East Dorset District Council Planning Committee 16Th November, 2004

Ever yone 7 128 867 rep_agd_ID Draft 3 C hief Exec uti ves 2 0 28, 29 rep_exe_IDsNo No No No No No No No No No N o N o N o N o N o N o No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No NoEN1, EN2 16/11/2004 09:30:18 Chief Executive Ol d 52 1

East Dorset District Council

Planning Committee Agenda Item No 6 16th November, 2004 Public Report

Schedule of Planning Applications

Item for Decision: To consider the planning applications contained within the schedule and to receive details of any withdrawn or requested deferred applications, if any. Contributors: Chief Executive Contact Officer: Michael Hirsh, Head of Planning & Building Control Financial Implications: None Council Priorities: EN1 EN2 Recommendations: It is RECOMMENDED that the applications contained in this schedule be determined or otherwise dealt with in accordance with the Head of Planning and Building Control's recommendations.

1. Applicable Lead Member Area(s) 1.1 Environment;

2. Crime and Disorder – Section 17 Implications 2.1 Where there is a specific crime and disorder matter that is a material planning consideration, it will form part of the report related to the particular application.

3. Application Schedule

No. Application No. Site Address Pg.

1. 3/03/1541/COU Woodlands Manor Farm, Horton Road, Horton 2 2. 3/03/1546/LBC Woodlands Manor Farm, Horton Road, Horton 4 3. 3/04/1049/FUL Carberry Heights, Corfe Lodge Road, Corfe Mullen 7 4. 3/04/1104/OUT Moonacre Cottage, Fordingbridge Road, Alderholt 11 5. 3/04/1109/FUL Junction Of Pinehurst Road And Woolslope Road, West 14 Moors, Ferndown 6. 3/04/1141/FUL Villa Sonne, Corfe Lodge Road, Corfe Mullen 24 7. 3/04/1158/FUL Land R/O 12 Fir Tree Hill, Alderholt, Fordingbridge 29 8. 3/04/1150/FUL Honeysuckle Cottage, Woodcutts, Salisbury 34 9. 3/04/1263/FUL 26 Hayes Close, Canford Bottom, Wimborne 36 10. 3/04/1282/FUL 15 Gallows Drive, West Parley, Ferndown 38 11. 3/04/1288/FUL Field at Steward's Lane, Shapwick 39 12. 3/04/1327/FUL 27 Little Dewlands, Verwood, Dorset 42 13. 3/04/1341/FUL 11 East Woodyates, Salisbury, Wiltshire 44 14. 3/04/1355/FUL 22 Olivers Way, Colehill, Wimborne 45 15. 3/04/1429/FUL 21 Dean Lane, Sixpenny Handley, Salisbury 47 16. 3/04/1456/FUL 1 Struan Court, Ashley Heath, Ringwood 49

Item Number: 1. Ref: 3/03/1541/COU

Proposal: Alterations, Extensions and Change of Use of Existing Barn to form Dwelling. As amended by plans received 19th February 2004 and 4th March 2004 Site Address: Woodlands Manor Farm, Horton Road, Horton, for Mr And Mrs D Riddle Constraints Listed Buildings Green Belt LP Windfarm Consultation Zone Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Airport Safeguarding (90m high) Public Rights of Way Area of Great Landscape Value LP Advert expired: 13 February 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 6 February 2004

Knowlton Parish Council No objection Comments:

Knowlton Parish Council No objection to amended plans. Comments:

Consultee Responses: EDDC Design And Comments on Listed Building application 3/03/1546/LBC Conservation

County Rights Of Way Officer Several recorded public rights of way in vicinity of the development - footpaths 17,18,20,21 and bridleway 15 - Woodlands. Unaware of any unrecorded paths likely to be affected. The rights of way do not, from plans received, seem to be directly affected. If application successful, free passage of public must not be obstructed/restricted. If necessary to close footpaths or bridleway for any length of time, application forms for temp closure must be completed/returned at least 8 weeks beforehand.

Wimborne Civic Society Does this proposal comply with Green Belt Policy as laid out in East Dorset Local Plan?

English Heritage Comments on Listed Building Application 3/03/1546/LBC

Officers Report:

This planning application was deferred at the meeting on 26 October 2004 to allow the Members to carry out a site visit.

This planning application, and the accompanying Listed Building application, (3/03/1546) propose the change of use of a Listed Barn on the Woodlands Manor Farm complex to provide a further dwelling for the family group that resides there.

Listed Building consent was granted for the restoration and alterations to the building in 1986 under reference number 86/0920. The barn has been used as an entertainment complex for the estate since then. The applicant argues that due to changes brought about by the Disability Discrimination Act and the new Part M of the Building Regulations, he would have to carry out significant improvements to the building to bring it up to current standards to be 2 able to obtain an Entertainment Licence which is necessary for any form of insurance. It is felt by the applicant that these changes would conflict with the historic integrity of the building and also would be very expensive. The applicant's son and family want their own dwelling on the site and it is suggested that this barn could be converted to a dwelling to meet that need, and in doing so, will be able to re-use the Listed Barn, and put right some of the insensitive alterations from the 1980's (such as the brick and tile bar and kitchen, and toilet block in the barn)

The conversion of a barn to residential accommodation in the open countryside, in particular in the Green Belt, is contrary to both national and local policy. The only exceptions, in policy CSIDE2 and BUCON9, are where "the building is incapable of reasonably beneficial use through re-use or conversion for any of the foregoing" ie for employment, tourism or recreational uses, and where "a proposed change of use of a Listed Building conflicts with other policies, it will be permitted where: (a) the existing use or alternative uses which accord with other policies are not expected to secure the preservation of the building...”.

The applicants have argued that the barn is in the middle of an existing group of dwellings where any form of commercial use would be inappropriate. They argue that it is far too big to be used for holiday accommodation and due to the cost of the works to the Listed Building it is only viable as a dwelling. The applicant's agent has also submitted details of an appeal in North Dorset where the conversion of barns was permitted for residential accommodation.

Your Officers do not accept this argument. The barn is in a sound condition, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. It does not have an authorised use as a commercial entertainment centre, rather was to be used ancillary to the dwellings on the adjacent land. It could be used for storage associated with the land holding, for example, connected with the equestrian uses on the site. It could also be used for ancillary office accommodation by the land owner. The conversion of this building into a dwelling would result in a further residential use in this isolated Green Belt location, which would constitute unsustainable development. It would also result in the likelihood of the domestic paraphernalia associated with the residential occupation of a dwelling having an adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt.

PPS7 also addresses the issue of the re-use of buildings in the countryside. Section 17 states that 'The Government's policy is to support the re-use of appropriately located and suitably constructed existing buildings in the countryside where this would meet sustainable development objectives.' It goes on to say that the 're-use for economic development purposes will usually be preferable, but residential conversions may be more appropriate in some locations, and for some types of building.' It then sets out a series of criteria that should be taken into account when considering such schemes, which include the potential impact on the countryside, specific local economic and social needs, settlement patterns and accessibility to service centres, the suitability of different types of buildings for re-use and the need to preserve buildings of historic importance or interest. This building is different from the majority of conversion applications in that it is not the initial conversion from a farm building under threat if an alternative use is not found for it. It has already been converted to a fairy high standard and is under no immediate threat. The expensive conversion work has already been done. It does not represent farm diversification which is vital to the continuing viability of the farm enterprise as there is no significant farming going on on the land. The appeal decision referred to is not in the Green Belt and appears to relate to the first conversion of buildings potentially under threat, which is a different scenario than the application before the Committee.

The application is therefore recommended for refusal for the following reasons.

Recommendation: REFUSE – FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON(S):-

Reasons:-

1 The proposed development lies within the Green Belt as defined in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Structure Plan 2000, and identified in the East Dorset Local Plan 2002. Within this area it is intended that no new development shall be permitted except that reasonably required in connection with agriculture or forestry or other uses appropriate. The conversion of this existing Listed Building to a dwelling amounts to inappropriate development which is harmful to the openness of the Green belt and contrary to the purposes of including land within it. The applicant has not demonstrated that there are any circumstances that are so special as to outweigh the Green Belt policies, the harm to the openness of the Green Belt and the reasons for including land within it. The Council do not consider that the evidence submitted by the applicant to argue that a residential conversion is the only beneficial use for this Listed Building is compelling enough to outweigh the Green Belt and countryside policies that apply to the area, and which would also result in a dwelling in an unsustainable location. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies CSIDE2 (para 6.59) , GB2 (para 6.97) and GB4 (para 6.106) of the East Dorset Local Plan and the advice contained in PPG2 and PPS7.

Policy Considerations

In reaching this decision the policies in the Development Plan for the area, which currently comprises the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Structure Plan 2000 and the East Dorset Local Plan, were taken into account. This includes specifically the following policies: CSIDE2 GB2 GB4 BUCON9

Item Number: 2. Ref: 3/03/1546/LBC

Proposal: Alterations, Extensions and Change of Use of Existing Barn to Form Dwelling as amended by plans received 19th February 2004 and 4th March 2004 Site Address: Woodlands Manor Farm, Horton Road, Horton, for Mr And Mrs Riddle Constraints Windfarm Consultation Zone Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Airport Safeguarding (90m high) Green Belt LP Public Rights of Way Area of Great Landscape Value LP Listed Buildings Site Notice expired: 12 February 2004 Advert expired: 13 February 2004

Knowlton Parish Council No objection Comments:

Knowlton Parish Council No objection to amended plans Comments:

Consultee Responses:

County Highways Development The rights of way do not, from the plan received, seem to Liaison Officer be directly affected by the development and in the absence of any information to the contrary, I have no 4

adverse comments to make.

EDDC Design And No objection to the proposed works to the Listed Building, Conservation but remains concerned about the principle of the conversion to a dwelling in the Green Belt.

English Heritage The conversion of listed barns to residential use is not normally supported by English Heritage due to the impact on their agricultural character. In this case it appears that the agricultural character of the site has already been significantly altered and is largely residential. Although we would advocate that alternative uses are investigated first this may not be so relevant in this case if a commercial use would not be appropriate here. We are happy for the Council's conservation Officer to undertake detailed negotiations on this scheme taking into account our comments in this letter.

Wimborne Civic Society , Query. Does this proposal comply with the Green Belt Policy as laid out in the East Dorset Local Plan_

Officers Report:

This planning application was deferred at the meeting on 26 October 2004 to allow the Members to carry out a site visit.

This Listed Building application, and the accompanying planning application (3/03/1541) propose the change of use of a Listed Barn on the Woodlands Manor Farm complex to provide a further dwelling for the family group that resides there.

The applicant's son and family want their own dwelling on the site and it is suggested that this barn could be converted to a dwelling to meet that need, and in doing so will be able to re-use the Listed Barn, and put right some of the insensitive alterations from the 1980's (such as the brick and tile bar and kitchen, and toilet block in the barn).

The applicant has argued that the barn is in the middle of an existing group of dwellings where any form of commercial use would be inappropriate. They argue that it is far too big to be used for holiday accommodation and due to the cost of the works to the Listed Building, it is only viable as a dwelling.

The applicant's agent has also submitted details of an appeal in North Dorset where the conversion of barns was permitted for residential accommodation. Your Officers do not accept this argument. The barn is in a sound condition, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. It does not have an authorised use as a commercial entertainment centre, rather was to be used ancillary to the dwellings on the adjacent land. It could be used for storage associated with the land holding, for example connected with the equestrian uses on the site. It could also be used for ancillary office accommodation by the land owner.

The conversion of this building into a dwelling would result in a further residential use in this isolated Green Belt location, which would constitute unsustainable development. It would also result in the likelihood of the domestic paraphernalia associated with the residential occupation of a dwelling having an adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt.

This building is different from the majority of conversion applications in that it is not the initial conversion from a farm building under threat if an alternative use is not found for it. It has already been converted to a fairy high standard and is under no immediate threat. The expensive conversion work has already been done. It does not represent farm diversification which is vital to the continuing viability of the farm enterprise as there is no significant farming going on on the land. The appeal decision referred to is not in the Green Belt and appears to relate to the first conversion of buildings potentially under threat, which is a different scenario than the application before the Committee.

The application is therefore recommended for refusal for the following reason.

Recommendation: REFUSE – FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON(S):-

Reasons:-

1 The Council do not consider that the evidence submitted by the applicant to argue that a residential conversion is the only beneficial use for this Listed Building is compelling enough to outweigh the presumption against the change of use. The Council consider that the works proposed represent an unnecessary intervention to this building and is contrary to Policy BUCON9 of the East Dorset Local Plan.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 3. Ref: 3/04/1049/FUL

Proposal: Erect Dwelling (Demolish Existing) as Amended by Plans Received 22.10.2004 Site Address: Carberry Heights, Corfe Lodge Road, Corfe Mullen, for Mr And Mrs Blah Constraints Windfarm Consultation Zone Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Airport Safeguarding (45m high) Urban Areas LP Site Notice expired: 19 August 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 17 November 2004

Corfe Mullen Parish Council Objection - due to the height, scale and bulk of proposed Comments: dwelling.

Consultee Responses:

County Highways Development Formal recommendation - DV2 Visibility splays, DN1 New Liaison Officer street order line (Modified).

English Nature The planning aspects would not raise any likely significant effects on the designated nature conservation site. Therefore, in relation to planning policy on such sites, English Nature has no objection to EDDC providing an authorisation for this proposal to be carried out strictly in accordance with the terms of the application and submitted plans.

EDDC Tree Section No arboricultural objections, subject to a protective fencing plan. Any hard surface remaining following the demolition of the out buildings can be utilised in the tree protection, minimising the need for fencing.

Neighbour Comments:

Mr And Mrs T Phillips 26 Loss of privacy. Restrict natural light. Visual impact on Wickham Drive, Corfe Mullen the front boundary of Corfe Lodge Rd.

Officers Report:

This application comes before Members as the Parish has objected to the proposed replacement dwelling due to the height, scale and bulk of the proposed dwelling. There has also been one letter of objection from the property next door but one to the north.

The Proposal

The proposal involves the demolition of the existing chalet and replacement with a two storey house of much larger proportions.

Site Description

The existing property at the site is a modest sized, rendered chalet, sitting in an extensive front and rear garden and screened by mature vegetation to the front and TPO'd trees on the side with Stonecrop. The adjacent site is the site of a former two storey dwelling Villa Sonne, which has been demolished and has been cleared. A 1.8 metre high fence runs the full length of the side boundary and some of the vegetation has been removed but towards the rear the vegetation is still in place on the side of Carberry Heights.

The site lies opposite the SSSI of Upton Heath and is accessed from the unmade section of Corfe Lodge Road.

Planning History

Two former schemes were determined under delegated powers. The first was a similar one for one replacement dwelling to that now proposed, but it was over two metres higher, (reference 3/02/1135). It was withdrawn because the adjoining site came up for development, and the two sites were combined for the second application, (reference 3/03/1362), which was an application for two replacement dwellings. That application involved two much more substantial dwellings in both height and bulk, and was refused on 10 December 2003. Following negotiations with both applicants, two separate revised applications have been submitted simultaneously. The adjacent site of Villa Sonne is also the subject of an application on this agenda at Item 6.

Policy Framework

Policy HODEV2 requires the best use to be made of urban land.

Policy BUCON6 of the East Dorset Local Plan stresses the importance of respecting features, which are key to maintaining the environmental quality of the area

Policy DES8 of the East Dorset Local Plan sets out the design criteria for new developments, ensuring that designs are appropriate in their environment in relation to neighbouring properties, trees, scale form and design, and that they should harmonise with the rural landscape.

Policy DES12 of the East Dorset Local Plan requires that all new development proposals should provide satisfactory access to the highway network and not cause or increase danger to road users.

Analysis of issues

The footprint of the new dwelling sits comfortably on the plot. It is close to the TPO'd trees adjacent to Stonecrop but as they lie the other side of the boundary fence and there is hardstanding from under the existing sheds alongside the boundary. The Tree Officer is satisfied that the trees can be adequately protected without need for protective fencing, as long as the hardstanding remains to protect tree roots during development. This will be required by condition.

The one objector has now moved, but lived at the site next but one to the application site. There is ample distance of over 25 metres between dwellings, for the position and impact of Carberry Heights to have no adverse impact upon them.

The new dwelling for Villa Sonne, which is immediately adjacent to the north, proposes the building to be set back 1.8 metres from the front of the new dwelling on Carberry Heights. This position is not likely to have any adverse impact upon Carberry Heights as proposed, nor vice versa.

The design of the new dwelling for Carberry Heights is now considered to be acceptable. The roof has been reduced by over 2 metres from the two former schemes and is now 8.6 metres tall. It also uses a hipped roof to preserve a sense of space between plots, which reduces the dominance of the building in the landscape and is more appropriate in the Area of Special Character. The projecting garage area at the front with rooms in the roof has been reduced in height from the most recent refusal, to improve the impact in terms of bulk that the new dwelling would have on the area. The amended plan, setting back the new dwelling by a further 1.5 metres, also assists in reducing the impact of the new dwelling on the heathland and the Area of Special Character.

English Nature have not objected to the proposal because it is a replacement on a one for one basis and will therefore not increase pressure on the heathland.

The County Highways Officer has advised that the site should be subject to a new road order, requiring large visibility splays to be provided at the site entrance and an area of 6 metres from the front garden to be cleared of vegetation and handed over for the making up of the highway.

However, as Corfe Lodge Road is an unmade road that directly abuts the SSSI, it would be inappropriate for it to be made up to an adoptable standard, as this would increase the pressure for use of the heathland. On this basis the County Council is now preparing a consultation of residents in Corfe Lodge Road with a view to preparing a delegated report to revoke the New Streets Order for Corfe Lodge Road.

In the meantime the application needs to be determined, so a notional line for the road improvement has been shown on the plan. Should the road Order be revoked the landscaping can be retained and therefore a condition is recommended to require the retention of the frontage landscape unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Local Highway Authority.

It therefore seems reasonable to allow the existing frontage planting to remain in this Area of Special Character and to require a reduced visibility splay, suitable for a 20 mile per hour road.

As now proposed it is considered that the dwelling will have an acceptable impact upon the Area of Special Character and on the SSSI and will not have an adverse impact upon neighbouring properties.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2 Details and samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any on-site work commences. All works shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the details as approved.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory.

3 Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions the window(s) on the first floor north or south elevation (such expression to include the roof) shall be glazed with obscure glass 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 overlooking. Furthermore, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any subsequent re-enactment, no further fenestration or door shall be installed in the said elevation without express planning permission.

Reason: To preserve the amenity and privacy of the adjoining property.

4 The existing natural tree screen/hedgerow along the western and southern boundary of the site shall be retained and reinforced where necessary in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any such reinforcement shall be carried out during the planting season October/March inclusive following the first occupation of the adjacent building maintained for a period of five years during which time any plants that are found to be dead or dying shall be replaced.

Reason: To maintain and enhance the appearance of the locality.

5 The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access, turning space, garaging and parking shown on the approved plan has been constructed and these shall be maintained and be kept available for that purpose at all times.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

6 Prior to the commencement of works on site a plan showing tree protection measures in relation to the trees on the southern boundary of the site shall be submitted to agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and erected on site in the approved form. The tree protection measures shall then be retained and not breached during construction works. No building works whatsoever shall take place within the identified area of protection.

Reason: To prevent trees on site from being damaged.

existing trees and shrubs shall be correctly described and their positions accurately shown. Upon approval such new planting shall be carried out during the planting season October/March inclusive, in accordance with the appropriate British Standards for ground preparation, staking, etc., in BS4428:1989 (1979), immediately following commencement of the development. The landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years during which time any specimens which are damaged, dead or dying shall be replaced and hence the whole scheme shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: Pursuant to Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and the locality.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 4. Ref: 3/04/1104/OUT

Proposal: Proposed New Dwelling and Garages (as amended by plans dated 29 September 2004) Site Address: Moonacre Cottage, Fordingbridge Road, Alderholt, for Mr And Mrs Byrne Constraints Windfarm Consultation Zone Village infilling Policy Areas LP Site Notice expired: 3 September 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 31 August 2004

Alderholt Parish Council Objection - Concerns over increased use of access on Comments: dangerous junctions. Lack of off road parking. Have received objections from local residents.

Consultee Responses:

County Highways Development Before I can make any formal recommendation the Liaison Officer following amendment should be noted:-

I have agreed with the agent that a footway should be provided over the site frontage to Fordingbridge Road and that the existing access should be permanently closed off.

Regarding the amended plans: NO OBJECTIONS in principle subject to the following conditions - CG11 Off Site Works a Pre Requisite of Development No development shall commence unless and until the following works have been constructed to the specification of the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Local Highways Authority :- 1. A kerbed footway has been constructed at least 1.5 metres in width along the entire frontage of the site connecting to the frontage of the adjacent property known 11

as Greenfield. 2. The existing vehicular access onto Sandleheath Road shall be widened and improved to provide a minimum access width of 4.5 metres. 3. The existing vehicular access onto Fordingbridge Road shall be permanently closed off. CB13 Parking Details to be submitted Before development is commenced, details of vehicular parking and manoeuvring facilities within the curtilage of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The parking and manoeuvring facilities shall then be completed in all respects in accordance with those details before the development is brought into use and shall be maintained as such thereafter.

EDDC Tree Section

Neighbour Comments:

Mr R Norbury Croft Cottage, Object on following grounds:- Fordingbridge Road 1. Danger from traffic. 2. Loss of light and aspect. 3. Loss of historic aspect.

Mr C Walker Greenfields, Concerns re: character and size, overlooking and loss of Fordingbridge Road light. Current proposal would make Pressey's Corner even more dangerous for motorists and pedestrians.

Mr And Mrs Green 161 Station Object due to loss of view. Garages in particular will be a Road, Alderholt cause for concern. Worried about their height and impact on the resale value of our property.

Mr P Gould Salisbury Arms Highway concerns. Overlooking. Loss of trees. The scale Farmhouse, Sandleheath Road of the development. Design and character.

Mr And Mrs K Puttick Cross Concerns re character, trees, highways and bats. Farm House, Sandleheath Road

Officers Report:

This application is brought to Committee because there is a favourable recommendation and the Parish Council have objected and more than two letters of objection have been received.

This is an outline application with details of siting and means of access not reserved for further consideration. Amended plans have been submitted which show the provision of a footway in front of the house and improvements to the access to Sandleheath Road.

The site lies within the defined settlement of Alderholt where the East Dorset Local Plan indicates that infilling is, in principle, acceptable. There are no policies or proposals which would prevent this proposal in principle.

The two main issues to be resolved in this instance are whether the amenities of any occupiers of nearby dwellings are adversely affected and whether the development would result in any highway danger. It is considered that due to the varied nature of the street scene through the village, a dwelling could be accommodated without being generally visually intrusive.

Moonacre Cottage was previously a restaurant but has been a private dwelling for a number of years. The site lies between two sharp bends on the eastern edge of the village. There is a brick building which lies between Moonacre Cottage and Greenfield which is the adjacent house to the south. That building will be demolished and replaced by a dwelling, the existing access which does not appear to have been in recent use will be closed and a footway constructed in front of the dwelling and Moonacre Cottage. The house is proposed to be sited 4.5 m. back from the road. The existing building lies directly on the road frontage.

Whilst there are local objections, it is considered that the only property which is likely to be affected by this proposal is Greenfield the garden of which does lie mainly on its north side adjacent to the proposed plot. It is, however, 10m. from the boundary and the mutual relationship is not one which would could be the subject of a justifiable reason for refusal. Any approval of reserved matters would of course need to ensure that there are no overlooking windows on the south elevation.

The modifications to the access and its use by two properties could not adversely affect the amenities of the occupiers of any other dwellings. The Local Highway Authority raise no objection subject to the imposition of conditions.

There are no grounds which would stand a reasonable chance of being successfully defended on appeal in the event of a refusal of planning permission.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 Before any development is commenced details of 'Reserved Matters' (that is any matters in respect of which details have not been given in the application and which concern the design or external appearance of the buildings to which this permission and the application relates or the landscaping of the site) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

An application for approval of any 'Reserved Matters' must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates :

(i) the expiration of five years from the date of the grant of outline planning permission, or

(ii) the expiration of two years from the final approval of the 'Reserved Matters' or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

Reason : To comply with Sections 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory.

3 Upon approval of the landscaping details, including any screen walls or fences, pursuant to Condition 1 the new planting shall be carried out during the planting season October/March inclusive, (in accordance with the appropriate British Standards for ground preparation, staking, etc., in BS4428:1989 (1979)) immediately following commencement of the development. Any plants found damaged, dead or dying in the first five years are to be duly replaced and the scheme thereafter retained.

Reason: Pursuant to Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and the locality.

4 No development hereby permitted shall be commenced unless and until the following works have been constructed to the specification of the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Local Highway Authority :-

1. A kerbed footway has been constructed at least 1.5 metres in width along the entire frontage of the site connecting to the frontage of the adjacent property known as Greenfield.

2. The existing vehicular access onto Sandleheath Road shall be widened and improved to provide a minimum access width of 4.5 metres.

3. The existing vehicular access onto Fordingbridge Road shall be permanently closed off.

Reason : In the interests of highway safety.

5 Before the development hereby authorised is commenced, details of vehicular parking and manoeuvring facilities within the curtilage of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The parking and manoeuvring facilities shall then be completed in all respects in accordance with those details before the development is brought into use and shall be maintained as such thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Informatives:

1 The applicant is advised that notwithstanding this consent, Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980 requires the proper construction of vehicle crossings over kerbed footways, verges or other highway land. Before commencement of any works on the public highway the Area Highways Manager (East) should be consulted to agree on the detailed specification (for the type access(es)). He can be contacted at the Area Office (East), Stour Park, Blandford St Mary, Dorset, DT11 9LQ (Tel: 01258 450048).

2 In the interests of highway safety, provision shall be made to ensure that no surface water drains directly from the site onto the highway.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 5. Ref: 3/04/1109/FUL

Proposal: 9 Houses and 4 Flats and Construct new Access (Demolish Public House) as amended by plans received 20th August 2004 and 21st September 2004 Site Address: Junction Of Pinehurst Road And Woolslope Road, West Moors, Ferndown, for Hall And Woodhouse Constraints Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Airport Safeguarding (45m high) Urban Areas LP Windfarm Consultation Zone Site Notice expired: 3 September 2004 Advert expired: 3 September 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 15 October 2004

West Moors Parish Council No objection. Comments:

Consultee Responses:

EDDC Design And This looks potentially a very attractive scheme. The Conservation layout, form and scale will fit nicely within the street scene. However, everything rests on the quality of the materials and detailing. Approval should be conditional on the submission of full architectural and joinery details and a detailed schedule of materials, which should be considered concurrently with the submitted plans. Appropriate shelters should be provided for the parking spaces.

EDDC Tree Section The orientation of the current proposal appears to be the reverse of the original application. The proposed rear gardens are now, predominantly, south facing. The preserved trees on the Pinehurst Road boundary appear to be in a communal area and the footprint for the dwellings in this location are in excess of the required 10m. Provided the necessary protective fencing accords with the previous plans and the current plans can be annotated with the fencing specification, I can provide a suitable condition.

County Highways Development No Objection subject to the conditions recommended in 15

Liaison Officer my observation of 24.08.04

Neighbour Comments: Mr Billington 3 Spinners Close, Object - Worried about increase in parking problems. West Moors Design of development not in keeping with surrounding area.

Mr And Mrs Winter 28 Worries about loss of light throughout the day because of Pinehurst Road, West Moors close proximity of new development. Concerns about responsibility for maintenance of perimeter fence, communal areas and trees fronting Pinehurst Road.

31 Pinehurst Road, West No objection - subject to the eight trees on Pinehurst Road Moors Elevation not being felled or pollarded.

Mr And Mrs Middleton 25 (Also representing Mr Stevenson, 27 Pinehurst Road.) Pinehurst Road, West Moors Overdevelopment, given that site is on the junction of two busy roads, in close proximity to bus stops and a church, inadequate parking. Open space shown on plans should be protected. Concerns about disruption during development.

Objections could be largely addressed if volume of properties to be constructed were significantly reduced.

Further letter dated 08/10/04

Concerned that the level of building has increased with the addition of the covered car parking spaces. One car parking space per plot could lead to parking problems. The living room window to first floor flat plot 9 overlooking first floor bedroom window affecting privacy.

Mr M Stevenson 27 Pinehurst Concerns re; number of dwellings, building line, Road, West Moors inadequate garaging for vehicles, increased traffic causing congestion, conservation of trees.

Mr And Mrs Haynes 31 Pinehurst Road, West Moors

Mr And Mrs Southcombe 12 Object - Loss of Public House. No objection to the grounds Southdown Way, West Moors being developed but not at the sacrifice of the public house.

Mr Armour 17 Southdown Way, Object. Construction of flats in this area inappropriate. West Moors Worried about parking congestion in Woolsope Road. Loss of Public House.

Mrs A Gillies 5 Weavers Close, Concerns re: overdevelopment, parking, trees, loss of West Moors public house and the effect on the community.

Mr Taylor 2 Weavers Close, Object-

West Moors Loss of local public house and meeting place. Overdevelopment of site.

Mrs Matthews 23 Weavers Safety concerns re boundary fence. Request developers Close, West Moors be approached with a view to replacing timber panels with bricks - perhaps higher by no more than 6 inches.

Mr D Hughes 14 Monks Close, Petition to stop closure of Fryers Arms Public House with West Moors eighty seven signatures. Second letter with further signatures.

Mrs K A Sheehan 50 Heathfield Objects to loss of amenity for villagers, particularly older Road, West Moors residents, traffic concerns.

Mr Eames 17 Avon Road, West Object due to loss of Pub facilities. Moors

Mr R K Cross 47 Teasel Way, Loss of amenity. West Moors

L C Johnson 3 Firsglen Road, Object - Loss of Public House West Moors

A J E Field 23 Teasel Way, Concerns re loss of amenity, particularly to local elderly West Moors residents and highway concerns re junction of Pinehurst Road and Woolslope Road.

Mr And Mrs I Stone 72 Concerns that proposed properties are in front of building Woolslope Road, West Moors line and will cause loss of light, are not in keeping and lack sufficient parking facilities. Amended plans - Houses directly next to our property have been planned too close, parking still a problem, carports not in keeping.

S B Potter 12 Avon Road, West Object - Concerns regarding Parking, Out of Character Moors with area and building line. Amended: - Number and nature of dwellings is too high density.

Mr And Mrs Walker 70 Object - Concerns regarding Parking, Out of Character Woolslope Road, West Moors with area and building line.

Mr And Mrs Holloway Objection. Density of housing too great for site and loss of Woodpecker Lodge, 6a public house should not be allowed. Suggest reduction of Pinehurst Road density of proposed housing and retention of a refurbished Fryers Arms which is an attractive building.

Officers Report:

This application is brought to Committee for determination as there have been a number of letters of objection as detailed above and a petition containing 122 signatures objecting to the closure of the Fryers Arms Public House.

Planning history and description of proposal

A previous application submitted in 2003 under ref: 03/0657 was refused. This was for the conversion of the existing pub to flats and the erection of detached dwellings on the site as well, together with associated access and parking. This was refused as it was considered that the proposal was too cramped that there was insufficient room for the proposed dwelling adjacent to number 28 Pinehurst Road and insufficient private amenity space had been provided for the flats within the converted pub.

This proposal is for the demolition of the existing building on the site and the erection of 9 houses and 4 flats, with access from Woolslope Road. The development is set in an L- shape to provide a frontage development on the corner of Woolslope Road with Pinehurst Road. Along Pinehurst Road the development is set back to avoid conflict with the mature trees along the road frontage. 20 parking spaces are provided to the rear of the site. 13 of these are covered by car ports. The plans have been amended during consideration of the proposal to take on board concerns raised by the immediate neighbours to the site and concerns raised by officers. These include increasing the distance from the end elevation of the building and the boundary with number 28 Pinehurst Road by 1m, from 2m to 3m; the parking spaces have been moved further away from the boundary with number 23 Weaver Close, and the nearest parking space (number 11) will be set at a lower level to overcome the levels difference between this site and Weaver Close, bollards are also proposed at the end of the turning head adjacent to the boundary with Weaver Close to try and overcome any potential damage to the boundary fence. There have also been alterations to the fenestration and layout of plot 10 to overcome the possibility of overlooking to the rear garden of plot 6, and the offending window has been replaced with a conservation grade skylight.

Description of the site

This is an important corner site at the junction of Pinehurst Road with Woolslope Road. There are a number of mature trees along the Pinehurst Road frontage which are protected by a Tree Preservation Order. The site is currently occupied by the Fryers Arms public house with access to the car park from Woolslope Road. There is an area of grass to the east of the public house between it and 28 Pinehurst Road. There is a church hall on the opposite side of Woolslope Road. There is a great variety of sizes, types and architectural styles and ages of dwellings in the area. To the north of the site there are Victorian and Edwardian houses, to the immediate east there are bungalows, to the south east in Weavers close there are also bungalows but to the south there are detached relatively modern 2 storey dwellings of fairly uniform design. There is therefore no particular cohesive style to the area which should be considered for this site and it is of sufficient size to accommodate a development with its own integrity of style, form and design.

Relevant policies and Central Government advice

The site is within the defined urban area of West Moors and therefore the principle of residential development on the site is acceptable subject to meeting the criteria set out in Policy DES8 (para. 6.3000 and DES12 (para. 6.316) of the EDLP. Central Government advice in Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 advocates making the best use of previously developed land in sustainable locations, but the form of such development must not be viewed in isolation and must be informed by the wider context. There is no policy within the Local Plan which supports the retention of a public house in this context. The site is in an area which has good access to local shops, a school and other facilities and is also near to a bus route. It is therefore considered to be a relatively sustainable location for a more

18 intensive form of development. The density proposed for this site of 0.2648ha falls within the Government guidance in PPG3 of 30-50 units per hectare

Analysis of Issues:

The main issues in this case are: The impact on the street scene; The impact on nearby properties; The impact on the trees on the site; Highway issues.

Impact on the street scene:

The Moorside Road and Avon Road area of Special Character Area lies opposite the site and has a number of large detached properties. This scheme has been designed in the ‘arts and crafts style’ of the early C20th and has been designed to turn the corner of the site to act as an architectural focal point, with the parking hidden to the rear. The frontage with Pinehurst road has been set back to avoid the mature trees on this boundary. A picket fence is proposed to the front of the flats and low fences and planting are proposed to the frontage of the houses in character with the existing developments in the street. It is considered that the proposal has been sensitively designed to make the best use of the site while providing an architectural solution which will fit well into the street scene. The use of appropriate materials and the fenestration details will be critical to the overall success of the design. Therefore, details have been sought at this stage of the windows and doors, the eaves and eaves brackets and the porches. A condition is proposed to ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with these details. A further condition also requires the submission of samples of all external materials to be used in the construction and these will be looked at critically before any approval is given.

Impact on nearby properties:

The amendments to the scheme, as set out above, have helped to further reduce any possible impact on nearby properties. There is now only a single storey element adjacent to no. 28 Pinehurst Road which is now 3m away from the boundary, the roof slopes away from this boundary and no windows are proposed in the east elevation. On this basis the impact on no. 28 Pinehurst road is considered acceptable. No. 23 Weaver Close, is a bungalow which lies to the south east of the site, adjacent to the car park area. The car parking area has now been moved away from the boundary with this dwelling and bollards are proposed to address the concern raised by the occupier of that property, that vehicles reversing might drive into the fence. Landscaping is proposed along this eastern boundary and the windows in the rear elevation are sited at a distance of over 23m to the rear elevation of number 23 Weaver Close. This relationship is considered acceptable in an urban setting. A pair of semi-detached properties are proposed to the north of number 72 Woolslope Road. While it is recognised that these dwellings are sited further forwards towards the road than number 72, as they are sited to the north west of this property at a distance of over 4m it is considered that there will be no material loss of light to the front facing windows of number 72. The roof is hipped away from the boundary, which will further reduce its impact, because although it has a relatively high ridge height of 8.5m it has an eaves height of only 4.6m. It is also proposed that Permitted Development rights for extensions and outbuildings to these houses are removed to retain control over the overall design concept of the scheme and to ensure that there are no dormer windows created which could result in overlooking to neighbouring properties. There are no Permitted Development rights for extensions to the flats. The car parking area is sited 7m from the southern boundary of the site and

19 landscaping is proposed in this space which will further reduce the impact on properties to the south and this is an improvement on the existing situation as the car park for the public house extends right up to this southern boundary. On the basis of the above it is considered that there will be no material loss of amenity to any of the adjacent properties to this site and therefore the proposal accords with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) in this respect.

Impact on trees

There are a number of mature trees along the Pinehurst Road boundary of the site which are an important feature of this part of the road. This proposal allows for a more than adequate distance from these preserved trees. The gardens for the new properties face predominantly south and therefore do not rely on the area of land to the north, which is in front of these dwellings, to provide amenity space. The proposal should therefore not result in pressure in the future to severely prune or remove these trees. This development has been designed to take full account of the crown spread of these trees and details of tree protection have been submitted. A condition is proposed to ensure that this protective fencing is put in place prior to the commencement of development.

Highway Issues

No objection to this proposal has been raise by the Highway Authority, subject to appropriate conditions relating to the provision of a suitably constructed access crossing with adequate visibility splays, the provision of the parking and turning areas and that no gates should be erected so as to form an obstruction to vehicular access serving the site. The provision of 20 car parking spaces on this site is considered adequate for a development of 13 dwellings, due to its sustainable location. 13 of the car parking spaces are to be covered by the car ports, one for each dwelling, with the remaining 7 being available for visitors. The parking requirements set out in the EDLP are maximum figures in line with advice from Central Government. This site is relatively close to the shops and other facilities of West Moors and there is access to public transport. There is no material reason to refuse the proposal on the basis of highway safety or the provision of car parking and the proposal is considered to accord with Policy DES12 (para. 6.316) of the EDLP in this respect.

Conclusion:

This proposal is considered to be a development which has been well designed to make the best use of the site, in an urban area. It has been designed to take account of the Special Character Area opposite, to provide an architectural focal point and to turn the corner of the site at the junction of Pinehurst Road with Woolslope Road. Careful consideration has been given to the layout and form of the development to minimise the impact on adjacent properties and to also largely screen the car parking area from public view. The Preserved trees on Pinehurst Road are to be safeguarded and the dwellings have been set back to achieve this. Further landscaping can be provided along Woolslope Road.

There is no policy in the EDLP which seeks to retain Public Houses in urban areas.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory.

3 Plans and particulars showing the finished floor levels, related to ordnance datum or fixed point within the site, of the ground floor of the proposed building(s), (and as appropriate the closest adjacent building beyond the site) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and development shall not be commenced until these details have been approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing. All works shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the details as approved.

Reason: In order that the Council may be satisfied with the details of the proposal having regard to the existing site levels and those adjacent hereto.

4 Plans and particulars showing the alignment height and materials of all walls and fences and other means of enclosure, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, and development shall not be commenced before these details have been approved. Such details as may be agreed shall be implemented in their entirety prior to the first occupation of the building to which these elements relate, maintained for a period of five years and any structural or decorative defect appearing during this period shall be rectified and the enclosure shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: In order that the Council may be satisfied with the enclosure details of the proposal and its implementation and retention.

5 Plans and particulars showing the provision to be made for the storage and disposal of refuse and recycling, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, and development shall not be commenced before these details have been approved. Such provision as is agreed shall be implemented concurrently with the development and thereafter retained.

Reason: In order that the Council may be satisfied with the details of the proposal.

6 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment thereof no extensions to the dwellings on plots 1-6 and numbers 11-13 shall be erected, nor outbuilding erected without express planning permission first being obtained. Reason: In order to enable the Local Planning Authority to retain control over the development on the site in the interests of the original overall design concept of the scheme and in the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of adjacent properties and the occupiers of the new dwellings hereby permitted, in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

7 Adequate underground ducts shall be installed before any building is occupied, to enable public utility services to be connected to any buildings within the site without

recourse to the erection of distribution poles, overhead lines, etc. Therefore, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, no distribution poles, overhead lines or surface installation required in connection with these services shall be provided or erected without the prior consent, in writing, of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

8 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment no further windows or doors shall be constructed in any of the elevations (such expression to include the roof) of the dwellings hereby permitted on plots 1-6 and 11- 13, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to avoid loss of privacy to the occupiers of adjoining properties and the occupiers of the new dwellings hereby permitted and in the interests of the original overall design concept of the proposal, in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

9 Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the bathroom and hall windows of plots 9 and 10 on the east elevation and the staircase window on the east elevation shall all be glazed with obscure glass 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 overlooking. Details of the obscure glass to be used for these windows shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and the windows shall be glazed in accordance with this approved glass.

Reason: To prevent overlooking to the garden area of plot 6, in the interests of the amenities of the future occupiers of this dwelling in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

10 The carports hereby permitted shall be retained as carports for the parking of vehicles only and shall not be enclosed or converted into outbuildings.

Reason: In order to ensure that sufficient on-site parking is provided to avoid road-side parking and in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in the interests of the original design concept of the development, in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

11 Before the development hereby permitted is commenced, proposals for the hard landscaping shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such approved works shall be completed in all respects before the final completion of the development and thereafter retained.

Reason: To enhance the amenities of the site and to secure well planned development.

12 Before the development is commenced, proposals for the landscaping of the site, to include provision for the retention and protection of existing trees and shrubs, if any, thereon, together with any means of enclosure proposed or existing within or along the curtilage of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority by means of a large scale plan and a written brief. All proposed and existing trees and shrubs shall be correctly described and their positions accurately shown. Upon approval such new planting shall be carried out during the planting

season October/March inclusive, in accordance with the appropriate British Standards for ground preparation, staking, etc., in BS4428:1989 (1979), immediately following commencement of the development. The landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years during which time any specimens which are damaged, dead or dying shall be replaced and hence the whole scheme shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: Pursuant to Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and the locality.

13 The land shown on the approved plan for amenity open space shall be retained for this and no other purpose.

Reason: To enhance the environment created by the new development.

14 The windows, doors, eaves and porches of the development hereby approved shall be constructed strictly in accordance with the details shown on drawing no. W02/03/30 - 28 received on 25/10/2004.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried in accordance with the approved scheme in the interests of the original design concept of the proposal, and in the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

15 Prior to the commencement of development, the first 10 metres of the access crossing, measured from the nearside edge of the carriageway, shall be laid out, constructed, hardened and surfaced, to the specification of the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Local Highway Authority.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

16 No part of the development hereby permitted shall be brought into use until the related access road(s) and parking provision shall have been constructed and surfaced to a specification to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Local Highway Authority and these areas shall be thereafter retained and kept available for these purposes.

Reason: To minimise the likelihood of car parking outside the areas provided, in the interests of highway safety.

17 There shall be no gates hung so as to form obstruction to the vehicular access serving the site.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

18 Visibility splays shall be provided at the access with an 'x' dimension of 2.4 metres and a 'y' dimension of 44 metres to the west and 'y' 90 metres to the east such that a vehicular user of the access can see the entire road width for the entire distance 'y', shall be provided prior to the commencement of development and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To provide adequate visibility for road users in the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy DES12 (para. 6.316) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

19 The bollards shown on drawing no. W 02/03/30 - 19 Rev. B, received on 21/09/2004, at the eastern end of the car park and around parking space number 11 shall be installed prior to the first occupation of any of the dwellings hereby permitted and shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: In the interests of safety and the amenities of the occupiers of the adjacent property, caused by vehicle movements adjacent to number 23 Weaver Close, in accordance with Policies DES8 (para. 6.300) and DES12 (para. 6.316) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

20 Details of the temporary siting of any contractors site compound and its means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing prior to the commencement of development. The site compound shall be established in accordance with the approved scheme and shall be removed in its entirety within one month of the completion of the development and the land restored to its approved use as shown on the approved site layout drawings.

Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to retain control over the siting of any contractors compound in the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties in accordance with policies DES2 (para. 6.280) and DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

21 Fencing for the protection of the preserved trees on this site shall be erected in accordance with plan W 02/03/30 - 19 Rev. B, received on 25 October 2004, before any equipment, machinery or materials are brought onto the site for the purposes of demolition or development . This protective fencing shall be retained in position until the development is completed and nothing shall be placed within the fencing, nor shall any ground levels within be altered, nor shall any excavation be made without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent the trees on site being damaged in the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

Informatives:

2 In the interests of highway safety, provision shall be made to ensure that no surface water drains directly from the site onto the highway.

3 The contractors for this development are requested to exercise consideration and caution during construction to minimise noise and disturbance to nearby properties due to the proximity of the site to a number of dwellings.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 6. Ref: 3/04/1141/FUL

Proposal: Erect two storey dwelling with integral garage as amended by plans received 13.10.2004 and 22.10.2004 Site Address: Villa Sonne, Corfe Lodge Road, Corfe Mullen, for Shelly Properties Constraints Site Notice expired: 4 September 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 17 November 2004

Corfe Mullen Parish Council Objection - Due to the height, scale and bulk of proposed Comments: dwelling. In addition, overlooking would be caused to no 26 Wickham Drive.

Corfe Mullen Parish Council Objection - The Parish Council objects to the height, scale Comments: and bulk of the proposed dwelling.

Consultee Responses:

EDDC Tree Section The latest proposal shows a repositioned footprint, to which I have no objection, and details the existing access for retention.

Details of the new surface for the existing access will be required, along with a protective fencing plan.

County Highways Development No objection to amended scheme subject to visibility of 2.4 Liaison Officer x 40 metres and the New Street Order line to be shown on the plans.

Neighbour Comments:

Mr B D And Mrs J Thomas 28 No objection to the size of the proposed single property. Wickham Drive, Corfe Mullen Concerns relating to the single Holly hedge and ensuring there is a suitable screen for privacy without blocking out light and evening sunshine.

Mr And Mrs Curnow 24 Over development of the site. Bulk of property Wickham Drive, Corfe Mullen unacceptable. Lack of privacy. Significant detrimental pressure on the area. Highway concerns. Negative impact on the SSSI Upton Heathland.

Mr J Blah Carberry Heights, No objection to the revised position of the dwelling. Corfe Lodge Road

Mrs U Leal 15 Jupiter Way , Concerned about forward projection of building towards Corfe Mullen Corfe Lodge Road, loss of light to conservatory at 26 Wickham Drive and overlooking from bedroom windows above garage.

Officers Report:

This application comes before Members as the Parish has objected to the proposed replacement dwelling due to the height, scale and bulk of the proposed dwelling and overlooking of 26 Wickham Drive. There have also been three letters of objection from properties in Wickham Drive.

The Proposal

The proposal involves the replacement of the former two storey rendered house with a two storey house of larger proportions.

Site Description

The former property at the site was a modest sized, rendered house, sitting in an extensive front and rear garden. The house was demolished over a year ago and the site has been cleared of much undergrowth and some trees. Since that time substantial planting has taken place adjacent to 26 Wickham Drive and 1.8 metre high panel fencing has been erected around the rest of the site. On the side boundary with Carberry Heights, towards the rear, shrubs and hedging are still in place on their side of the fence. Carberry Heights to the south is also proposed to be redeveloped, but is currently a chalet set in substantial grounds and well screened. The site lies opposite the SSSI of Upton Heath and is accessed from the unmade section of Corfe Lodge Road.

Planning History

One former scheme for Villa Sonne in combination with Carberry Heights was determined under delegated powers, (reference 3/03/1362), which was an application for two replacement dwellings. That application involved two much more substantial dwellings in both height and bulk, and was refused on 10 December 2003. Following negotiations with both applicants, two separate revised applications have been submitted simultaneously. The adjacent site of Carberry Heights is also the subject of an application on this agenda at Item 3.

Policy Framework

Policy HODEV2 requires the best use to be made of urban land.

Policy BUCON6 of the East Dorset Local Plan stresses the importance of respecting features, which are key to maintaining the environmental quality of the area

Policy DES12 of the East Dorset Local Plan requires that all new development proposals should provide satisfactory access to the highway network and not cause or increase danger to road users.

Analysis of issues

The footprint of the new dwelling sits comfortably on the plot. It retains the existing access close to the TPO'd trees adjacent to the entrance but the Tree Officer is satisfied that the trees can be adequately protected with fencing and the surface treatment can be agreed by condition.

One objector is the new owner of 26 Wickham Drive, who was concerned that the building be set back to prevent overshadowing of their rear garden. The amended plans have moved the building back a further two metres so that the main part of the new dwelling is in line with No 26. The previous property on the site was set completely forward of No 26, and so the garden of No 26 would now receive less obstruction than was previously the case. The neighbour is also concerned at overlooking from the dormers to bedroom windows above the garage which overlook their garden from a distance of 18 metres. However, given that these only face the rear end of their garden and that new tree and hedge planting has occurred alongside the boundary, it is not considered that any overlooking would amount to demonstrable harm.

No 28 Wickham Drive at the rear is over 40 metres from the proposed dwelling and is screened by a 2 metre high fence and also a holly hedge. The final height of the hedge is not for planning to control and is a matter that the neighbours will need to resolve privately. However the hedge is shown for retention on the landscaping plan and therefore adequate setting and privacy should be retained for No 28.

No 24 Wickham Drive faces sideways onto the rear garden area of the proposed dwelling. There is a 2 metre high fence and new landscaping planted inside the plot to assist in the screening of No 24. Previous trees and hedging have been removed, which currently leave the site more exposed than it had been previously. However, its front windows are over 30 metres from the rear projecting bay window on the proposed dwelling and at right angles to it. Due to the distance and orientation of the dwellings it is not considered that overlooking will occur to any significant degree or that the proposed dwelling will be of an inappropriate bulk, height or scale.

The new dwelling for Villa Sonne, proposes the building to be set back 1.8 metres from the front of the new dwelling on Carberry Heights. This position is not likely to have any adverse impact upon Carberry Heights as proposed, nor vice versa.

The design of the new dwelling for Villa Sonne is now considered to be acceptable. The roof has been reduced by over 2 metres from the former scheme. It also uses a hipped roof to preserve a sense of space between plots, which reduces the dominance of the building in the landscape and is more appropriate in the Area of Special Character. The projecting garage area at the front with rooms in the roof has been reduced in height from the most recent refusal, to improve the impact in terms of bulk that the new dwelling would have on the area. The amended plan, setting back the new dwelling by a further two metres, also assists in reducing the impact of the new dwelling on the heathland and the Area of Special Character.

English Nature have not objected to the proposal because it is a replacement on a one for one basis and will therefore not increase pressure on the heathland.

It therefore seems reasonable to allow the existing frontage planting to remain in this Area of Special Character and to require a reduced visibility splay, suitable for a 20 mile per hour road.

As now proposed it is considered that the dwelling will have an acceptable impact upon the Area of Special Character and on the SSSI and will not have an adverse impact upon neighbouring properties.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory.

3 Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions the window(s) on the first floor north and south, excluding north garage elevation (such expression to include the roof) shall be glazed with obscure glass 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 overlooking. Furthermore, notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any subsequent re-enactment, no further fenestration or door shall be installed in the said elevation without express planning permission.

Reason: To preserve the amenity and privacy of the adjoining property.

4 The existing natural tree screen/hedgerow along the north and west boundary of the site shall be retained and reinforced where necessary in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any such reinforcement shall be carried out during the planting season October/March inclusive following the first occupation of the adjacent building maintained for a period of five years during which time any plants that are found to be dead or dying shall be replaced.

Reason: To maintain and enhance the appearance of the locality.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

6 For the duration of the development, which expression shall include any site clearance, the trees that are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, shall be protected by a protective fence, in accordance with BS5837 (1991) Sections 7 and 8, at least 1.2m high comprising of scaffold framework supporting cleft chestnut pale. This fencing should be considered sacrosanct and should not be breached or removed during development. No building activities whatsoever shall take place within this means of enclosure. The fencing shall be erected in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent trees on site from being damaged.

7 Before the development is commenced, proposals for the landscaping of the site, to include provision for the retention and protection of existing trees and shrubs, if any, thereon, together with any means of enclosure proposed or existing within or along the curtilage of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the District Planning Authority by means of a large scale plan and a written brief. All proposed and existing trees and shrubs shall be correctly described and their positions accurately shown. Upon approval such new planting shall be carried out during the planting season October/March inclusive, in accordance with the appropriate British Standards for ground preparation, staking, etc., in BS4428:1989 (1979), immediately following commencement of the development. The landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years during which time any specimens which are damaged, dead or dying shall be replaced and hence the whole scheme shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: Pursuant to Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and the locality.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 7. Ref: 3/04/1158/FUL

Proposal: Erection of Detached Chalet Bungalow and Detached Garage Creation of Access Temporary Siting of Caravan (as amended by plans received 7 October and 11 October 2004). Site Address: Land R/O 12 Fir Tree Hill, Alderholt, Fordingbridge, for Mr And Mrs Benham Constraints Airport Safeguarding (90m high) Windfarm Consultation Zone Site Notice expired: 12 September 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 7 September 2004

Alderholt Parish Council No objection. Comments:

Consultee Responses:

County Highways Development No objection subject to same condition(s) previously Liaison Officer recommended for Application no: 3/03/1450

Neighbour Comments:

Mr And Mrs Wallace Pen-y- A Chalet bungalow would have a major impact on the Fan, Fir Tree Hill aspect of this property. Loss of privacy. Drainage and increase in traffic.

Miss McConnell 10 Fir Tree Object to two storey dwelling as out of keeping. If passed, Hill, Alderholt request that no windows (other than Velux) should be installed in the roof at rear of property.

Mr & Mrs Pink Kerreri Croft, Fir We reiterate that we are not against development of this Tree Hill site, but have some objections to detail. Is the sycamore hedge and the lane to remain? Worried about drainage issues. Loss of view, Builders traffic, if granted as lane unsuitable for large and or heavy vehicles. Object to proposed vehicular and pedestrian entry point to the site.

Officers Report:

This application is brought to Committee for consideration as there have been three letters of objection as detailed above, which is contrary to the officer recommendation of approval.

Planning History and Description of Proposal

Planning permission was granted under reference 3/03/1450/OUT for the erection of a detached dwelling and detached garage and creation of new access on this site. Means of access was determined at this stage. This approval followed 2 previous refusals on the site ref: 3/03/0906 and 3/03/1152. A condition was imposed on this previous approval requiring any new dwelling on this site to be single storey only in the interests of the amenities of occupiers of nearby properties.

This current application is for full planning permission for the erection of a detached chalet bungalow and detached garage, with the creation of a new access and also the temporary siting of a caravan on the site during construction. The plans have been amended following negotiation, to reduce the size of the submitted site so that it closely reflects that considered under the outline consent. However, as this is for full planning permission, rather than Reserved Matters, the site area does not have to be exactly the same. The amended site will allow for more garden area to be retained for number 12 Fir Tree Hill. However, this alteration does now require the temporary siting of the caravan to be moved to the rear of the dwelling, adjacent to the boundary with number 10, but this would only be for the duration of the construction and it would then be removed.

This proposed dwelling is to have 3 dormers to the front (west) facing towards the road, a high level skylight in the south elevation facing towards number 12, to serve the en-suite bathroom and a skylight in the rear (east) elevation to serve the stairwell. A detached single garage is proposed in the south east corner of the site adjacent to the retained rear garden of number 12 and the rear garden of 10 Fir Tree Hill.

Description of the site

The site slopes steeply from the south to the north and currently forms the rear garden of number 12 Fir Tree Hill, which is a bungalow. The properties to the north off Camel Green Road are split level and 2-storey. The properties opposite the site in Fir Tree Hill are 2-storey and the development will be seen in this context. There is a dense hedge screen along the road to the west of the site where the access is proposed. A New Street Order for the possible widening of this road was imposed in the 1960s.

Policy Framework and Analysis of Issues

The site is within the defined village envelope of Alderholt. The principle of a new dwelling in this location with a new access from the road to the west has been established by the grant of outline planning permission under ref: 3/03/1450/OUT. Therefore, the main issues are whether, despite the imposition of a condition on this previous outline approval that any new dwelling should be single storey only, whether a chalet bungalow in this location is acceptable, the impact on the amenities of the occupiers of adjacent properties and the impact on the street scene.

Although the properties to the south of the site in that part of Fir Tree Hill are generally bungalows, this dwelling will not really be seen in that context. It will be seen against the properties opposite the site and those adjacent to the north in Camel Green Road. The ridge height of the chalet bungalow has been kept to 6.8m with only dormer windows to the front but the overall height of the building increasing to 7.5 metres due to the impact of the slope adjacent to 48 Camel Green Road. The roof is also hipped in on both sides which further reduces its bulk. The roof of the proposed dwelling is shown to be 1m higher than 48 Camel Green Road to the north and the ridge of the roof of 12 Fir Tree Hill is approximately 1m higher than the proposed dwelling due to the levels difference across the site. It is considered that this dwelling has been designed in such a way as to limit its bulk and impact on the street scene, and will be fairly well screened by the boundary hedgerow, and is therefore considered acceptable in the context of the site and the surrounding area.

The dormer windows to the front will not lead to any material overlooking of properties opposite as the nearest property is 15m away from these dormer windows, across Fir Tree Hill. This is considered to be an acceptable relationship in an urban setting. The high level skylight on the south elevation which serves the bathroom can be obscure glazed as can the

31 stairwell skylight facing to the east towards the rear garden of number 10. On this basis and providing no other windows are inserted in the east, south and north elevations, there should be no loss of privacy to any adjacent occupiers. Number 48 Camel Green Road is sited to the north east of the new dwelling and is set at a lower level. However, the chalet bungalow is sited 1.5m from the boundary with a further 4m between the boundary and the side elevation of number 48 Camel Green Road part of which is a steep bank. As the ridge is hipped away from the northern boundary of the site, it is considered, on balance that the proposal will not have an overbearing effect or result in loss of light to number 48. The general aspect of 48 being east west with a conservatory addition on the side closest to the application site and which already relies on light from the north and west due to the steep bank to the south.

Conclusion

This application is considered to comply with policies DES8 (para. 6.300) and DES12 (para. 6.316) of the Easy Dorset Local Plan and is therefore recommended for approval, subject to appropriate conditions regarding the temporary siting of the caravan during construction, removing Permitted Development rights for extensions to the property given its relatively constrained site and the levels difference across the site, removal of Permitted Development rights for further windows in the east, south and north elevations, and the conditions and informatives required by the Highway Authority in respect of construction of the access and the set back of the highway boundary to preserve the line required by the possible future widening of the road under the New Street Order.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory.

Reason: In order that the Council may be satisfied with the details of the proposal having regard to the existing site levels and those adjacent hereto.

Reason: In order that the Council may be satisfied with the enclosure details of the proposal and its implementation and retention.

5 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment thereof, no extension to the dwelling shall be constructed without express planning permission first being obtained. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the extent of development on the site, due to its relatively constrained area and in the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of adjacent properties in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

6 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment no further windows or doors shall be constructed in the north, south and east elevation(s) (such expression to include the roof and wall) of the extension/building hereby permitted, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To avoid loss of privacy to adjoining properties.

7 Prior to the commencement of development, the first 4.5 metres of the access crossing, measured from the nearside edge of the carriageway, shall be laid out, constructed, hardened and surfaced, to the specification of the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Local Highway Authority.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

8 Before the development hereby authorised is brought into use any entrance gates shall be set back a minimum distance of 4.5 from the edge of the carriageway and hung so as to open inwards.

Reason: To enable vehicles to be parked clear of the carriageway whilst any gates are being opened or closed in the interests of highway safety.

9 The proposed facilities for on-site parking as shown on drawing 6549/1 Rev. A received on 11 October 2004, shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Highway Authority prior to the occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted, and shall thereafter be retained. Reason: to ensure a satisfactory form of development with adequate on-site parking, in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy DES12 (para. 6.316) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

10 The caravan shown to be sited to the rear of the proposed dwelling shall be for a temporary period of no more than two years from the date of commencement of construction or until such time as the permanent dwelling is erected on site, and shall be removed within three months of the occupation of the dwelling hereby

permitted, whichever period is the shorter. Reason: to ensure that the caravan is not permanently used as a place of residence as the site is not adequate to accommodate two dwellings, in the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of adjacent properties and the visual impact of the proposal, in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

11 Prior to construction work commencing, a two metre high close boarded fence shall be erected along the common boundary with 48 Camel Green Road and thereafter retained.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory level of privacy and to protect the amenities of occupants of 48 Camel Green Road.

Informatives:

2 In the interests of highway safety, provision shall be made to ensure that no surface water drains directly from the site onto the highway.

3 To allow for future road widening the highway boundary of the site fronting onto Fir Tree Hill shall be set back to conform with the widening invoked by a New Street Order prescribed originally under Section 159 of the Highways Act 1959 as now extended by Section 10 of Schedule 23 of the Highways Act 1980.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 8. Ref: 3/04/1150/FUL

Proposal: Two Storey Extension And Single Storey Lean To as Amended by Plans Received 03.11.2004 Site Address: Honeysuckle Cottage, Woodcutts, Salisbury, for Mr Carmichael Constraints Groundwater Protection Zone Windfarm Consultation Zone Site Notice expired: 3 October 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 28 September 2004

Sixpenny Handley Parish Objection - The extension is too large in relation to the size Council Comments: of the original cottage and garden. The design does not maintain the original character of the cottage. Does not maintain or enhance the AONB. Would suggest Whitebeam trees in place of the Beech and Birch. There 34

is no mention of the conservatory on the application.

Consultee Responses:

EDDC Design And No Objection subject to permission being conditioned in Conservation accordance with comments dated 14.09.2004

EDDC Tree Section No Objection

Neighbour Comments:

Mr Goodwin Flintlock Cottage, Suggest the best position of extension would be a linear Woodcutts one using material that would be sympathetic to the original brick and flint construction. Glad the North Facing windows have been dispensed with. Also that further selection of trees are to be planted between Honeysuckle Cottage and Flintlock Cottage. Please consider the two sklylights on the north side of the roof to be obscure light giving material.

Glen Scott Ltd The Studio, 61c Client concerned that the potential for this extension would Seamoor Road not be acceptable if the requirements of SPG No. 21 are not respected. Feel extension is inappropriate and out of character. Cannot see any material alteration to this new application other than the omission of overlooking windows. If application approved would like conditions applied requiring that large scale details be prepared of windows and doors, Eaves and rainwater goods, rendering/brick details. Roof lights positioned on the roof slope be positioned at a higher level to negate chance of overlooking.

Officers Report:

This application is brought to Committee on account of the Parish Council’s objection and in the light of the Officer recommendation of approval.

The proposal is to erect a two-storey extension to the rear and a single storey lean-to extension.

Honeysuckle Cottage is situated in the centre of a small rural hamlet of Dean and within the Cranborne Chase & West Wiltshire Downs AONB. The cottage is one of 6 cottages found down a narrow road. The cottage was originally a workers cottage and once associated with the local bakery, and provided humble accommodation. Over the years this cottage has been extended with a single storey side extension and a two-storey rear extension. There is a single pitched roof garage on the front

The cottage is detached and lies between Flintlock Cottage to the north and Dean Cottage to the south. The front of the cottage faces west and is behind a hedge fronting directly onto the road, looking onto a steep bank and open countryside. To the rear (east) is a lawned area with a small paddock area behind a rough hedgerow.

A previous application was withdrawn (3/04/0210) due to concerns raised by adjoining residents and the Parish Council. Also trees were removed which were not the subject of a Tree Preservation Order but did provide screening between Flintlock Cottage and Honeysuckle Cottage and would have reduced the visual impact of the development.

The current proposal is to provide a third bedroom (first floor level) and a lounge (ground floor) and to the side a single storey extension to accommodate a dining area and conservatory.

The rear two storey element will extend out by approximately 3.5m. The addition of a chimney is designed to break up the roofline and the roof is hipped which will reduce the overall visual impact on Flintlock Cottage.

The lean-to single storey structure on the north elevation over the existing patio area has been designed to incorporate two different elements a more traditional structure with a more lightweight conservatory.

Attention to detail and the use of traditional materials, such as wooden windows and doors, slate and render to match the existing material have been conditioned and the applicant has included a planting scheme to help to reduce the visual impact on the adjoining properties.

It is considered that the revised scheme is acceptable and therefore this application is recommended for approval in accordance with policy DES8 and LSCON1 of the East Dorset Local Plan.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2 The windows and doors shall be constructed of wood, slate tiles shall be used for the roof and render shall be used for the walls. Details and samples of all windows, external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any on-site work commences. All works shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the details as approved.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory.

3 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment no further windows or doors shall be constructed in the north and east elevation(s) (such expression to include the roof and wall) of the extension/building hereby permitted, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To avoid loss of privacy to adjoining properties.

4 The proposal for the landscaping of the site, as shown on the submitted plans, including the planting of additional trees and shrubs, shall be carried out during the

planting season October/March inclusive, (in accordance with the appropriate British Standards for ground preparation, staking, etc., in BS4428:1989 (1979)) immediately following commencement of the development. Any plants found damaged, dead or dying in the first five years are to be duly replaced and the whole scheme thereafter retained.

Reason: Pursuant to Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and the locality.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 9. Ref: 3/04/1263/FUL

Proposal: Raise roof, convert existing loft to living accommodation and addition of dormers to front and rear as amended by plans received 04.10.2004 Site Address: 26 Hayes Close, Canford Bottom, Wimborne, for Mr And Mrs Robertson Constraints Green Belt LP Windfarm Consultation Zone Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Airport Safeguarding (90m high) Site Notice expired: 8 October 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 1 November 2004

Ferndown Town Council No objection - however would strongly recommend either Comments: obscure glazing in the dormer windows on the west elevation or velux windows.

Consultee Responses:

EDDC Tree Section No objections

Neighbour Comments:

Mrs Bourton 28 Hayes Close, Intrusive. Overlooking. Canford Bottom 2nd letter No objections to the revised plans providing Velux windows are used in the rear. 3rd Letter : - Concerned that there is still a Dormer window in the rear included in the amended plans, affects privacy.

Officers Report:

This application comes before Members at the request of Parish Council

The Proposal

The proposal is for a first floor extension over the existing flat roofed extension on the south side of the dwelling; and increase in the roof height of the dwelling from 5.2 metres to 6.3

37 metres across its whole width, to provide first floor accommodation, including two front dormer windows and one rear facing dormer window.

Site Description

The dwelling is a bungalow, situated at the corner of Hayes Close and backing onto an open field. To the south is a two storey thatched cottage, which fronts onto Wimborne Road West. To the north is a bungalow with a conservatory on the rear and opposite is another bungalow in Hayes Close. There are a number of roof conversions in Hayes Close. The boundaries of this site are hedges of about 2 metres at the front and rear and a 1.8 metre fence and block wall adjacent to No 28 Hayes Close. There is a 1.8 metre fence screening the rear of the thatched cottage.

Policy Framework

Analysis of issues

The increase in roof height of 1.1 metres is not considered to be significant or overpowering, as there are a variety of roof heights, even within the bungalows in Hayes Close. The extension is substantial and increases the mass of the building in the street scene. However, given its position at the corner of the close and next to a two storey thatched cottage, it is not considered to have any adverse effect.

The neighbour at No 28 is concerned about the use of dormer windows at the rear of the dwelling as they have the potential to overlook her garden and her new conservatory. However, amended plans have deleted the dormer, which was closest to her boundary and the only other dormer window on the rear is at a distance of over 20 metres from her garden area. The remaining dormer is also positioned so that it could only glimpse the bottom corner of the garden of No 28 and is therefore not considered to cause a loss of privacy.

Whilst the Parish raise the same concern as the neighbour about overlooking, it is not considered to amount to demonstrable harm; and in all other respects the proposed extension is considered to be acceptable in its impact upon the street scene and neighbouring properties.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2 The materials and finishes to be employed on the external faces of the development, hereby permitted, shall be identical in every respect to those of the existing building unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory visual relationship of the new development to the existing.

3 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment no further windows or doors shall be constructed in the first floor north or west elevation(s) (such expression to include the roof and wall) of the extension/building hereby permitted, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To avoid loss of privacy to adjoining properties.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 10. Ref: 3/04/1282/FUL

Proposal: Rear single storey conservatory extension.

Site Address: 15 Gallows Drive, West Parley, Ferndown, for Mr And Mrs Stout Constraints Windfarm Consultation Zone Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Urban Areas LP Airport Safeguarding (All) Site Notice expired: 8 October 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 7 October 2004

West Parley Parish Council No Objection Comments:

Consultee Responses:

County Highways Development No objection Liaison Officer

Neighbour Comments:

Mr A Hunt 49 Chine Walk, West The conservatory extension would extend towards rear Parley fence and would create noise and light nuisance. In- sufficient rear garden depth. The proposal would create an unusual and over developed plot in relation to the existing character of the area.

Mr And Mrs Holmes 51 Chine Lack of privacy. If the shed is used as replacement could Walk, West Parley cause noise disturbance. The proposal would seem too much in relation to the size of the land and be intrusive on the surrounding properties.

Mr And Mrs Rose 17 Gallows Intrude on privacy. Drive, West Parley

Mr And Mrs Sergeant 47 Chine Over developing the site. Highway/Parking concerns. Walk, West Parley

Officers Report:

This application is on the agenda because there are more than two letters of objection.

This is a fairly new bungalow (3/00/0214) and because of its relationship to neighbours any extensions are likely to have a potentially more significant impact than a more conventional street frontage layout. It already has a conservatory.

The internal alterations and the insertion of a window in the side (south) elevation, associated with the garage conversion, do not require express planning permission .

The proposed conservatory faces the rear garden of 49 Chine Walk and lies adjacent to the rear garden of 51Chine Walk. The conservatory extends 3.5 m. into the rear garden, leaving 7.0m. to the rear boundary. The garden of 51Chine Walk runs the length of the curtilage of 15 Gallows Drive on its north side. There is a 1.8m. high fence on this boundary.

The concerns of neighbours have been given careful consideration but the only issue which has to be assessed is whether the conservatory is detrimental to the amenities of occupiers of the adjacent dwellings. It would be very difficult to persuade an Inspector in the event of an appeal that the harm is such as to warrant a refusal of planning permission. In these circumstances there is a favourable recommendation.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 11. Ref: 3/04/1288/FUL

Proposal: Green Oak Shelter Open On All 4 Sides With A Pitched Roof And Clay Tiles Site Address: Field at Steward's Lane, Shapwick, for Shapwick Community Trust Ltd Constraints Groundwater Protection Zone Green Belt LP Windfarm Consultation Zone Area of Great Landscape Value LP Fluvial Flooding Area Site Notice expired: 29 October 2004 Advert expired: 29 October 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 21 October 2004

Pamphill and Shapwick Objection on planning grounds - Colour of roof tiles not Parish Council Comments: suitable for this rural area, should be more of a natural colour. Size of the shelter too large to be situated in the prominent position on this ½ acre site. Site visit should be made as site plan as shown does not agree with on-site, plan looks larger.

Adjoining occupier is concerned with fire risk.

Shelter used as meeting place for older children could lead to unruly behaviour.

Consultee Responses:

EDDC Design And No design objections Conservation

Environment Agency No objections, but percolation tests should be carried out to demonstrate that the use of soakaways is appropriate for drainage of the site.

Neighbour Comments:

Mr J Hooper Kings Farm, Support the scheme as a community enterprise serving a Steward's Lane useful function and offering shelter for school children waiting for the bus in the morning. Structure would keep open feel of the parkland and not be cluttered.

Mr D And Mrs S Kerley 188 Questions the close proximity of the proposed shelter to Steward's Lane, Shapwick their boundary hedge and the size of the shelter is far to large.

Officers Report:

This application comes before Members due to its particular nature and the suggestion of a site visit by your Officers.

The Proposal

The proposal is for the erection of an oak shelter with clay tiled roof, measuring 9 metres long by 4.5 metres wide and 4 metres in height.

Site Description

The site is an open field which has been recently converted to a play area, with timber play equipment at its south western end. A mature boundary hedge and trees run along the north west boundary of the field where the proposed shelter is to be located, alongside the boundary of No 188 Stewards Lane. To the south east lies an orchard associated with King’s Farm, which has 5 windows facing the proposed shelter. At the front of the site and around its perimeter is 1.2 metre high ranch style fencing. Mature hedging exists on the other side of Stewards Lane opposite the front of the site.

Policy Framework

Policy GB2 of the East Dorset Local Plan sets out the policy framework for new buildings in this Green Belt location. It defines inappropriate development as any development that does not maintain the openness of the land or which conflicts with the purposes of including land within the Green Belt. Essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation are considered to be appropriate if they preserve the openness of the Green Belt.

Planning Policy Guidance Note 2 Green Belts 1995, assists in defining what is considered to be essential. It specifies at paragraph 3.5 that the facilities should be genuinely required for uses, which preserve the openness of the land such as small changing rooms or unobtrusive spectator accommodation for outdoor sport or small stables.

Analysis of issues

The proposed shelter is larger than what could be considered to be small stables as defined by PPG2 and is larger than a small changing room for sport. The exact size that would be considered to be appropriate is a matter of judgement, but a structure of half the size proposed would clearly have a significantly reduced impact upon the openness of the Green Belt.

The applicant has provided a supporting statement which identifies that the structure will be used as a place for older children in the village to meet. It is also envisaged it will be used as a picnic area and a place to sit and watch children play. It can be argued that these general social interactions, central to traditional village life, are best sited in this location and this amounts to a special circumstance. There is also a consideration that informal spectating of others at recreation means that the building’s use, in part, could be appropriate development in the Green Belt.

However, in arriving at a decision, the scale of the building should also be considered in relation to the potential impact on openness of the Green belt. It is considered that the overall proportions of the proposed shelter are too large to be considered to be unobtrusive or small in scale. A reduction in size is clearly needed if it is to comply with Green Belt policy.

In other respects the shelter is not considered to be harmful. Whilst the neighbour at No 188 is concerned about loitering youths making a disturbance and potential fire hazards to their hedge, it is not considered that this would be likely to occur because of the lack of lighting around or within the site in the evenings. It is considered that the main use of the shelter will be in daylight in summer months by children and parents and at specific community events on the field. The other neighbour at Kings Farm is supportive of the scheme on community grounds and supports its dual use as a bus shelter for the school children during the morning.

The colour of roof tiles is a matter that could be subject to condition and they would not need to be terracotta or red in colour, as illustrated on the plan.

It is therefore considered to be the planning policy considerations in this instance that are overriding in the determination of this application. The applicant has been offered the opportunity to reduce the size of the shelter, but has requested that Members would consider the scheme as submitted.

In view of the particular circumstances of this case, it is considered that Members may wish to visit the site prior to determination.

Recommendation: REFUSE – FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON(S):-

Reasons:-

1 The proposed shelter is not considered to be essential for outdoor recreation or sport and not withstanding the special circumstances set out in the application, on account of its scale, it will result in loss of openness to this part of the Green Belt. As such it fails to comply with national advice contained in Planning Policy Guidance Note 2 and also Policy GB2 of the East Dorset Local Plan.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 12. Ref: 3/04/1327/FUL

Proposal: Erection of Picket Post Fence to Enclose Front Garden Boundary (Retrospective) Vary Condition 7 of 3/99/0184 Site Address: 27 Little Dewlands, Verwood, Dorset, for Mr And Mrs Salter Constraints Windfarm Consultation Zone Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Airport Safeguarding (90m high) Site Notice expired: 4 November 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 1 November 2004

Verwood Town Council To Be Reported Comments:

Consultee Responses:

County Highways Development No Objection. Liaison Officer

EDDC Design And No Objection Conservation

Neighbour Comments:

Mr M Smith 29 Little Dewlands, The fence spoils the view from our property as we are Verwood much lower down and look up to it. The hedging already defines the boundary. Not in keeping with the open plan nature of the Bloor Homes development

Mr J B Green 25 Little Objections; The development is designated open plan, The Dewlands, Verwood existing boundary is already adequately marked, the fence is a prominent eyesore and not in keeping with the rest of the development.

S Baker 10 Little Dewlands, No objection the planted shrubs are already beginning to Verwood grow through the fence and I understand the fence to be

within the current boundary and further planting is planned between the fence and the boundary that will provide further enhancement to the design.

Mr Martin 23 Little Dewlands, Objects:- Our understanding from the developer, Bloor Verwood Homes, on purchasing our property, was that the landscaping and planting was to be integral with the buildings for all houses on the development to maintain the Open Plan nature of the design. We believe that the concept of the scheme is now in jeopardy.

Mr And Mrs J Harrison 31 Little Dewlands, Verwood

Officers Report:

The proposal comes to Planning Committee on account of the number of letters of objection received from residence.

The application is for a Picket Post Fence to enclose the front garden boundary (retrospective application)

Little Dewlands is a modern development, which is of an open plan nature to the front of the properties. Small hedges defined the adjoining front garden of no. 25.

The original consent (planning application 3/99/0184) for this development was conditioned (7) and stated;

Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 2 Class A of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment the road frontage of the plots in advance of the front (and/or side as may be appropriate) main walls of the dwellings shall be kept free of all means of built enclosure, except for the provisions of walls, not exceeding 0.5 metre in height and of the same type and colour of materials as the dwellings, or as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Nothing in this condition however prevents the use of hedging and planting materials.)

Reason: To control the visual forms of walls and fences in the public domain.

This application seeks to vary this condition and retain the existing picket fence, which has been erected around the land in the ownership of No. 27 Little Dewlands. The fence is approximately 0.9m high. Planting has been implemented to soften the fence, enabling the existing vegetation to grow though and in time this fence will weather.

There are a mix of hedges and small fences on the development and given the open nature of the fencing and the existing and proposed planting this application is recommended for approval and would therefore does not conflict with DES8 East Dorset Local Plan

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The existing natural tree screen/hedgerow along the front boundary of the site shall be retained and reinforced where necessary in accordance with a scheme to be 44

submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any such reinforcement shall be carried out during the first planting season October/March inclusive following the grant of permission. Any plants found to be dead or dying shall be replaced and there after retained.

Reason: To maintain and enhance the appearance of the locality

Informatives:

1 This permission is granted in accordance with Section 63 (2) (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 13. Ref: 3/04/1341/FUL

Proposal: Single Storey Side and Rear Extensions

Site Address: 11 East Woodyates, Salisbury, Wiltshire, for Mr And Mrs G Harris Constraints Groundwater Protection Zone Windfarm Consultation Zone Site Notice expired: 21 October 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 12 October 2004

Sixpenny Handley Parish Object - insufficient detail on plan. No details of the full Council Comments: extent of the structures on the property. Request accurate plan.

Consultee Responses:

EDDC Design And Poor design. Conservation

Officers Report:

The application comes to Committee following an objection from the Parish Council.

The site lies within the Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Policies LSCON1 and DES8 of the East Dorset Local Plan apply.

The existing two storey dwelling forms one half of a semi-detached pair and is one of a row of 16 similar brick built properties. To the south of the application site is a rendered chalet style dwelling.

The proposal is for a single storey, lean-to side extension (measuring 1.2m x 4.2m) with two single storey extensions at the rear to form a pitched roof dining room (3.3 x 3m) and mono pitched conservatory (3.5 x 3.7m).

Whilst there is some concern regarding the design quality of the extensions proposed relative to window style and conservatory roof form, it is not considered that given their context, a refusal on this reason alone, could be substantiated. The extensions are modest in scale and any impact upon the AONB will be limited.

The Parish Council objection is noted. An elevational drawing of the side of the conservatory has subsequently been provided by the applicants and the Parish notified of this plan. The application is recommended for approval.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory visual relationship of the new development to the existing.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 14. Ref: 3/04/1355/FUL

Proposal: Raise Existing Ridge Height to Provide First Floor Accommodation (Revised Scheme) Site Address: 22 Olivers Way, Colehill, Wimborne, for Mr Thickett Constraints Windfarm Consultation Zone Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Airport Safeguarding (90m high) Site Notice expired: 30 October 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 25 October 2004

Colehill Parish Council No Objection. Comments:

Neighbour Comments: Mr A MacGregor 6 Ashmeads The proposed roof windows are at eye level and occupants Way, Colehill would overlook the properties to the north. The raised roofline would be obtrusive visually.

Mr R A Hilbourne 8 Ashmeads The 3 roof windows would look directly into our bedroom

Way, Colehill and lounge windows, and patio .

Mrs Lawton 4 Ashmeads Way, None of original objections have been overcome by the Colehill revised application. Concerns over roof height, loss of privacy (see diagrams on letter). The property would be out of place in a retirement block.

Officers Report:

This application comes before Members on account of the three letters of objection in the light of the Officer recommendation of approval.

Description of Proposal

This application is for the raising of the roof of this detached bungalow by 900mm, to provide first floor accommodation. Three high level roof lights are proposed at the rear and three roof lights at the front.

The raised ridge will bring the apex of the roof further to the rear and result in an extended front roof plane.

Description of Site

The detached bungalow at the site lies in an elevated position above Olivers Way, and ground levels fall to the south and rise to the north. The properties in Ashmead Close to the north are at a higher level than the application site.

Trees and a hedge form the rear (north) boundary with 6 and 8 Ashmead Close. This boundary is of a sufficient height to screen the walls of the dwelling from views available from the rear of 6 and 8 Ashmead Close.

Description of policy framework

The site lies within the urban area and Policy DES8 is relevant. This policy aims to ensure all new development is respectful to its surroundings, and no adverse impacts are had on neighbouring property.

Analysis of Issues

The principle issues on the site are the impact of the proposal on neighbouring dwellings through overlooking from the roof lights on the rear roof plane, and impact on the street scene.

An application to raise the ridge of the dwelling and provide a large single dormer window at the rear was refused under delegated powers earlier this year (application 04/0488). It was considered that overlooking would be generated by the dormer window, and the bulk of the side elevation of the dormer would allow the dwelling to have an adverse impact on the street scene.

The proposal now for consideration will not result in any overlooking of neighbouring dwellings as it is proposed to insert high-level roof lights that will not permit occupants of the new accommodation to overlook properties in Ashmead Close.

The absence of the rear dormer window will prevent the proposal having an adverse impact on the street scene, as the bulk of the side elevation will be greatly reduced.

Conclusions

It is considered that the proposal is acceptable and will not result in any adverse impact on neighbouring dwellings, nor the street scene.

Recommendation

This application is therefore recommended for approval.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any subsequent re-enactment, no further fenestration or door shall be installed in the rear (north) elevation without express planning permission.

Reason: To preserve the amenity and privacy of the adjoining properties.

3 The materials and finishes to be employed on the external faces of the development, hereby permitted, shall be identical in every respect to those of the existing building unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory visual relationship of the new development to the existing.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 15. Ref: 3/04/1429/FUL

Proposal: Conservatory To Rear

Site Address: 21 Dean Lane, Sixpenny Handley, Salisbury, for Mr Newman Constraints Windfarm Consultation Zone Groundwater Protection Zone Site Notice expired: 4 November 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 1 November 2004

Sixpenny Handley Parish Objection on planning grounds:- The location plan is 48

Council Comments: incorrect, showing proximity to neighbours boundary on the North West side. Block plan is not correct not showing the lean to/car port/storage area. A concrete block rendered structure with a tiled roof built in the garden and no planning permission received by the Parish Council. Septic tank ticked whereas these houses are on mains sewers. No Velux window shown in rear roof overlooking neighbours on North West side. Acoustic soundproofing and screening will be required.

Consultee Responses:

County Highways Development No Objection. Liaison Officer

Officers Report:

This application comes before the Committee on account of the objection raised by the Parish Council, in the light of the Officer Recommendation of approval.

The property is a semi detached dwelling, one of 6 pairs of semi-detached properties on the outskirts of Sixpenny Handley and adjacent an AONB designated area. This property has been extended to the side (planning application 3/96/0800 garage/store) and rear (planning application 3/02/0624 kitchen) and the current proposal is to extend between the side and rear additions to provide a conservatory off the living room area in line with the rear elevation of the kitchen.

The ground runs slightly higher to the rear providing slight views over the adjoining properties. To the direct rear a shed/store, green house and fence with some large shrubs and hedging of other properties, the gardens the applicant backs onto. These gardens are in a diamond formation with the centre properties having shorter gardens and getting longer as the properties move away from the centre of the development of houses.

The proposal is a lean-to style conservatory with the roof at a lower level than the existing kitchen extension. The conservatory is modest in size and form with dimensions of 4.2m width by 3.1 length with a maximum height of 2.5m reducing to 2.5m.

The proposal is completely screened from the adjoining neighbour (no.22) by the existing kitchen extension and no. 21 has a 1.8m birch fence between the two properties. Whilst the 1.8m screen will not completely screen the proposal it does considerably reduce the visual impact to adjoining properties.

The proposal is recommended for approval in accordance with DES8 of the East Dorset Local Plan

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory visual relationship of the new development to the existing.

Policy Considerations

Item Number: 16. Ref: 3/04/1456/FUL

Proposal: Single Storey Side Extension Raise Ridge Above Existing Dwelling To Provide First Floor Living Accommodation Site Address: 1 Struan Court, Ashley Heath, Ringwood, for Mr And Mrs P Davie Constraints Windfarm Consultation Zone Airport Safeguarding (Birdstrike) Airport Safeguarding (90m high) Site Notice expired: 11 November 2004 Nbr-Nfn expired: 3 November 2004

St Leonards Parish Council To be reported Comments:

Consultee Responses:

County Highways Development Before I can make my formal recommendation the Liaison Officer following amendment(s) should be noted:- DT2 On site Turning facilities.

Neighbour Comments:

Mr Bews 2 Ashley Park, Ashley Height of the structure will overlook main living area and Heath garden. This represents a loss of privacy previously enjoyed and may breach our Human Rights. Would like to address the Planning Committee and would like them to visit our home

Mr And Mrs Crease 1 Ashley Any up building of the property would alter the outlook from Park, Ashley Heath our lounge and block the skyline. Concerns re; further development over the garage as a consequence.

Dr N M Gregson 3 Ashley Park, Out of character with surrounding buildings. It will also Ashley Heath look right into the properties behind the bungalow.

Mr Polak 4 Struan Court, The development is totally inappropriate in an area Ashley Heath exclusively of low level bungalows. The site is too small to

accommodate such a large two storey development which would overlook neighbouring properties. The development would inevitably require the removal of a number of trees and flora.

Officers Report:

This application is brought to Committee for consideration due to the level of objections raised as detailed above. There was a previous application (ref: 3/04/0422/FUL) which was for fundamentally the same proposal as that now proposed but with the addition of a double garage to the side which resulted in a refusal based on the impact on the Preserved trees on the site. This latest application no longer includes the double garage and extended driveway and therefore no longer raises a tree reason for refusal.

Description of Proposal

This application is to erect a side extension to form an annexe with a bedroom, bathroom and living area, and raise the ridge above the existing dwelling by 0.5m from 5.3m to 5.8m to provide a first floor bedroom, bathroom and small sitting area.

Policy Considerations

The site is within the defined urban area of Ashley Heath. Therefore the principle of extensions to this property is acceptable providing the proposal accords with the criteria set out in Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

Consideration of Proposal

The main issues in the consideration of this proposal are the visual impact, the impact on the amenity of adjoining properties and the impact on the trees on the site which are covered by a Tree Preservation Order.

The dwellings within Struan Court and Struan Drive are bungalows. While this proposal will provide one bedroom at first floor level, it is only raising the ridge by 0.5m. Only one dormer is proposed at first floor level which is at the front of the dwelling and will be viewed obliquely from the road. The side extension is single storey only and will not greatly increase the bulk of the building. This dwelling is also set somewhat apart from the main area of bungalows in Struan Drive and will not seen in the context of a row of similar bungalows. It is also fairly well screened from the road by the trees on the boundary of the site. The visual impact of the proposal is considered acceptable and is considered to be compatible with its surroundings in accordance with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

The nearest dwelling to the application site is no. 1a Struan Court, sited to the south west. One window was shown on the original plans in the gable end at first floor level facing towards the garden of no. 1a to serve the upstairs sitting area. However, a revision has been sought to provide skylights instead to prevent overlooking. At the time of writing the report the revised plans have not been received and the Committee will be updated as to the latest situation at the Committee meeting. A condition is suggested to ensure that no windows are inserted in the gable end at first floor level in the south east elevation. There are 2 skylights in the rear elevation together with full height glazing to serve the downstairs dining/living area. The bedroom above is to have a balustrade set 2m back from the rear elevation to create a gallery to this bedroom. The bedroom will also benefit from the full height glazed window but it will not be possible to stand adjacent to this window to look towards the

51 properties to the rear. In any event there is over 12m between the rear elevation and the rear boundary with the properties in Ashley Park. It is considered that there will be no material overlooking from this proposal to the properties to the east in Ashley Park. No other properties would be materially affected by this proposal and therefore the impact on the amenities of the occupiers of adjacent dwellings is considered acceptable and complies with Policy DES8 (para. 6.300) of the East Dorset Local Plan.

This latest proposal no longer involves the creation of an extended driveway or the double garage. The side extension is outside the 8m protection zone for the adjacent trees. The proposal will therefore not have an adverse impact on any mature trees on the site, providing suitable tree protection is put in place during construction. At the time of writing this report the details of the tree protection has been sought but not yet received. The Committee will be advised of the latest situation at the Committee and the conditions amended if required.

Conclusion

The site is within the defined urban area. The proposal complies with Policy DES8 of the EDLP in that the impact on the visual amenities is considered acceptable, subject to appropriate conditions there will be no material impact on the amenities of the occupiers of adjacent properties and there will be no adverse impact on the Preserved trees. It is concluded that provided the amended plans are received, there are no material planning reasons so substantial to refuse this application and accordingly it is recommended for approval.

Recommendation: GRANT – SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):-

Conditions/Reasons:-

1 The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of five years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory visual relationship of the new development to the existing.

3 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment no further windows or doors shall be constructed in the north east, north west and south east elevation(s) (such expression to include the roof and wall) of the extension/building hereby permitted, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To avoid loss of privacy to adjoining properties.

4 For the duration of the development, which expression shall include any site clearance, the trees that are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, shall be protected by a protective fence, in accordance with BS5837 (1991) Sections 7 and 8, at least 1.2m high comprising of scaffold framework supporting cleft chestnut

pale. This fencing should be considered sacrosanct and should not be breached or removed during development. No building activities whatsoever shall take place within this means of enclosure. The fencing shall be erected in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To prevent trees on site from being damaged.

5 The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the access and parking shown on the approved plan has been constructed and these shall be maintained and be kept available for that purpose at all times.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

Policy Considerations