______

Note: Councillor Mrs Stribley rejoined the Meeting at 4:52pm

ITEM NO 08 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01302/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS Land Adj 78 Churchill Road, Parkstone, Poole, BH12 2LU PROPOSALS Erect new two storey dwelling accessed from Cromwell Road (as amended by plans received 06/01/2012). REGISTERED 6 January, 2012 APPLICANT Mr A Hall AGENT Bradbury Bichard WARD Branksome West

28 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

CASE OFFICER Caroline Palmer The Application was brought before the Committee due to the receipt of a red card from Councillor Mrs Le Poidevin in relation to concerns of local residents.

Caroline Palmer, Planning Officer, gave a Site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding areas.

The Architect’s plans, detailing the various elevations of the Proposal, were considered.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet and, in particular, the amended recommendation regarding the delegation of approval subject to receipt of the completed Section 106 Agreement.

A summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

Mr Bichard, Applicant, expressed his views, including:

 Referred to the history of the Site  Proposal was the most neighbourly option  Agreed with the Case Officer’s conclusions  Proposal engaged with the street scene  Proposal maintained the urban fabric  Traditional cottage design  Proposal provided a valuable affordable home  Had problems with bank regarding the unilateral undertaking, it would be signed the next day

The Chairman complimented Planning Officers on the final Scheme as it engaged with the street scene.

RESOLVED to delegate to the Head of Planning and Regeneration Services to approve on completion of S106 Agreement by not later than 28th February 2012; otherwise to refuse planning permission on the grounds of the necessary mitigation set out in the Report having not been secured, subject to the following Conditions:

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

2. GN030 (Sample of Materials)

3. GN160 (Sustainable Homes - Code Level 3)

4. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

5. HW090 (Access Gradient Not to Exceed 1:15)

6. HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays) 29 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

7. LS050 (Hard Landscaping)

8. RC010 (Remove Residential Permitted Development) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 or any subsequent re-enactment thereof, no further garage, porch, extensions, fences, dormers and windows other than those authorised by this permission shall be erected without express planning permission first being obtained from the Local Planning Authority.

Reason - To ensure that the Site is not overdeveloped and to protect the amenities of neighbouring properties and in accordance with Policies PCS05 and PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy (Adopted 2009)

9. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s)) Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the window coloured pink on the approved plan on the south elevation at first floor level (serving the bathroom) 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 PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy (Adopted 2009).

Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010

The Proposal respects the setting and character of the Site and adjoining buildings by virtue of its siting, landscaping, scale, massing, height, design and appearance, as well as amenity space. A condition removing permitted development rights will ensure that the Site does not become overdeveloped - Policies BE02, PCS05 and PCS23.

The proposed house has been designed in such a way so as to ensure that there will be no material harm caused to the light, outlook or privacy currently enjoyed by the occupiers of any adjacent home. This is as a

30 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 result of the scale of the proposed building as well as its design and orientation and its resultant relationship with the adjacent homes. A condition has been imposed removing residential permitted development rights to ensure that no further windows can be inserted without planning consent. A condition has also be imposed that requires the bathroom window to be obscure glazed. This will further protect the privacy of neighbouring homes - Policy PCS23

The Head of Transportation Services has no objections to the proposed replacement dwelling subject to the imposition of conditions requiring the implementation of the parking on the Site, the provision of visibility splays and the restriction of the access gradient to 1:15. The level of parking is acceptable - Policy T13

The Energy and Resources Statement refers to Code for Sustainable Homes and sustainability issues. A condition requiring that the scheme be built to Level 3 of Code for Sustainable Homes has been imposed on the permission - Policies PCS31, 32 and 35

The relevant contributions in relation to heathland and transportation have been secured by a signed Section 106 Agreement - Policies L17, NE16, PCS28 and T13

2. IN13 (Kerb Crossing to be Lowered) The applicant is informed that the Local Highway Authority will require the footway and kerb to be lowered and reconstructed in the position(s) corresponding to the vehicular means of access to the Site. This requirement is imposed in order to service the means of access; in order to prevent danger and Inconvenience to other road users and to pedestrians; and in order to prevent possible damage to highway surfaces. The work shall conform to a specification to be provided by the Highway Authority, or it may be required to be undertaken by the Authority itself. In either event, the work will be required to be undertaken at the applicant's expense.

3. IN43 (Section 106 Agreement) The land and premises referred to in this planning permission are the subject of an Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Voting: Unanimous ______

ITEM NO 09 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01484/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 5 & 5a Moor Road, Broadstone, BH18 8AZ PROPOSALS Extension to salon with s/c flat over and change of use of existing offices to maisonette. (Revised Scheme) amended plans received 31st January 2012 REGISTERED 22 November, 2011 APPLICANT DL & GW Frampton

31 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

AGENT Martin Hanham WARD Broadstone CONSERVATION AREA Tudor and Golf Links Road CASE OFFICER James Larson

The Application was brought before the Committee at the request of Councillor Brooke, due to neighbour concerns and the lack of amenity space provision.

The Application was the subject of a Members’ Site visit on 22 February 2012, which commenced at 11:25am and concluded at 11:45pm. Councillors Eades, Pawlowski, Brown, Burden, Mrs Clements, Potter, Mrs Stribley, Trent and Mrs C Wilson were in attendance. Ward Councillor Brooke was also in attendance.

James Larson, Planning Officer, gave a Site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding area.

Architect plans detailing the various elevations of the Proposal were considered.

A summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

Ken Parke, Agent for the Objectors, expressed his views, including:

 Poorly designed and disproportionate  None of the previous reasons for refusal had been resolved  Resubmitted Scheme very similar to refused Scheme  Car parking issues had not been resolved  Structure would dominate neighbours’ boundary  Structure would cause unacceptable loss of daylight  Overlooking issues had not been addressed  Access/parking – no turning point

Ward Councillor Brooke expressed his views, including:

 Previous application was harmful, revised scheme did not adequately address the problems  Nothing had changed  No amenity space  Contrary to PCS05 and 23  Poor living conditions  Proposal did not enhance Conservation Area  Obscure glazing did not enhance the active frontage  Referred to Highway’s Report dated 19 January 2013, which had not been published, recommending refusal  It would be logical to refuse the Application

Following a question from a Member, the Planning Officer explained the design both at ground and first floor levels.

32 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

A Member questioned the provision of parking and stated that in his opinion it did not meet Borough of Poole policies.

A Member stated that she felt that the Proposal was too large and would need additional parking provision.

A Member stated that when viewed from the footpath the design was acceptable, however, beyond that, the Proposal was totally inappropriate.

A Member stated that he could not imagine how two cars could use the allotted parking spaces. He reminded the Meeting that the Application Site was in a Conservation Area.

Mr Parke summed up his views, including:

 Lots of problems with the Proposal  Poor layout/design  There were better ways to achieve their goals

On being put to the vote, the Officer’s recommendation to approve was LOST.

Members continued by discussing reasons for refusal, particular reference was made to the following:

 Unneighbourly  Restricted parking  Intensification  Poor design/layout/appearance  Scale/size/mass  Overdevelopment  Did not fit in with the Conservation Area

RESOLVED that, contrary to Officer recommendation, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

Reasons for Refusal:

 The restricted access, inadequate car parking provision and absence of vehicle manoeuvring provision would result in vehicles entering or leaving the site in reverse gear and additional vehicles parking in nearby streets. This would detract from the safety of other users of the shared access and of the adjacent highway, most particularly pedestrians. The proposals are therefore contrary to the provisions of Policies T3 and T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) and PCS26 of the of the Poole Core Strategy (adopted February 2009)  By reason of their size, mass and design the proposals would represent overdevelopment of the site such that they would neither preserve; nor enhance; nor better reveal the significance of the Broadstone Conservation Area. The proposals are therefore contrary to the provisions of Policy

33 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy, adopted 2009; Policy BE16 of the Poole Local; Plan First Alteration, adopted March 2004 and policies and advice contained within the Broadstone Conservation Areas Character Appraisal and Management Plan (BCACAMP) published 2010; and also advice contained within PPS1 and PPS5.

Voting: Unanimous ______

Note: Councillor Trent left the Meeting at 5:35pm

Members agreed to change the order of the Plans List. ______

ITEM NO 11 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01393/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS The Bays, 133 Banks Road PROPOSALS Demolition of existing building and erection of a contemporary flat development containing four apartments and one duplex penthouse. Associated lower ground floor parking and supporting amenities (as amended plans received 31st January 2012). REGISTERED 31 October, 2011 APPLICANT The Bays Management AGENT R B Studio WARD Canford Cliffs CASE OFFICER Darryl Howells

The Application was brought before the Committee by Councillor Sorton to reflect concerns of neighbouring residents.

Darryl Howells, Senior Planning Officer, gave a Site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding area.

The Architect’s plans detailing the various elevations of the Proposal were considered.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet and, in particular, details of additional representations and the completion of a unilateral undertaking.

A summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

Mr Cain, Agent for the Objectors, expressed his views, including:

 There had been 22 letters of objection  Proposal would have an adverse impact upon the character of the area  Not enough had been done to overcome previous reasons for refusal

34 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

 Difficult to see how Officers believed that the revised Application improved on the previously refused Scheme  Upper floor levels of the Scheme were unacceptable  Skyline would be obscured  Design of building was “too square”  Appeal decision at 115 Sandbanks Road was not relevant  Plot too narrow for the design  Footprint had been enlarged  Key findings of Inspector had not been overcome  Quoted policies PCS5 and 23

Mr Parke, Applicant’s Agent, expressed his views, including:

 Straightforward Application  As a result of Inspector’s comments, massing of upper floors had been reviewed  Third storey was recessed  Overall, the height/scale had been significantly reduced  Slightly lower than Carina Court  Contemporary design was “acceptable” according to the Inspector  No harm to neighbouring properties

Following a query from a Member, the Senior Planning Officer highlighted the parking spaces as shown on the Plan.

A Member stated that the present property on the Site was not particularly attractive and that the Proposal was a great improvement. The Chairman stated that, although not a planning consideration, he had concerns regarding sustainability as the previous property was built in 2000.

Mr Cain summed up his views, including:

 Reiterated the Appeal decision  Requested that Members refuse the Application

Mr Parke summed up his views, including:

 Upper floors had been reviewed  Excellent design

RESOLVED that this Application be Grant Subject to Unilateral Undertaking subject to the following Conditions:

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

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

3. GN030 (Sample of Materials)

35 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

4. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access, turning space, garaging and vehicle parking shown on the approved plan have been constructed, and these shall thereafter be retained and kept available for those purposes at all times. For the avoidance of doubt, space nos. 3-8 shall be retained as unallocated car parking and shall not at anytime become allocated spaces attributed to any one particular flat.

Reason - In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies T11 and T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

5. GN080 (Screening to Balcony)

6. GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)

7. WL030 (Clearance of Protected Species)

Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010

The Banks Road streetscene consists of a few modern contemporary buildings with flat roofs which are interspersed between the traditional buildings. The contemporary form of development was accepted by the previous Planning Inspector in his decision dated May 2011, where he stated that "the proposed flats appearing up to four storeys in height at the front and five storeys to the rear, would have a very different, contemporary and flat roofed appearance, with extensive glazing facing the sea. Such an approach is acceptable in principle..." - Policy PCS23, PCS26

The principle reason for dismissing the appeal scheme was the Inspector found that "the rectangular form and flat roof of the upper floors would project above the ridge of no.131 and reach a similar height to the ridge of Carina Court. This would give the building considerably greater bulk and prominence in the street scene than the existing flats." The design of the revised scheme has been stepped in terms of its appearance. Furthermore the height of the building will not be overpowering in the street scene - PCS23, NE23

36 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

The application Site is not located within convenient walking distance of a local centre but gives access to bus stops to 2 hourly bus services. The prevailing form of development within the vicinity of the application Site at no.133 Banks Road are blocks of flats, so therefore allowing another block of flats in this location which is not within convenient walking distance of a local centre is acceptable - Policy PCS05

Situated on and to the north eastern boundary of the Site is a Holm Oak and Sycamore protected by Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 49/1999. These trees are mature specimens and offer a good level of public amenity value. To protect their Root Protection Area an arboricultural method statement has been submitted, its recommendations are acceptable to safeguard the retention of the trees - Policies BE2 and NE28

The applicants have submitted an Energy and Resources Statement to demonstrate how the development will meet the relevant code level for Sustainable Homes and incorporate principles of sustainable drainage and Lifetime Homes Standards into the design of the development. Furthermore the applicants provide an assessment as to how orientation, the choice of materials, building techniques, and energy efficient measures from renewable sources and low carbon technology would achieve a thermally efficient development. As such the Proposal accords with Policies PCS31, PCS32 and PCS35 of the Poole Core Strategy advice contained within PPS1: Planning & Climate Change and PPS22 Renewable Energy. It is proposed that there will be 6 unallocated spaces (3 internal/ 3 external) with an additional 2 further spaces in the garage to serve as allocated parking to the Penthouse. According to the Council's Parking SPD, units 1-4 should provide 6 spaces so the development complies in that respect. According to the SPD, as the Penthouse has 5 rooms, then the provision should be 2.3 allocated spaces, so there is a shortfall of 1 space in that respect Policy T11

The Environment Agency consider that the submitted FRA meets the requirements of PPS25 Development and Flood Risk and therefore has no objection to the current Proposal, subject to conditions. In this regard the Proposal accords with Policy PCS 34 of the Poole Core Strategy

Representations have been received that suggest there is evidence of protected species inhabiting the Site. Whilst such species are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act enforced by other agencies, in the event planning consent is granted a condition is recommended requiring the submission and approval of a wildlife survey prior to commencement of works and informatives reminding the applicant of his obligations under that Act in accordance with Policy NE21 of the Poole Local Plan.

The Applicant is willing to secure the necessary financial contributions needed to mitigate the effects of the development upon local recreation

37 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 facilities, heathlands and transportation infrastructure - Policies PCS36, PCS37, PCS15, PCS28, L17 and T13

Voting: Unanimous

Councillor Mrs Stribley left the Meeting at 5:50pm ______

ITEM NO 12 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01562/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 558 Blandford Road, Poole, BH16 5EG PROPOSALS Demolish existing garage and erect a single storey detached bungalow with associated car parking & vehicualr access off Blandford Road (as amended plans received 18th January 2011). (Revised scheme) REGISTERED 26 January, 2012 APPLICANT Plan-it AGENT Plan-it WARD Hamworthy West CASE OFFICER Darryl Howells

The Application was brought before the Committee by Councillors Wilkins and Chandler due to the concerns of local residents.

Darryl Howells, Senior Planning Officer, gave a Site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding area.

The Architect’s plans detailing the various elevations of the Proposal were considered.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet, and, in particular, an additional representation from the Head of Leisure Services.

A summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

Mr Lavery, Objector, expressed his views, including:

 Applicant had been trying to build this bungalow for years  There would be increased noise from vehicular movements  All neighbours had objected  Represented many neighbours who could not attend the Meeting  Referred to SSSI

Ward Councillor Wilkins expressed his views, including

 Proposal was not ideal for residents  Fully supported Officer’s recommendation

38 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

 Proposal would have an adverse impact on the character of the area  Requested that Members refuse the Application

RESOLVED that this Application be Refused for the following reasons:

1. RR000 (Non Standard Reason) The Proposal constitutes a backland development by reason of its size, scale and position relative to the prevailing pattern of established development and therefore will fail to positively contribute to the local distinctiveness of the area, resulting in a congested form of overdevelopment on the Site at 558 Blandford Road. The Proposal is therefore considered to be contrary PCS5 and PCS23 of the Core Strategy (adopted February 2009) and the Borough of Poole's Characterisation Study (April 2010).

2. RR090 (SE Dorset Transport Contribution Scheme) The Proposal fails to secure the appropriate mitigation as recommended in the South East Dorset Transportation Contribution Scheme SPG adopted by Poole Council 7 April 2009 (amended 9 November 2009). Contributions are necessary to ensure the Developer addresses the transportation impact generated by the proposed development. Without suitable mitigation and infrastructure improvements there is a real danger that the Proposal will have a detrimental affect on the economy, environment, accessibility and road safety. As such the Proposal is contrary to the aims of the Poole Core Strategy Policies PCS 36 & PCS 37, saved Local Plan Policy T13 and the adopted Transportation Contributions Scheme SPG.

3. RR060 (5Km of a Site of Specific Interest) The Proposal is within 5Km of a Site of Specific Interest (SSSI). This SSSI is also part of the designated Dorset Heathlands SPA (Special Protection Area) and Ramsar Site, and is also part of the Dorset Heaths SAC (Special Area of Conservation). The proximity of these European Sites (SPA and SAC) means that determination of the application should be undertaken with regard to the requirements of the Habitat Regulations 1994, in particular Regulations 48 and 49.

If the Council had been minded to grant permission in all other respects it would have to carry out an appropriate assessment in accordance with the advice and procedure set out broadly in Circular 06/2005. The applicant has failed to demonstrate in accordance with the Habitat Regulations that the Proposals will cause no harm to the SPA and SAC heathland. It is clear, on the basis of advice from English Nature that, the proposed development would in combination with other plans and projects within close proximity to heathland and in the absence of any form of acceptable mitigation be likely to have an adverse effect on the heathland special features including those which are SPA and SAC features. Having regard to the Waddenzee judgement (ECJ case C- 127/02) the Council is not in a position to be convinced that there is no reasonable scientific doubt to the contrary. For these reasons, and

39 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 without needing to conclude the appropriate assessment, the Proposal is considered contrary to the Environmental policies A, B, C and D of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Structure Plan as well as the recommendations of the Berne Convention Standing Committee on urban development adjacent to the Dorset Heathlands, Policies NE16 and NE19 of the Poole Local Plan (First Alteration) Adopted 2004 and Policies PCS28 and PCS29 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009.

Informative Notes

1. IN52 (Works Affecting Adjoining Land) It is noted that the boundary treatment supporting the development hereby approved may overhang your neighbour's land. This planning permission does not convey the right to enter land or to carry out works affecting or crossing the boundary with land which is not within your control without your neighbour's consent. This is, however, a civil matter and this planning consent is granted without prejudice to this.

Voting: For – 7 Against – 0 Abstentions - 1 ______

ITEM NO 10 APPLICATION NO. APP/11/01033/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS Rear of 16-18 St Clements Road, Poole, BH15 3PD PROPOSALS Demolish existing buildings and erect 4 dwellings (as amended plans received 28th December 2011 and 9th January 2012). REGISTERED 18 August, 2011 APPLICANT Regal Homes AGENT Harriplan WARD Newtown CASE OFFICER Darryl Howells

The Application was brought before the Committee at the request of Councillor Wilson because of the history of the Site; in response to local residents’ concerns; because of excessive hardstandings; backland development causing unacceptable overdevelopment; limited rear gardens and because of harm to the rear outlook of existing neighbours.

Darryl Howells, Senior Planning Officer, gave a Site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding areas.

The Architect’s plans detailing the various elevations of the Proposal were considered.

A summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement was noted.

40 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

Ward Councillor Mrs Clements stated that the Proposal was an improvement on the current situation and it was a suitable use of the land.

A Member stated that in her view, the Proposal represented “cramming”.

RESOLVED that this Application be Granted Subject to Unilateral Undertaking subject to the following Conditions:

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

2. AA01 (Non standard Condition) The materials and finishes to be employed on the external faces of the development hereby permitted shall match those specified in the schedule listed in Section 9 of the Planning Application form unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason - To ensure a satisfactory visual relationship of the new development and that existing and in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted February 2009. 3. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

4. HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)

5. GN160 (Sustainable Homes - Code Level 3)

6. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)

7. LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)

8. RC010 (Remove Residential Permitted Development) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 or any subsequent re-enactment thereof, no further garage, porch, extensions, fences, dormers, windows or creation of additional hard standing other than those authorised by this permission shall be erected or constructed without express planning permission first being obtained from the Local Planning Authority.

Reason - To maintain the amount of development on the Site and to improve visual amenities to the street scene and in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy (adopted 2009) and Policy BE2 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

Informative Notes

1. IN62 (Summary of Reasons for Decision) Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure)

41 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

(England) Order 2010

PCS04 Isolated Employment Sites According to the Proposals Map of the Poole Local Plan and Core Strategy, the application Site is excluded from the policy covering the adjacent industrial area. As such Policy PCS4 is the relevant policy that seeks to retain islolated employment Sites unless alternative uses are not appropriate. The planning history of the Site is unclear. Some time ago the owner of no.18 St Clements Road erected 2 flat roof garages within the curtilage of the dwelling house and used as ancillary accommodation as such. Subsequently part of the garden was divided by the erection of a close boarded fence, and the use of the garages ceased being solely ancillary but became partially commercial, albeit without any formal grant of planning permission. Evidence on Site indicates some commercial activity, namely company logos visible on buildings, storage of commercial containers and bins. There logos are also shown on commercial vehicles, pictured in the applicant's own submission documents. However the applicant has confirmed, that the owner of no.18 maintained the use of the garages as ancillary accommodation to a dwelling house as such, only occasionally storage motorcycle or machine parts associated with commercial use off Site. As the Site is not identified as being one of commercial activity, Policy PCS04 does not strictly apply.

PCS05 Broad Locations for Residential Development This policy seeks to ensure that residential development is located within appropriate locations demonstrating that usage. This Site is located with close to local shops in Parkstone and Newtown and reasonably good access to the town centre by public transport.

PCS15 Access and Movement This policy seeks to encourage and promote alternative modes of transport other than the private motor vehicle. The proposed development encourages occupiers and visitors to use alternative modes of transport other than their private motor vehicle.

PCS23 Local Distinctiveness This policy seeks to ensure that proposed development positively reinforces the local distinctiveness of an area. The character of the area is residential of terraced houses and flats with pitched and hipped roofs, rendered or brick walls. The proposed development will positively enhance the visual amenities of the area by reflecting design features, massing, scale and proportions.

42 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012

PCS28 Dorset Heaths International Designations This policy recognises the importance that Dorset Heathlands have, and the damage that recreation activities can cause. The proposed development is supported by a financial contribution towards the mitigation of effects of development and will therefore provide protection for nature habitats and fauna in the area.

PCS31 Sustainable Energy - General This policy seeks to promote sustainable use and generation of renewable energy. These Proposals are Sited in a sustainable location and as such promote alternative modes of transport such as walking, cycling or public transport. The resultant effect will be residential accommodation that reduces energy demands.

PCS32 Sustainable Homes This policy seeks to ensure that residential development seeks to reduce carbon emissions and improve energy uses within buildings. The scheme will be required to achieve a minimum of Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes (or its successor) thereby will reduce energy consumption.

PCS36 Joint Working This policy recognises the importance of working with partners to improve community facilities and the transportation infrastructure. The proposed development is supported by a financial contribution towards the mitigation of effects of development and will therefore provide mitigation for Council strategies.

PCS37 The Role of Developer Contributions in Shaping Places This policy recognises the importance that developer contributions have in respect of providing recreation provision, heathland mitigation and improvements to the transportation infrastructure network. The proposed development is supported by a financial contribution towards the mitigation of effects of development and will therefore provide mitigation for Council strategies.

BE02 Landscaping This policy seeks to ensure that hard and soft landscaping is an integral part of any development in order to improve visual amenities. The Proposals incorporate areas of hard and soft landscaping to positively contribute towards visual amenities.

Policy T11 Car Parking Maxima This policy seeks to ensure that development is adequately served by on Site car parking provision. The proposed development will be served by 6 car parking spaces each which is sufficient tot accord with the Council's adopted standards.

Policy T13 Traffic Generated by Development This policy seeks to support the Council's policies on collecting financial

43 BOROUGH OF POOLE – PLANNING COMMITTEE – 22 FEBRUARY 2012 contributions to improve the car parking provision within the town centre and the transportation infrastructure network. In the case, the existing use will likely exceed the trip generation caused by residential uses so no contribution towards transportation infrastructure can be justified.

L17 Provision for Recreational Facilities This policy recognises the need to provide recreation facilities within the ward and wider area to meet the recreation needs of the occupiers of the dwelling hereby approved. Providing off Site facilities will improve the self being of occupiers, their health and fitness and contribute to the Council's wider recreation strategies.

2. IN00 (Non Standard Informative) For the avoidance of doubt, condition no.8 which removes permitted development rights to the 4 houses hereby approved and no.18 St Clements Road, as being within the red line.

Voting: For – 5 Against – 2 Abstentions - 1