Docstoc

Attachment Planning Applications Borough of Poole

Document Sample
Attachment Planning Applications Borough of Poole Powered By Docstoc
					    Borough of Poole




    Planning Committee

List of Planning Applications




    11 February, 2010




              1
                               BOROUGH OF POOLE

                                Planning Committee

                         DATE: 11 February 2010 at 09:30


NOTES:


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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




                                           2
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
                              Planning Committee
                            11 February 2010 at 09:30


Not before 09:30
01   6 Lea Way, Bournemouth, BH11 9NF                APP/09/01413/F   EG
02   2A & 2B Shore Road, Poole, BH13 7PQ             APP/09/00742/F   JL
03   Sandacres, 3 Banks Road, Poole BH13 7PW         APP/09/00973/F   CLM
04   Burwood Nursing Home, 100 Dunyeats Road,        APP/09/01333/F   CS
     Broadstone, BH18 8AL
05   Land rear of 34 Ridgeway and rear of 46 to 54   APP/09/01378/F   CS
     Dunyeats Road, Broadstone

Not before 11:30
06   3 Dorset Lake Avenue, Poole, BH14 8JD           APP/09/01571/F   DH
07   99 Good Road, Poole, BH12 3HW                   APP/09/01494/P   EG
08   11 Blake Hill Avenue, Poole, BH14 8QA           APP/09/01366/F   DH
09   29 Links Road, Poole, BH14 9QS                  APP/09/01209/F   DH
10   56 Blake Dene Road, Poole, BH14 8HH             APP/10/00041/F   EM




                                         3
Item No:             01

Case Officer:        Eleanor Godesar


Site:                6 Lea Way, Bournemouth, BH11 9NF

Application No:      APP/09/01413/F

Date Received:       19 November, 2009

Agent:               Harriplan

Applicant:           Mr Hermsen Esq.

Development:         Alterations to existing dwelling house.

Ward:                P160 Merley & Bearwood


This application is brought before committee by Councillor Maiden and Councillor
Long due to resident's concerns of the overall development of the application site.


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
H12        House Alterations and Extensions
NE28       Tree Preservation Orders

Site Description

The application site is located on the eastern side of Lea Way. Whilst the application site
is on relatively level ground, the land slopes down from the application site to the east.
The area is characterised by detached two storey dwellings on spacious plots.

Relevant Planning History

04/05430/002/P - Outline application to demolish 4 Lea Way and erect 5 dwellings to be
accessed from Lea Way. Erect a garage at No 6 was dismissed at appeal in June 2005.

09/00334/P - Outline Application to demolish existing and erect three 2-bed detached
houses to be accessed from Lea Way was refused in May 2009.



                                              4
09/01220/P - Outline application to erect 2 x 2-bedroom houses was refused in
December 2009.

Current Proposal

Alterations to existing dwelling house.

Representations

Fifteen representations have been received with the following concerns:
 This application needs to be considered alongside the previous outline application.
 This application is a means to an end to develop the site with additional houses.

The representations ask that the concerns for the overall development of the site for three
dwellings be considered. A summary of their concerns includes:
 Area being destroyed by development
 Impact upon wildlife
 Congestion of Lea Way with more vehicles
 Increase in road users would exacerbate road safety at junction of Lea Way with
   Magna Rd
 Harm the character of the area
 Alterations to the existing house will not be carried out without structurally damaging
   the remaining house
 Loss of privacy in this quiet area
 Loss of amenity to nearby dwellings due to the application site being on higher ground
 Uncharacteristic plot sizes
 Loss of trees and wildlife
 Flooding and drainage
 Concern of unstable ground to the rear would be exacerbated by potential loss of trees

Head of Transportation Services – no objection subject to conditions.

Planning Considerations

This scheme is for alterations to the existing dwelling (demolition of part) and needs to be
considered on its own merits. As such the key issues associated with this application are
impact upon the street scene, neighbouring privacy and amenity. Whilst the proposal was
linked to the previous outline application to erect two dwellings to the rear and would
create space to facilitate an access into the site this does not form part of the current
application, and is not material to the determination of the current proposal.

Whilst the concerns within the representations state an underlying agenda for this
application, which is clear given the planning history for this site, this should not prejudice
the determination of the current application.

One of the refusal reasons for the previous outline application (09/00334/P) which is
relevant for this current application is:
    “The proposed development would result in a replacement dwelling along the Lea Way
    frontage which would appear narrow, cramped and have an uncharacteristic


                                               5
   appearance which would cause material harm to the character and appearance of the
   street scene. As such, the proposed development would be contrary to PCS 5 and
   PCS 23 of Poole Core Strategy, adopted on 19 February 2009”.

The previous scheme would have resulted in a replacement dwelling of about 4.1 metres
wide. The current application would retain the existing dwelling with alterations to reduce
the width of the building to about 5.2 metres. Whilst narrower than the existing dwelling,
the resultant appearance of the dwelling would be similar in appearance to dwellings at
No. 4 and 8. As such, it is considered that the current scheme would cause no material
harm to the character and appearance of the area.

The resultant dwelling would have a similar floor plan to the existing dwelling. The existing
dormer window associated with an existing upstairs bathroom would be replaced by two
roof windows associated with the hallway. These could be reasonably obscure glazed to
overcome any concerns associated with neighbouring privacy. The proposed alterations
would result in a narrower dwelling which would cause no material harm to neighbouring
amenity.

This application considers the proposed alterations to the existing dwelling only. It is
considered that the reduction of the existing dwelling would cause no material harm to
protected trees. However, it is considered that harm may be caused during construction. It
is considered that a condition for an arboricultural method statement would address this
concern.

As with the previous application, the Transportation Officer has no highway objections to
the scheme. The Transportation Officer has requested a condition regarding parking and
turning provision. However, this application considers the alterations to the existing
dwelling rather than access and parking for the overall development. It is therefore
considered unreasonable to impose this condition.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant with Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s)

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

2 - GN050 (Matching Materials)

3 - GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the windows coloured
orange on the approved plan (drawing no. 3792:7) on the south side elevation shall
be glazed with obscure glass in a form sufficient to prevent external views and shall
either be a fixed light or hung in such a way as to prevent the effect of obscure
glazing being negated by reason of opening.

Reason -
To protect the amenity and privacy of the adjoining properties and in accordance
with Policy H12 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended


                                              6
by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).


4 - TR010 (Arb Method Statement-Submission Required)


Informative Notes

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

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

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




                                           7
Item No:             02

Case Officer:        James Larson


Site:                2A & 2B Shore Road, Poole, BH13 7PQ

Application No:      APP/09/00742/F

Date Received:       26 June, 2009

Applicant:           Seven Developments

Development:         Demolish existing bungalows and erect 3 single storey
                     dwellings.

Ward:                E050 Penn Hill
                     F060 Canford Cliffs


This application is brought before committee due to the planning history of the site.


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

PCS05      Broad Locations for Residential Development
PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
PCS28      Dorset Heaths International Designations
PCS29      Poole Harbour Spa and Ramsar Site
PCS36      Joint Working
PCS37      The Role of Developer Contributions in Shaping Places
L17        Provision for Recreational Facilities
NE16       Sites of Special Scientific Interest
NE21       Legally Protected Species
NE23       Coastal Zone and Shoreline Character
NE27       Individual or Grouped Trees
NE28       Tree Preservation Orders
PCS34      Flood Risk
BE02       Landscaping
PCS32      Sustainable Homes

Site Description
The proposal site, occupied by two detached bungalows, is situated on the north side of
Shore Road, facing onto Poole Harbour, and is between the Luscombe Valley SSSI to the


                                            8
east, and a public footpath to the west, which runs parallel to the west of the site from
Shore Road to Alington Close. A variety of residential properties are located to the north
and west of the site.

Vehicle access to both bungalows is provided via a single entrance from Shore Road.

The site is subject to a Tree Preservation Order

Relevant Planning History

09/00158/F - Demolish existing dwelling & erect a block of 6 apartments with basement
garage, bin store & associated vehicular access at 1 Shore Road. Refused at Committee
15/05/2009. The subsequent appeal (APP/Q1255/A/09/2105873) was allowed
25/11/2009.

04/06086/017/P - Outline Application to demolish dwellings and erect 5 blocks of 10 flats
(total 50 flats) at 1, 2 & 3 Alington Close & 2a & 2b Shore Road. Appeal
(APP/Q1255/A/05/1188400) dismissed 10/07/2006

07/06086/020/F - Demolish existing and erect 4x3 storey blocks comprising 32 flats with
basement car parking and associated works and landscaping (Revised scheme) at 1, 2 &
3 Alington Close & 2a & 2b Shore Road. Refused 04/09/2007. The subsequent appeal
(APP/Q1255/A/08/2061709/NWF) was withdrawn.

07/06086/21/F - Demolish existing and erect 6 x two / three storey blocks comprising 32
flats with basement car parking, accessed off Alington Close and associated works and
landscaping (Revised Scheme) at 1, 2 & 3 Alington Close & 2a & 2b Shore Road.
Approved 22/05/2008.

09/00007/F - Demolish existing properties and erect six detached houses with detached
and integral garages, with single access from Alington Close at 1 Alington Close, 2a and
2b Shore Road. Refused for the following reasons:

   1.The Applicant has failed to demonstrate viability that supports zero provision towards
   affordable housing. Without such evidence, the application is contrary to Policy PCS 6
   of the Poole Core Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report into the Examination),
   adopted on 19th February 2009 which seeks to secure provision towards affordable
   housing on residential schemes of 6 units or more.

   2.The application site lies partially within flood zones 2 & 3. While the application is
   supported by a Flood Risk Assessment, the proposals fail the Sequential Test as
   required by PPS25 and Policy PCS 34 of the Poole Core Strategy (as amended by the
   Binding Report into the Examination), adopted on 19th February 2009 in so far as
   permitting residential development within flood zones 2 and 3, informed by the
   Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.

   3, 4, and 5 failure to provide contributions.


   6. The proposed third floor terrace serving plot 6 will materially harm the privacy of the


                                               9
    occupiers of no. 2 Alington Close by reason of overlooking. Furthermore the proposed
    terraces and balconies serving all of the proposed residential units will cause mutual
    overlooking to the detriment of occupiers of adjacent homes. As such the proposals
    harm the residential amenities of local residents and fail to comply with PCS 5 (iii) of
    the Core Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination) adopted on
    19th February 2009

    7. The proposed development fails to adequately provide pedestrian or cycling
    provision to offer a sustainable alternative to the private motor car. As such the
    proposals are contrary to Policy PCS 15 (iii) of the Core Strategy (as amended by the
    Binding Report on the Examination) adopted on 19th February 2009 which seeks to
    improve the quality, reliability, safety and attractiveness of alternatives to the private
    car.

    8. The proposed development constitutes an overdevelopment of the site and fails to
    respect or reflect the established pattern and form of development within the immediate
    vicinity or wider context of Crichel Mount. The proposed 4 storey houses are excessive
    and out of character to the extent, will dominant the street scene. The proposed
    bungalows and houses have insufficient gaps between them to maintain important soft
    landscaping to the detriment of visual amenities. The proposals are contrary to
    Policies PCS 23 & PCS 5 and BE2, BE3 and NE23 of the Core Strategy (as amended
    by the Binding Report on the Examination) adopted on 19th February 2009

09/00550/F – Demolish existing dwelling & erect 3 single storey detached dwellings with
integral garages (revised scheme) at 2a and 2b Shore Road. Withdrawn 19/06/2009

Current Proposal

Demolish existing bungalows and erect 3 single storey dwellings.

Representations

There have been 6 representations in support from the owner/occupiers of nos. 2 and 9
Honeywood House, 3 Alington Close, flats 3 and 5 Harbour Lodge, 34 Barlow Close
(Oxford), and 20 Alington Road.

There have been 5 representations in objection received from nos. 2 Alington Road, 1
Alington Close, 208 Dorset Lake Avenue, and 11 Mount Grace Drive. The objections have
been summarised as follows:

   Concerns that the appearance, height, massing and density of the proposed buildings
    will be inconsistent and harmful to the area.
    loss of privacy, loss of outlook, and harm to amenities of the surrounding properties
    from excessive illumination.
    Proposals should be part of a comprehensive development which includes nos.1, 2,
    and 3 Alington Close.

   The Luscombe Valley SSSI should be protected during course of development
    Concern over the impact of the proposed development on the SSSI and protected
    species


                                               10
    The SSSI and surrounding properties should be screened from the proposed
    development by hedging.

   Proposals do not justify development within flood zone 3 or satisfy the sequential test
    or exemption test required by PPS25.
    Proposed flood mitigation is not adequate and will cause water logging to the
    properties at the rear of the site.

   The proposed removal of railings of the footpath will make it unsafe for its users.

Transportation Services
 No highway objection subject to the provision of Contributions in accordance with the
   Southeast Dorset Transportation Contribution Scheme (SEDTC) and to conditions that
   the parking and turning area is implemented as proposed and that details relating to
   the footpath alterations are submitted for Highway Authority approval.

Arboricultural Officer
 The proposals are acceptable in tree terms subject to tree protection conditions to
   include the submission of an Arboricultural Method Statement.

Leisure Services
 There is a lack of information as to how the SUDS will function and any possible
   effects on water quality and on the vegetation within the Luscombe Valley SSSI.
 The submitted Wildlife Survey is acceptable.

Dorset AONB Partnership
 Suggest glazing with low levels of reflectance
 Recommend the use of exterior lighting designed to reduce light pollution and energy
   waste
 Suggest planting trees along the southeast boundary to soften views across the
   harbour, and create a buffer zone between the development and the SSSI.

Wessex water
 No objection.

Environment Agency
 The application does not satisfy the Sequential Test as required by PPS25. However,
   the EA are aware that the previous permission (07/06086/021/F) can be implemented
   and it is for the LPA to determine the material weighting of this.
 According to the Strategic Housing and Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) the
   Borough can meet its housing needs over the next 15 years from sites within Poole's
   central area and from those parts of the Borough within Flood Zone 1
 Subject to the resolution of the Sequential Test and parts a and b of the Exemption
   Test, the EA would have no objection subject to conditions ensuring implementation of
   the proposed flood risk mitigation measures and for a scheme of SUDS, and
   informative's relating to waste management and pollution prevention.

Natural England
 Object:


                                              11
    No details of surface water treatment.
    No details of preventative fencing to protect protected species within the SSSI from
    predatory pets.
   Recommend the application is refused unless adequate info is submitted to show no
    bats are present or that potential harm would be avoided or mitigated.

Open Spaces Society
 Objections relating to the proposed works to Public Foot Path 85; due to the lack of
  detail and information; to the resultant clearance of vegetation to widen the path; to the
  removal of the path barriers; and to the amended gradient of the path.

Planning Considerations

Efficient use of land
 Whilst the previously approved scheme would provide a significantly greater number of
    dwellings, and therefore would result in a more efficient use of the land, it is considered
    that in the present economic climate and housing market, that the approved flats are
    unlikely to be developed at this present time. The current scheme, whilst not being as
    efficient a use of land as the previously approved scheme in terms of numbers of units,
    is more efficient than the existing housing present on the site, and is deliverable.

Character and appearance
 The density and layout of the proposed development is consistent with that of nearby
  development.

   The proposed bungalows are of a height and scale that reduces the dominance in the
    street scene and the appearance contributes positively to the surrounding area, the
    Coastal Zone and Shoreline Character.

Privacy and amenity
 The proposed houses will provide limited amenity for the future residents although in
    this location the wider amenities are of benefit. There will be no harm to the amenities
    and privacy of the adjoining residential properties.

   It is recommended that any permission is subject to condition that the flat roofed areas
    of the proposed bungalows are prevented from being used as balconies, roof gardens
    or other similar amenities, in order to preserve the privacy of the surrounding
    properties.

Trees
 The proposals are acceptable in tree terms subject to tree protection conditions to
   include the submission of an Arboricultural Method Statement.

Landscaping
 The proposed dwellings would benefit from a scheme of landscaping planting, to be
   secured by condition.

Flood Risk
 The proposals are situated within Flood zone 2 (land with a 1/100 chance of flooding).



                                              12
   The scheme includes measures to mitigate against flooding, which include raising the
    finished ground floor levels of the houses to 3.55m AOD and by proposing an
    emergency egress from the site via a private footpath from the rear of the site onto
    public footpath 85, which the applicant is proposing to alter the gradient of to fall within
    safe levels.

   The EA have suggested that the application does not satisfy the Sequential Test as
    required by PPS25 and that the Borough can meet its housing needs over the next 15
    years from sites within Poole's central area and from those parts of the Borough within
    Flood Zone 1. The applicant has undertaken a Sequential Test which claims that there
    are no other available sites within flood zone 1 that are suitable for the proposed
    development. It is considered that, even if there are other sites in Poole within flood
    zone 1 which could be developed in the manner currently proposed, the applicants
    have undertaken all reasonable steps to reduce the risk and consequences of flooding,
    and, notwithstanding the findings of the SHLAA and the requirements for a robust
    Sequential Test, given that a larger scheme for residential development has already
    been approved on the site (07/06086/021/F), the principle of residential development
    on this site has already been agreed and is sufficient material weighting to consider
    the current scheme appropriate within flood zone 3 providing it meets the Exemption
    Test of PPS25. It is further noted that this scheme, in light of the history, results in less
    dwellings within Flood zone 2.

   The proposals are situated on previously developed land, will result in the provision of
    housing of modern standards that mitigate the risk of flooding and provide emergency
    egress, which will significantly improve the existing housing situation and will not
    increase the risk of flooding to other areas. In addition the proposals will provide SSSI
    mitigation and Sustainable Urban Drainage, improved landscaping, and relevant
    financial contributions. It is considered that these benefits satisfy the Exemption Test
    and will outweigh the preferred delivery of sites in flood zone 1. This approach reflects
    Planning Inspectorate decision (5th March 2008) where an Inspector, in allowing a
    similar scheme in Bristol, concluded that the appeal site would be at no more risk to
    fluvial flooding (i.e. vulnerable to a breach/over top of the tidal flood defences) than
    nearby property to the site. The Inspector concluded that whilst there is the possibility
    of other sites within the wider Bristol area being potentially developable and at less risk
    of flooding, they would not bring the benefits that development of the appeal site
    could bring forward.

   Concerns relating to increased flood risk to the properties to the rear of the site
    resulting from the proposals have been raised. It is considered that drainage could
    overcome any water logging issues. It is therefore considered that a Scheme of SUDS
    should be required by condition.

Luscombe Valley SSSI and the Poole Harbour SSSI/RAMSAR site
 The proposals do not provide information on how surface water will be treated to
   prevent harm to the Poole Harbour SSSI. However, it is considered that details for the
   treatment of surface water could be agreed by condition.

   The proposals do not include measures to mitigate against harmful effects on
    protected species within the adjacent Luscombe Valley SSSI from predatory pets.


                                               13
    Mitigation measures in the form of buffer strip and preventative fencing should
    therefore be secured by condition. In addition, given the proximity of the proposed
    development to the Luscombe Valley SSSI it is considered that protective fencing shall
    be erected during construction.

   The applicants have submitted a Biodiversity Checklist which confirms that no
    protected species are present on the site or within existing buildings.

   It is considered that any outdoor lighting should be conditioned to be down lighting only
    and shall be angled and shielded, and the windows on the southwest elevation should
    be non-reflective to prevent glare, which would be detrimental to the visual amenities
    of the area.

Parking and access
 The proposed parking and vehicle access is considered to be acceptable subject to
   the provision of contributions in accordance with the Southeast Dorset Transportation
   Contribution Scheme (SEDTC) and to a condition that the parking and turning area is
   implemented as proposed.

   In addition, works to public footpath 85 have been agreed with the Council's Rights of
    Way Officer. Any approval should therefore include a condition that details relating to
    the footpath alterations are submitted for Highway Authority approval.

Contributions
 The applicant has entered into a legal agreement securing the relevant financial
  mitigation towards nature conservation, recreational facilities, and transportation
  infrastructure within the Borough.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant Subject to Unilateral Undertaking


Section 106 Notes
Details of Section 106 Agreement.

1.A financial contribution of £2260 (plus administration fee) towards the provision
of recreational facilities in accordance with Policy L17 of the Poole Local Plan First
Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September
2007).

2.A financial contribution of £1719 (plus administration fee) towards mitigating the
harm to the SSSI protected Dorset Heathlands in accordance with the Dorset
Heathlands Interim Planning Framework 2006-2009 and policies NE16 of the Poole
Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State
direction September 2007) and PCS28 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted on 19th
February 2009.

3.A financial contribution of £7134 (plus administration fee) towards the South East
Dorset Transport Contributions Scheme Adopted 2009 and Policy T13 of the Poole


                                             14
Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State
Direction 20th September 2007).

Subject to the following condition(s)

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

2 - GN030 (Sample of Materials)

3 - GN020 (Screen Fencing/Walling)

4 - TR010 (Arb Method Statement-Submission Required)

5 - TR060 (Tree Protection - No Trenches/Pipe Runs)

6 - LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)

7 - HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

8 - DR040 (Sustainable Urban Drainage)

9 - WL020 (Protection of SSSIs)
The first on-site works shall be the fencing of the site from the adjacent Luscombe
Valley SSSI with a fence to a specification and location to be submitted to, and
approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The fence shall remain intact
throughout the entirety of the development period, unless the Local Planning
Authority agree otherwise in writing. The Local Planning Authority shall be advised
in writing when the fence has been erected so that initial compliance with the
condition can be confirmed.

Reason -
To ensure that the SSSI and legally protected species are protected against harm
and any adverse effects resulting from development works and in accordance with
Policies NE16 and NE21 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as
amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).


10 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
Notwithstanding the approved plans, prior to the commencement of development
details of a scheme of measures to mitigate against potential harm to protected
species within the Luscombe Valley SSSI from predatory pets shall be submitted to
the Local Planning Authority for their written approval. The scheme shall include a
'buffer zone' of trees and planting and a fence/wall separating the site from the
Luscombe Valley SSSI. Upon approval the details shall be fully implemented prior to
occupation of the approved dwellings.

Reason-
To ensure that legally protected species are protected against harm in accordance
with Policy NE21 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as
amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).


                                            15
11 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
The ground floor level of the development hereby permitted shall be set at or above
3.55 metres above ordnance datum (AOD). No structure or ground raising shall be
undertaken on land below 3.55 metres AOD without the prior written approval of the
local planning authority.

Reason-
To ensure that the risk of flooding has been adequately mitigated, in accordance
with Policy PCS34 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted February 2009.

12 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
No works shall commence on site until full details and contracts to alter 'footpath 85'
as shown on the approved plans have been agreed in writing with Transportation
Services. All works relating to the reconstruction of the foot path shall be completed
prior to first occupation of the approved houses.

Reason -
To ensure that works to the foot path are undertaken to Highway Standards in
accordance with Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004
(as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007), and that flood risk
mitigation measures are fully implemented prior to occupation of the approved
development in accordance with Policy PCS34 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted
February 2009.

13 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
All outdoor lighting shall be down lighting only and shall be angled and shielded at
all times and all glazing on the southwest elevations shall be non-reflective, unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason -
To avoid glare in the interests of protecting the SSSI and contributing positively to
the character and visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies PCS23
of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted February 2009, NE16 of the Poole Local Plan
First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction
September 2007).

14 - GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995 and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
or any subsequent re-enactments thereof, the flat roof area of the dwellings hereby
permitted, coloured green on the approved plans, shall not be used as a balcony,
roof garden or similar amenity area without the grant of further planning permission
from the Local Planning Authority.

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



                                             16
Informative Notes

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

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

a) The proposed bungalows are of a height and scale that reduces the dominance in
the street scene and the appearance contributes positively to the surrounding area,
the Coastal Zone and Shoreline Character - Policies PCS5, PCS23 and NE23
b) Residential privacy and amenity will not be affected adversely - Policy PCS5
c) The proposals demonstrate flood risk mitigation measures for the 3 units and in
light of the history of the site reduces the number of residential units within the flood
zone- Policy PCS34
d) Contributions have been secured to mitigate the impact of the proposals upon
recreational facilities, low-land heathlands, and transportation infrastructure -
Policies L17, NE16, PCS28, PCS29, PCS36, PCS37 and T13
e) Appropriate conditions mitigate the proposals to protect the Sites of Special
Scientific Interest or protected species - Policies NE16 and NE21
g) The proposals will not adversely affect highway safety - Policy T13
h) With appropriate conditions the proposals will not adversely affect protected and
non-protected trees - Policies NE27 and NE28
I) The proposals will improve the landscape setting of the site - Policy BE2

2 - IN09 (Work Affecting Public Highway)

3 - IN12 (Kerb Crossing to be Raised)

4 - IN00 (Non Standard Informative)
The applicant is advised to contact Daniel Griffin of the Environment Agency (01258
483351) to establish whether Flood Defence Consent is required. In addition the
applicant is advised to contact the Environment Agency for advice and information
on the legal requirements for Pollution Prevention.




                                              17
Item No:              03

Case Officer:         Claire Moir


Site:                 Sandacres, 3 Banks Road, Poole BH13 7PW

Application No:       APP/09/00973/F

Date Received:        19 August, 2009

Agent:                James Beake Partnership

Applicant:            Beake & Sinclair

Development:          Refurbishment of restaurant/bar, increasing restaurant
                      area on ground floor, removal of 2 flats on ground floor
                      and construction of 2 new penthouse apartments with
                      associated parking. (Revised Scheme. As amended by
                      plans received 09/11/09.

Ward:                 F060 Canford Cliffs


This application is brought before committee at the request of Councillor Mrs
Haines due to local residents concerns.


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
PCS05      Broad Locations for Residential Development
NE23       Coastal Zone and Shoreline Character
TO06       Tourism Zones
T13        Traffic Generated by Development
BE09       Public Art
PCS34      Flood Risk
T03        Provision for Pedestrians in New Development
PCS26      Delivering Locally Distinctive, Self-Reliant Places

Site Description

The application site is located between Banks Road and Shore Road close to the apex of
the junction between these two roads and as such is a prominent site when travelling


                                              18
towards the Sandbanks Peninsula. This part of Shore Road has access straight to the
beach and is an important tourist spot. The application site also sits facing out towards
Poole Harbour and as such is viewed from the Shoreline.

To the side of the site is 5 Banks Road, a four storey dwelling, beyond this Mirage, a four
storey flat development and beyond this the Sandbanks Hotel.

The site is occupied by The Sandacres pub/restaurant and 2 flats at ground floor and 20
flats above on 3 floors.

The building is a fairly large four storey building with the three upper floors being flats. The
building covers a large part of the site with the rest of the site hardsurfaced and largely
utilised as access and parking for the restaurant/bar and residents.

Relevant Planning History

03/10652/025/F - Replace existing window with French doors to shared balcony. –
Granted 23/10/03

08/10652/026/F - Retrospective application for juliet balcony to Flat 6 and new juliet
balcony to Flat 5. New balcony to Flat 4 & 5 over existing flat roof. – Granted 15/09/08

08/10652/027/F - Refurbishment of restaurant/bar, increasing restaurant area on ground
floor, removal of 2 flats on ground floor and construction of 2 new penthouse apartments
with associated parking.- Withdrawn 21/08/09

Current Proposal

This current proposal is to increase the floor area of the existing Sandacres
bar/Restaurant on the ground floor by removing the two existing ground floor flats, re-
siting the entrance to front Banks Road and to create a decked terrace area to the front of
the entrance. The proposal also includes the creation of a restaurant/bar entrance to
Shore Road and alterations to the parking and access arrangements.

The proposal is also for the erection of two additional floors, the second of which is limited
to the corner of the building and is not a full floor, to include two new penthouses.

Other external alterations to the building include a lift shaft, replacement of all windows
and general refurbishment of the building to improve its current visual state.

Representations

Letters of objection have been received from two residents concerning the following:
 harm to streetscene, character of area and design not in-keeping
 proposal would be higher than Mirage and set a precedence
 the proposal would be incongruous in streetscene and dominate skyline
 increased traffic problems
 flood risk and existing issues with rainwater
 harm to light and air to neighbouring amenities due to oversail of fourth floor
 lack of security division between residents and customer parking


                                              19
   balconies to fourth floor should not overhang external wall the same as other balconies
    but should stop at the external wall
   the overhang of the fourth floor will take away natural light and ventilation from existing
    flats and harm amenities
   sound transfer from additional floors above existing
   could lift be upgraded for all users
   can the existing building structurally take the new floors

Environment Agency – No objection

Head of Transportation – No objection

Planning Considerations

It is noted that the proposal does not include any net gain in residential units and therefore
no financial mitigation towards Heathland Management, Recreation Space or Highways
are required.

Streetscene/ Shoreline Character

The proposed alterations to the bar/ restaurant area be an improvement to the
appearance of the building in such a prominent location. The existing building would
benefit from a face lift, where currently the building is in need of some visual
improvements as it appears rather tired.

The alterations to the restaurant improve the buildings visual impact on the streetscene,
and make the bar/restaurant area more of a focus within the streetscene. The creation of
new pedestrian access points fronting Banks Road and from Shore Road would create an
active frontage and provide Shore Road, which is a busy road with tourists accessing the
beach, with a direct access to the restaurant/bar. These access points are pedestrian only
which will aid in creating a safer entrance to the bar than currently exists where the
bar/restaurant is accessed directly from the car park area.

The parking and access arrangements will be rearranged and landscaping incorporated to
both Shore Road and Banks Road frontages where currently none exists. This will
improve the visual amenities of the site and wider character. A decked area, fronting
Banks Road, would provide activity along the streetscene.

The main alteration to the building is the creation of two additional floors of residential
accommodation, to accommodate two penthouses. These additions would result in a part
five storey, part six storey building with one full new floor and the top floor being
significantly smaller in size and contained to the north west corner of the building.

The proposed additional floors will result in a higher building within the streetscene, which
would exceed the height of its neighbours and the fifth floor would exceed the height of
the Mirage development. This in itself is not of significant concern. The building is located
in a prominent position and it is considered that a more prominent building at the corner of
the site would help to define the character of the building as a focal point at the beginning
of the Sandbanks Peninsula. Following detailed negotiation the proposals have been re-
designed since the previously withdrawn application to include the fifth floor element to


                                              20
define this corner. The 4th floor has also been redesigned to have a flat roof from that
previously submitted in order to reduce its emphasis and increase the emphasis of the
corner element. The materials to this corner element would also be different from the rest
of the building in order to define it further and details of these will be requested by
condition. The fourth floor is no greater in height than Mirage and would not result in a
building which is significantly greater in massing to other sites nearby.

The application site fronts Poole Harbour and within the Coastal Zone and Shoreline
Character area. ,It is considered that the proposal would result in a positive contribution to
the character of the streetscene and the Shoreline Character. The proposal would from
Poole Harbour be read against the back drop of land and buildings in the Chaddesley
Glen area whereby land rises significantly and the skyline is characterised by trees. The
proposal would not prejudice this wider important characteristic. As such the proposal
would comply with Policy NE23 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as
amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

Overall it is considered that the proposal would result in a number of significant
improvements to the site, the introduction of landscaping, active frontages, improved
emphasis to the building as a whole and of the restaurant, and visual improvements to the
external of the building which result in an acceptable proposal.

Flood Risk

The proposal will result in a benefit in flood risk terms as the existing ground floor flats will
be removed and replaced by two penthouses on upper floors. Residential accommodation
will be completely removed from the ground floor where it would be at greater risk from
flooding.

Neighbouring Privacy and Amenity

The closest neighbours to the site, and therefore most likely to be affected, are 5 Banks
Road, Mirage development and the existing flats at the Sandacres.

The proposal will not result in overlooking of the neighbour at 5 Banks Road. The
proposed penthouse balcony fronting Banks Road will result in some views towards this
neighbour however due to their own balcony screens there will be no loss of privacy.

The proposal will not result in any overlooking towards the neighbour at Mirage providing
the terrace area to the rear at first floor level is conditioned to be screened by an obscure
glazed balcony screen.

Elsewhere there is a sufficient distance between residential dwellings and the application
site that the additional floors would result in no further harm to privacy and amenities than
the existing flats at the site.

Some concern has been raised regarding the impact of the proposal on views from sites
to the rear of the application site (Shore Road/ Chaddesley Glen area) however there is
no right to a view and as such this is not a material planning consideration.

In respect of the impact of the development on the existing flats at Sandacres, it is noted


                                               21
that there is an internal courtyard/ access arrangement to the centre of the building
whereby the second and third floors have windows serving kitchen and bathrooms (and
according to a letter of representation a second bedroom window) facing into this
courtyard. The proposal would place and new floor on top of these existing floors, which
would in part over hang the existing floors and a glazed light well would be erected in the
roof above the courtyard. Whilst some loss of light to the windows of the existing flats
would result, the main habitable rooms of these flats on the exterior of the building which
would not be altered. It is also noted that the existing windows at second floor are already
obscured by the balcony access to the third floor, which overhangs these windows. The
proposal would cause no further harm than this current arrangement and it is not
considered that the impact on neighbours would be so significant to refuse the application.

Highways/Parking

The parking has been significantly re-arranged /re-allocated. The access to Banks Road
has been reduced to a pedestrian only access, which will result in a significant Highway
benefit with the access being from the more minor road, Shore Road. On Shore Road
there will be three access points, two vehicular accesses, one to the public car park and
residence parking and one to private residents parking. The other access will be a
pedestrian only access for customers of the restaurant/bar.

Whilst the proposal would result in a lower provision of restaurant parking spaces,
highways have accepted this given that there would be significant highway safety gains
from the closure of the existing access onto Banks Road and that there is nearby pay and
display parking on Banks Road and car parks. Disabled parking provision has also been
provided for restaurant users.

The level of parking provision for residents will be increased compared to existing and this
is also considered acceptable.

Cycle parking facilities have also been shown and will be conditioned.

Pedestrian visibility is to be provided at the vehicular access points with the walls
indicated as being no higher than 0.6 metres.

A highways contribution will not be required as there is no net gain in residential units.

Public Art

It is considered that the application site, which is a prominent site and acts as a form of
gateway to the Sandbanks Peninsula should contribute to Public Art in accordance with
Policy BE9 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by
Secretary of State Direction September 2007). As such negotiations have taken place and
it has been agreed that the applicants as part of a Section 106 agreement will make a
contribution of £15,000 towards a scheme to be agreed for Public Art.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant Section 106



                                              22
Section 106 Notes
Details of Section 106 Agreement.

1.A financial contribution of £15,000 (plus administration fee) towards a scheme of
public art at the development site in accordance with Policy BE9 of the Poole Local
Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction
September 2007).

Subject to the following condition(s)

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

2 - GN030 (Sample of Materials)

3 - GN080 (Screening to Balcony)
Prior to the commencement of development, details of an obscure glazed screen of
at least 1.8 metres in height to be erected along sides of the balconies as marked in
blue on the approved plans shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the
Local Planning Authority. The screens shall be erected in accordance with the
approved details prior to the commencement of occupation of the dwellings hereby
permitted, and shall thereafter be permanently retained as such.

Reason -
In the interests of privacy and amenity of the neighbouring properties and in
accordance with Policy PCS05 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted 2009.


4 - LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)

5 - HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

6 - HW110 (Cycle Provision)

7 - HW050 (Barrier to Prevent Vehicular Access)
Prior to the first use of the new restaurant areas or first occupation of the new
residential units, whichever occurs first, a permanent physical vehicle proof barrier
shall be erected (low wall, fence or landscaping) to the Banks Road frontage, the
details of which are to be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority; such barrier shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with
the agreed details and thereafter retained.

Reason -
To control indiscriminate maneuvering across the public footway and restrict
crossing to the approved vehicle access in the interests of highway safety and in
accordance with Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004
(as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and PCS26 of the
Poole Core Strategy Adopted 2009.


8 - HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)


                                             23
9 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
The rear access to the Public House as shown on the approved plans shall be used
by pedestrians only and shall at no time be used for vehicular traffic.

Reason -
In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy T13 and T3 of the
Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State
Direction September 2007).

11 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
Spaces 1 and 2 as shown on the approved plans shall be marked out as appropriate
disabled parking bays and shall be retained as such and made available to
restaurant/bar users only.

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

12 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
Prior to commencement of the approved works the Developer shall agree in writing
with the Local Planning Authority a scheme to raise the existing lowered kerbs to
Banks Road and reinstate the footway. Such works to be completed in accordance
with the procedures and approvals adopted by the Local Highway Authority prior to
first use of the new restaurant areas or occupation of the new residential units,
whichever occurs first and to be retained thereafter.

Reason -
In the interests of Highway safety and in accordance with Policies PCS15 and
PCS26 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted 2009.

13 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
The development hereby permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried
out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) prepared by
Ashley Ruben Limited and the following mitigation measures detailed within the
FRA: Flood-resilience measures detailed on page 9 of the FRA are incorporated into
the proposed development. All utilities within the ground floor level are set 1.25m
above the present floor level of 1.71metres Above Ordnance Datum and are routed
from the ceiling level.' and 'Further advice is sought for flood resilient construction.'

Reason -
To reduce the impact of flooding on the proposed development and future
occupants and in accordance with PCS34 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted
2009.

14 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
No development approved by this permission shall commence until a scheme for
water efficiency has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the


                                              24
agreed details prior to occupation of the flats hereby approved.

Reason -
In the interests of sustainable development and prudent use of natural resources
and in accordance with policy PCS34 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted 2009.


Informative Notes

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

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

a) The proposal will positively compliment or enhance the character and
appearance of the area by virtue of its design and massing and would not result in
harm to the character of the Shoreline - Policy PCS23 and NE23
b) Residential Amenity will be preserved and obscure glazed balconies screens will
be conditioned - Policy PCS05
c) Highway safety will not be compromised and the loss of the existing access on
Banks Road is a significant highway benefit - Policy T13, T3, PCS34 and PCS26
d) Public Art contributions have been secured by Unilateral/106 agreement - Policy
BE09
e) The proposal deals adequately with Flood Risk - Policy PCS34
f) The proposal will not impact upon tourist facilities and will result in improvements
to the existing bar/restaurant - Policy TO06


2 - IN43 (Section 106 Agreement)
The land and premises referred to in this planning permission are the subject of an
Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 which
makes a contribution towards Public Art.




                                             25
Item No:             04

Case Officer:        Clare Spiller


Site:                Burwood Nursing Home, 100 Dunyeats Road, Broadstone,
                     BH18 8AL

Application No:      APP/09/01333/F

Date Received:       2 November, 2009

Agent:               Brennan Williams Lester

Applicant:           Mr & Mrs Haines

Development:         Demolition of rear property & link to front property
                     including separate converted stable block. Construct one,
                     two & three storey nursing home, comprising no 42 x 1-bed
                     en-suite units, ancillary accommodation & associated
                     parking as amended by plans received 21.1.10.

Ward:                O150 Broadstone


This application is brought before committee at the request of Cllr Brookes due to
the significance of this development in Broadstone and residents concerns
regarding the impact and loss of amenity.


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

BE02       Landscaping
T13        Traffic Generated by Development
NE28       Tree Preservation Orders
NE21       Legally Protected Species
PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
PCS07      Care Homes
PCS08      Lifetime Homes
PCS28      Dorset Heaths International Designations
PCS36      Joint Working
PCS37      The Role of Developer Contributions in Shaping Places
PPS01      Delivering Sustainable Development
PPS03      Housing


                                           26
Site Description
 The application site is sited on the south side of Dunyeats Road close to the junction
   with Ashwood Drive.
 The site is a long rectangular site which is occupied by 2 x 2 storey buildings in a
   tandem relationship. The character of the area is generally residential but there are
   non residential uses including a school close to the application site. The application
   site is in quasi-residential use (care home).
 There are a number of protected trees within the site especially on the boundaries of
   the site which add to the amenity of the area.
 There is a loose urban grain with a high density of open space to built development.
   The site comprises of 2 separate blocks which are both in use as a nursing home.
   There is a 1980's 2 storey block which fronts Dunyeats Road although this is set well
   back from Dunyeats Road. Behind this block is a traditional 2 storey pitch roof property
   which was built early 1900's. The two properties are linked by a conservatory with
   walkways.
 From Dunyeats Road the newer block built c.1980 is visible in the streetscene, but
   does not appear dominant due to its set back in the plot. There is boundary screening
   to the front/sides of the plot which limit views of the site when approaching from
   Dunyeats Road to being views when stood outside the application site.

Relevant Planning History
Pre application discussions have taken place on this site. It was concluded that there is no
objection to the principle of extending the nursing home. The proposed scale and mass
and design were considered to be acceptable.

Current Proposal
Demolition of rear property & link to front property including separate converted stable
block. Construct one, two & three storey nursing home, comprising no. 42 x 1-bed en-suite
units, ancillary accommodation & associated parking.

Amended plans were submitted on the 21.01.10 showing the following:-
 The plans show the relationship of properties in Lavender Place to the proposal
 Juliette balconies proposed on the west elevation at first and second floor in lieu of
  balconies which could be used as amenity space (sitting out)
 Terrace area on south west corner removed
 Confirmation that the boundary of parking spaces on west side of the site has not
  altered from the existing layout and relationship to trees.
 Access widen to 5.5m for the first 6m

Representations
Site notices were posted and neighbouring properties were notified of the application.
Over 30 Letters of representation have been received, the comments are follows:-

Objection
 Inappropriate design in Broadstone, design of building bears no relationship to the
   retained building is out of character, inappropriate and obtrusive
 Excessive scale and the proposal would dominate the skyline
 Create an unwelcome precedent for flats/nursing homes in the area


                                             27
   Loss of privacy to garden and properties at 1, 2 and 3 Lavender Place and to
    properties in Watertower Rd

   Increase in noise pollution from commercial vehicles accessing the property
   Light pollution from the building

   Traffic congestion and inadequate provision of parking spaces for commercial vehicles,
    staff and visitors
   No provision for improved access to the application site
   There is a school directly opposite the proposal and the increase in the number of
    vehicles will only add to the existing congestion and hazards directly affecting the
    children of Broadstone Middle School.

   The main trees are pine trees which offer no visual shield of the development due to
    their high canopys
   The trees in the area are deciduous so there is no screening for at least 6 months of
    the year
   Juxtaposition of the building to trees is likely to lead to pressure for their removal, and
    impact upon natural daylight to various units

   Bats are in the vicinity and may in the existing building proposed for demolition
   There are active badger sets close to the application site and they will be disturbed
    during demolition of the existing property and during construction

   A 60 bed care home has been recently approved in Moor Road, therefore further
    development is not required as there are also additional care homes on the Ridgeway,
    and Lower Blandford Rd. Oversupply of care homes will result in conversions to flats

   The sewer pipes are unable to cope with the current amount of residents.

5 Letters of support have been received:-

   Create employment locally
   The home has received an 'Excellent' rating and always a waiting list for admissions
   The new building will benefit and enhance the quality of care to the elderly in the area
   Little impact on the streetscene

Head of Transportation Services- No objection subject to conditions
The number of parking spaces proposed accords with the Parking Guidelines.
Sheltered and secure cycle parking for 4 cycles should be provided.
The expansion of the nursing home may necessitate larger delivery vehicles, which must
be able to turn on site due to Dunyeats Road being a Local Distributor Route. There
appears to be space between the two main buildings near the fish pond for a larger
turning area to be introduced.
In line with the South East Dorset Transport Contributions Scheme and allowing credit for
the 8 residential units to be lost through demolition, the net increase of 34 residential units
incurs a fee of £51,626, in accordance with the SEDTCS. This has been calculated using
a TRICS derived figure of 2.129 trips per room x £713.20 per room (34 rooms x 2.129 trips
per room x £713.20 per trip tariff = £51,626)


                                               28
Natural England- Currently object to the application due to insufficient information. The
applicant is in the process of submitting a draft unilateral for consideration as adequate
mitigation for protecting the Heathlands.


Planning Considerations
The main planning considerations with regards to the proposal is firstly whether the
proposal will be materially harmful to the character or appearance of the area; whether the
proposal will have an adverse impact on residential amenity (both neighbouring
properties and future occupants of the care home); whether adequate parking is provided
and the impact on highway safety; the impact of the proposal on important amenity trees;
the impact of the proposal on biodiversity; and whether appropriate transportation
mitigation is provided through a transportation contribution.

Use as a care home
 The current use of the site as a care home is not classed as residential dwellings
   falling within Use Class C3 of the Town and Country Use Classes Order 1987. A care
   home falls into Use Class C2, this current use and proposed extension to the care
   home is acceptable given its proximity to protected heathland, and the principle of a
   care home being a quasi-residential use is an acceptable use given the site is within a
   residential area.

   The Council has identified a need for care homes and the provision of between 500-
    700 bed spaces by 2025. Policy PCS7 (Care Homes) of the Poole Core Strategy
    allows for extensions to nursing homes provided the development is proportionate,
    compatible with the character of the area and would not adversely affect neighbouring
    amenities.

   In August 2009 the LPA carried out consultation on Poole Site Specific Allocations
    DPD which identified the preferred locations for Care Home sites which would provide
    for an indicative 420-620 bed spaces. Whilst the application site is not identified in this
    document, the use of the site is already a care home and thus provided the proposal
    complies with section ii. a to d of Policy PCS7 there would be no objection in principle
    to the proposal.

Impact on character and appearance of the area
 The proposal will be visible behind the front building which is proposed to be retained,
   however, it will not appear dominant in the streetscene of Dunyeats Road.

   The proposal to demolish the existing rear building and conservatory and erect a 3
    storey building. The parapet of the proposed building is similar in height to the ridge of
    the current building and the footprint of the extension is similar in width to the current
    building. Towards the rear of the proposed building the footprint is shifted further to the
    west which helps to articulate the building together with the palette of materials and
    break up the mass. The design of the proposal is different in architectural style to the
    building proposed to be retained, however the buildings are separate and there are a
    variety of architectural styles within the area.

   There will be glimpsed views of the proposed building through trees between


                                              29
   properties in Water Tower Road, this will not result in material harm to the character or
   appearance of the area.

Residential amenity
 The occupants at 1 to 3 Lavender Place, Ashwood Drive are concerned with the loss
  of privacy to the rear of their properties and gardens. The proposed east elevation will
  be around 28m from the rear of no. 3 Lavender Place at its closest point. There are
  few habitable room windows in this elevation. There are proposed balconies/terraces
  at first and second floor level, but overlooking can be mitigated by appropriate
  obscured screening to the sides/front of the balconies/terraces. The amended plans
  show this screening and it can be controlled by condition. The separation distance
  between this east elevation and the rear of properties in Lavender Place is more than
  adequate to prevent material harm to privacy.
 The proposed west elevation will be around 37m to 44m from the rear of 5 Water
  Tower Road at its closest point. Habitable rooms are proposed on this elevation. The
  amended plans submitted now show juliette balconies on the first and second floor
  rooms which prevents occupants from siting outside. It is reasonable to condition the
  materials and design of the juliette balconies to obscure these screens.
 The amended plans submitted also remove the roof terrace at second floor level on the
  south west corner of the proposal. This removes any potential for overlooking to the
  rear of no. 7 Water Tower Rd. A condition can be attached to this area of flat roof to
  prevent it being used for a terrace in future.
 Given the separation distances between the proposal and rear of properties in Water
  Tower Rd and Lavender Place, the building whilst visible from these properties will not
  appear overbearing or lead to a material loss of light which would lead to a material
  objection.
 Currently cars are able to park parallel to the rear/side boundary of 5 Water Tower Rd
  and 96 Dunyeats Rd. This remains unchanged with this proposal. Therefore is not
  considered to lead to additional noise and disturbance, which would be detrimental to
  the amenities of properties in Water Tower Rd and 98 Dunyeats Rd.

Trees
 Two trees are proposed to be felled to facilitate this development, these trees are a
   Holm Oak (category B2) and a Sycamore tree (category C). A Category B tree is a tree
   of moderate quality and value and a Category C tree is one of low quality and value.
   Two other trees (beech) are proposed to be removed, these trees are classed as
   Category C and Category R (any exiting value loss within 10 years and should be
   removed for reasons of sound arboricultural management). The applicant proposes
   replacement trees to mitigate against the loss of the existing trees and has suggested
   Beech and Field Maple or alternatively Sweet Chestnut or Scots Pine. The number,
   size, species and location of the proposed replants can be controlled by condition.
 The Arboricultural Officer raises no objection to the proposal or the Arboricultural
   Appraisal and Method Statement submitted to support this application and the
   proposal is not considered to result in harm to important amenity trees, is considered
   acceptable in tree terms and complies with Policy NE28 of the Poole Local Plan

Highways
 Amended plans have been submitted which widens the first part of the access to 5.5m
   for the first 6m.
 There are 8 car parking spaces proposed, in addition to the existing 10 spaces. A total


                                            30
    provision of 18 spaces would accord with the Parking Guidelines.
   Sheltered and secure cycle parking for 4 bicycles is required. This can be controlled by
    condition there is adequate room within the site to provide a cycle store.

Biodiversity
 With regards to badger activity close to the application site, Natural England have
   advised that they have no objection subject to a condition being attached to any
   consent for a survey of the site. Natural England concluded that whilst there may be
   some short term disruption to the badgers this is not likely to be significant in the long
   term.
 With regards to bats the applicants are to submit a bat survey.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant Section 106

Section 106 Notes
Details of Section 106 Agreement.

1. A financial contribution of £51,626 (plus administration fee) towards appropriate
mitigation across the conurbation and towards the South East Dorset Transport
Contributions Scheme Adopted 2009 and Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First
Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction 20th
September 2007)

2. The development retained for the purposes of a care home which falls within
Class C2 of the Use Classes Order 1995

3. Age restriction of residents- minimum age 65, and in need of personal care due to
frailty, dementia or physical disability

4. Restriction on owners/occupiers of proposal owning pets

Subject to the following condition(s)

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

2 - GN030 (Sample of Materials)

3 - GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995 and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
or any subsequent re-enactments thereof, the flat roof area as marked in RED of the
building hereby permitted shall not be used as a balcony, roof garden or similar
amenity area without the grant of further planning permission from the Local
Planning Authority.

Reason -
To protect the amenity and privacy of adjoining residential properties and in
accordance with Policy [PCS07 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted 2009.


                                              31
4 - GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the window(s) and
glazing to balconies coloured GREEN on the approved plan on the east and west
elevations shall be glazed with obscure glass in a form sufficient to prevent external
views and shall either be a fixed light or hung in such a way as to prevent the effect
of obscure glazing being negated by reason of opening.

Reason -
To protect the amenity and privacy of the adjoining properties and in accordance
with Policy PCS07 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted 2009


5 - HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

6 - HW110 (Cycle Provision)

7 - HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)

8 - LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)

9 - TR030 (Implementation of Details of Arb M Stmt)

10 - TR080 (Replanting of Specified Number of Trees)
Four (4) No. tree(s), of a size and species and in a location to be agreed in writing
with the Local Planning Authority, shall be planted in accordance with BS3936
(Parts 1 and 4), BS4043 and BS4428 in the earliest planting season following
implementation of this permission. The tree(s) shall be thereafter maintained for a
period of five years including the replacement of any tree(s), or any tree(s) planted
in replacement for it, which die, are removed or become damaged or diseased
within this period with tree(s) of a similar size and of the same species, unless the
Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. The Local Planning
Authority shall be notified in writing when the tree(s) have been planted so that
compliance with the condition can be confirmed.

Reason -
In order to preserve the visual amenities which at present exist on the site and to
ensure that as far as possible the work is carried to current best practice, in
accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted February 2009
and Policy NE28 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended
by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).


11 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
The balcony screens to be erected along the side/front of balcony's as marked in
BLUE on the approved plans shall be obscure glazed screen of at least 1.8 metres
in height. The screens shall be erected prior to the commencement of first
occupation of the building, hereby permitted, and shall thereafter be permanently
retained as such.


                                            32
Reason -
In the interests of privacy and amenity of the neighbouring properties and in
accordance with Policy PCS07 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted
2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

12 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
A survey of the application site for badger activity/setts, including mitigation
measures shall be carried out prior to demolition/development and the survey shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
demolition/development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details
contained within the report.

Reason -
To ensure that no material harm is caused to the badgers living in the vicinity and in
accordance with the provisions of Policy NE21 of the Poole Local Plan First
Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September
2007).


Informative Notes

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

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

a) The existing and proposed extension of a care home falls within Class C2 of the
Town and Country (Use Classes) Order 1995 and adequate mitigation measures
are in place via a unilateral agreement to prevent harm to protected heathlands-
PCS28
b) The proposal will positively compliment and enhance the character and
appearance of the area and assist with meeting the demand for care homes whilst
compatible with the surrounding area - Policy PCS23 and PCS07
c) Residential Amenity of neighbouring properties will be preserved and an
adequate living environment will be created for the future occupants- Policy PCS07
d) Adequate measures have been taken to preserve protected trees - Policy NE28
e) Transportation contributions have been secured by Unilateral/106 agreement -
Policies T13
f) Biodiversity can be safeguarded by mitigation measures- Policy NE21

2 - IN43 (Section 106 Agreement)




                                            33
Item No:             05

Case Officer:        Clare Spiller


Site:                Land rear of 34 Ridgeway and rear of 46 to 54 Dunyeats
                     Road, Broadstone

Application No:      APP/09/01378/F

Date Received:       11 November, 2009

Agent:               Ellis Belk Associates Ltd

Applicant:           East Boro Housing Trust

Development:         Erect 6 No. (Use class C2) high dependency flats for the
                     learning disabled with associated shared lounge facility.
                     Entrance driveway and parking area. Erection of new
                     single garage.

Ward:                O150 Broadstone


This application is brought before committee as the applicant a Housing Trust falls
outside the scheme of delegation.


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

BE02       Landscaping
BE16       Conservation Areas
BE03       Topography
NE28       Tree Preservation Orders
NE29       Development Adjacent to Open Space
NE27       Individual or Grouped Trees
T13        Traffic Generated by Development
PCS06      Affordable Housing
PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
PCS08      Lifetime Homes
PCS28      Dorset Heaths International Designations
PCS36      Joint Working
PCS37      The Role of Developer Contributions in Shaping Places
PPG15      Planning and Historic Environment


                                           34
SPG4      Affordable Housing
SPG2      Parking Guidelines

Site Description
The application site is formed from the severance of rear gardens of Nos 46 to 52
Dunyeats Road.
The access into the site is from the Ridgeway, between 34 and 36 Ridgeway. The rear
part of the garden of no. 34 Ridgeway which is also within the application site.
The garage at the rear of no. 34 Ridgeway has been demolished.
The site is mostly overgrown.
To the south of the application site is the Broadstone Recreation Park and War Memorial
site (Listed). There is mature screening along this boundary.
There is a prominent Oak tree at the entrance to the application site on The Ridgeway.
With regards to levels the site rises from the Ridgeway.
No. 34 and its rear garden lies within the Ridgeway/Broadstone Park Conservation Area.
No. 34 has been classified as 'neutral building'. The rest of the area to the north including
the access into the site lies outside the Conservation Area but is within the Conservation
Area Setting.

Relevant Planning History
 An application (05/24699/004/F) to demolish no. 34 Ridgeway and erect 11 detached
    single garages at the rear of 46-68 Dunyeats Rd with access from Ridgeway was
    refused in 2005. The reason for refusal related to the loss of the Oak Tree and other
    protected trees within the site cannot be adequately offset by replacement trees, which
    would result in a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the streetscene and
    character of the area, in close proximity to a Conservation Area.
 N.B This site included further land (rear gardens of 54-68 Dunyeats Road) to the east of
this current application.

Current Proposal
Erect a two storey block of 6 No. (Use class C2) high dependency flats for the learning
disabled with associated shared lounge facility. Entrance driveway and parking area.
Demolition of existing garage to 34 Ridgeway and erection of new single garage for the
occupants of 34 Ridgeway.

The garage to no. 34 Ridgeway has been demolished, whilst within the Conservation
Area, a building up to 115cu m can be demolished without Conservation Area Consent.
The garage was under this threshold and therefore is not classed as development.

Representations
Neighbouring properties were notified of the application and a site notice was posted. 13
Letters of objection have been received. The comments made are as follows:-

   The garage has already been demolished
   Excess massing and density and overdevelopment of the site
   Overlooking to all adjacent properties especially given the site is on higher ground than
    the surrounding properties
   Proposed ridge heights not shown in relation to topographical survey
   Will the Ancient Oak tree (TPO) be protected and will construction traffic be able to
    access the site


                                             35
   Loss of natural light to all surrounding properties
   Unable to form visibility splays due to the adjoining tree and adjoining properties
   Noise pollution and unacceptable increase in traffic. Parking is becoming increasingly
    difficult
   Are residents dangerous to the general public? the D & A statement says that
    'residents are not allowed off the site without supervision'

English Heritage- The application should be determined in accordance with National and
Local policy guidance, and on basis of conservation advice

Natural England- No objection subject to a s106 condition preventing tenants from
keeping dogs or cats and requires the Landlord/Management Agency to confirm in writing
to BoP and Natural England from the date of occupancy that there are no such pets
resident in the flats and at 2 yearly intervals hence forth.

Head of Transportation Services- No objection subject to amended plans to improve
pedestrian visibility splay.
With regards to SEDTC contributions it is difficult as information provided on the TRICS
data base is limited for this proposed use. One survey of a care home indicates 1.741 trips
per unit. The information provided indicates 8 vehicular movements a day + occasion
visits from Doctors and similar to the care home trip rate if applied would be 6 x 1.741 x
£713.20 / trip = £7,450

Head of Housing- This planning application forms part of a complex property delivery
programme for learning disability client leaving long term hospital units which are due to
be closed this year.

Planning Considerations
The main planning considerations with regards to the proposal is firstly whether a building
for the use as high dependency flats (C2) for the learning disabled is acceptable in
principle; whether the proposal preserves or enhances the Conservation Area; whether
the proposal will have an adverse impact on residential amenity (both neighbouring
properties and future occupants of the building); whether adequate parking is provided
and the impact on highway safety; the impact of the proposal on important amenity trees;
the impact of the proposal on biodiversity; and whether appropriate transportation
mitigation is provided through a transportation contribution.

Principle of a Class C2 use building
 The application site falls within 400m of protected heathlands and according to the
    Dorset Heathlands Interim Planning Framework there is a presumption against a net
    increase in residential dwellings.
 The proposed use is not classed as residential dwellings falling within Use Class C3 of
    the Town and Country Use Classes Order 1987. The use of the proposed building as
    high dependency flats for the learning disabled falls into Use Class C2, and this
    proposed end use is acceptable given its proximity to protected heathland.
    Furthermore the use as a quasi-residential use is an acceptable use given the site is
    within a residential area and adjacent to the Ridgeway/Broadstone Park Conservation
    Area.
 There is a need for this type of use and is supported by Head of Housing.


                                             36
Impact on the adjoining Ridgeway/ Broadstone Park Conservation Area and impact on the
character and appearance of the area
 The majority of the site lies outside but adjacent to the Conservation Area, but the
   whole site lies within the 'Conservation Area Setting'. The garden to No 34 and area of
   the siting of the garage for no. 34 Ridgeway, together with the triangular piece of land
   within the front garden of no. 34 Ridgeway is within the Conservation Area.
 The relationship of the building to the conservation area, and the adjacent area of
   public open space the southern part of the building will be set in from the boundary by
   14m. There is mature boundary screening on the southern boundary which will be
   retained. The sitting of the building, together with the scale, mass and design will
   preserve the setting of the conservation area and when viewed from the Public Open
   Space cause no material harm.
 The proposed access road will be to the south of the protected Oak tree. There will be
   landscape buffer to either side of the access. Within the site will be a 'L' shaped
   building. The building will appear and be read as 2 x 1.5 storey buildings with the first
   floor largely contained within the roof (dormers) linked with a single storey flat roof
   structure. The building will be of domestic scale.
 There will be glimpses of the building from The Ridgeway along the new access road.
   However the building is set back from the road between 36m and 51m and the design
   of the buildings are well articulated with steep pitched roofs, gable ends and dormer
   windows at first floor level reducing the impact of the building so that it appears
   subservient to properties fronting the Rideway. The scale, mass and design of the
   building will not cause material harm to the character of the area.
 Conditions can be applied to control the surface treatment of the access road,
   materials for the building and landscaping to ensure the character and setting of the
   Conservation Area is enhanced
 The replacement garage for no. 34 Ridgeway is of a brick construction with a pitch
   roof. This can be controlled by condition.

Impact on amenity of neighbouring residential properties
 The building retains adequate separation distances (in excess of 26m) to properties on
   Dunyeats Road to preserve residential amenity for the occupants of properties in
   Dunyeats Road and the future occupants of the development.
 The west part of the building is sited at the rear boundary of no. 36 Ridgeway. The site
   slopes up from the Ridgeway. The finished floor level of the building will be around 1m
   higher than the current level of the site and adjacent to the common boundary with no.
   36 Ridgeway. The distance from the rear of 36 to the gable end of the closest part of
   the building is around 17m. This is sufficient to prevent the building appearing
   overbearing to the occupants of no. 36 Ridgeway. No windows are proposed at first
   floor level in this elevation.
 One secondary window to the communal lounge is proposed in the west elevation, this
   can be conditioned to be obscure glazed to prevent overlooking into the rear garden of
   no. 36 Ridgeway.
 Due to orientation of the building to properties in The Ridgeway and Dunyeats Road,
   and the separation distances the proposal will not lead to a material loss of light to the
   detriment of the amenities of the occupants of those properties.
 A landscape buffer is provided along both sides of the access to protect the



                                             37
    neighbouring properties from noise and disturbance and visually enhance the entrance
    into the development.

Impact on Important Protected Trees
 The proposal requires the removal of one (1) category B tree, a Birch tree, to facilitate
   the development, and nine (9) category C trees (trees of a low quality and value) which
   are 7 x Apple, a Birch and Rowan tree. The tree plan shows 3 x extra heavy standard
   trees to be planted along the boundary with no. 36 Ridgeway and 5 x extra heavy
   standard trees to be planted along the north boundary of the application site. The
   species can be agreed by condition.

   The arboricultural information submitted is acceptable, and the proposal is not
    considered to result in harm to important amenity trees to be retained (including the
    protected Oak tree adjacent to The Ridgeway). Whilst the proposals results in the
    removal of a single category B tree the replacement planting is considered acceptable
    in tree terms and complies with Policy NE28 of the Poole Local Plan.

Highways and Parking
 The proposed level of parking 3 spaces plus 2 visitor spaces should be adequate. The
   existing house no. 34 Ridgeway will use the access to access their parking space and
   at the rear and garage space. A covered sheltered parking facility (for a minimum of 3
   cycles) should be provided to encourage cycle use. This can be dealt with by
   condition.

   Pedestrian visibility to the north side of the access should be provided.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant Section 106

Section 106 Notes
Details of Section 106 Agreement.

1. Restricting use of building to persons with learning disabilities (class C2)

2.Undertaking to include a 'no pets: cats or dogs' clause and monitoring by the
landlord in any tenancy agreement due to the proximity to protected heathland.

3. Affordable housing of up to 100% of units to be affordable.

4.A financial contribution of £7,450 (plus administration fee) towards the South East
Dorset Transport Contributions Scheme Adopted 2009 and Policy T13 of the Poole
Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State
Direction 20th September 2007).

Subject to the following condition(s)

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

2 - GN020 (Screen Fencing/Walling)


                                              38
3 - GN030 (Sample of Materials)
Details and samples of all external facing, roofing materials, soffits, fascia and
windows to be used for the building and garage shall be submitted to, and approved
in writing by, the Local Planning Authority before any on-site works commence. The
development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason -
To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is satisfactory and in
accordance with Policy PCS16 and PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted
February 2009.


4 - GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the window(s)
coloured RED on the approved plan on the west elevation at ground floor level to
the communal lounge and the northern facing windows on east elevation at first floor
level to the lounge to units 5 and 6 shall be glazed with obscure glass in a form
sufficient to prevent external views and shall either be a fixed light or hung in such a
way as to prevent the effect of obscure glazing being negated by reason of opening.

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


5 - HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

6 - HW110 (Cycle Provision)

7 - HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)

8 - HW210 (Building Operatives Parking)

9 - HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)

10 - LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)

11 - LS050 (Hard Landscaping)

12 - TR030 (Implementation of Details of Arb M Stmt)

13 - TR080 (Replanting of Specified Number of Trees)
Eight (8) heavy standard tree(s) with the species and in a location to be agreed in
writing with the Local Planning Authority, shall be planted in accordance with
BS3936 (Parts 1 and 4), BS4043 and BS4428 in the earliest planting season
following implementation of this permission. The tree(s) shall be thereafter
maintained for a period of five years including the replacement of any tree(s), or any
tree(s) planted in replacement for it, which die, are removed or become damaged or
diseased within this period with tree(s) of a similar size and of the same species,


                                             39
unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. The
Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing when the tree(s) have been
planted so that compliance with the condition can be confirmed.

Reason -
In order to preserve the visual amenities which at present exist on the site and to
ensure that as far as possible the work is carried to current best practice, in
accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted February 2009
and Policy NE28 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended
by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).



Informative Notes

- IN43 (Section 106 Agreement)

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

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

a) The proposal will positively compliment or enhance the character and
appearance of the area - Policy PCS23
b) The proposed home for the learning disabled falls within Class C2 of the Town
and Country (Use Classes) Order 1995 and adequate mitigation measures are in
place via a unilateral agreement to prevent harm to protected heathlands- PCS28
c) The proposal will preserve the setting of the Ridgeway/Broadstone Conservation
Area- Policy PCS23
d) Residential Amenity of neighbouring properties will be preserved and an
adequate living environment will be created for the future occupants- Policy PCS05
e) Adequate measures have been taken to preserve protected trees - Policy NE28
f) Transportation contributions have been secured by Unilateral/106 agreement -
Policy T13
g) The requirement of 40% affordable housing have been secured by a
Unilateral/106 agreement- Policy PCS06




                                            40
Item No:              06

Case Officer:         Darryl Howells


Site:                 3 Dorset Lake Avenue, Poole, BH14 8JD

Application No:       APP/09/01571/F

Date Received:        18 December, 2009

Agent:                Sibbett Gregory

Applicant:            Mr M Huntley

Development:          Demolish existing house. Erect a block of 3 shops with 3
                      flats above- fronting Sandbanks Road. Erect 2 detached
                      houses fronting Dorset Lake Avenue. With associated
                      basement parking, cycle storage and lift enclosure.
                      Accessed from Dorset Lake Avenue (as amended plans
                      received 27th January 2010).

Ward:                 E050 Penn Hill


This application is brought before committee by Councillor Dion, due to concerns
of insufficient vehicle parking and the loss of a oak tree from the streetscene.

Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

PCS13      Retail Growth Outside The Town Centre
PCS05      Broad Locations for Residential Development
PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
PCS26      Delivering Locally Distinctive, Self-Reliant Places
PCS28      Dorset Heaths International Designations
L17        Provision for Recreational Facilities
T02        Cycling Provision in New Development
T03        Provision for Pedestrians in New Development
T11        Car Parking Maxima
T15        Rear Access and Servicing
NE28       Tree Preservation Orders
T13        Traffic Generated by Development

Site Description


                                              41
   The application site is occupied by a detached 2 storey house positioned to the centre
    of the site. The ground levels of the site increase from the roadside of Dorset Lake
    Avenue by approximately 2 metres. The character of Dorset Lake Avenue is
    residential comprising detached houses of varying architectural forms. The site to the
    rear fronting Sandbanks Road is adjacent to the Lilliput Local Centre which is
    characterised by commercial units on the ground floor with residential units above.

Relevant Planning History

   1961 - An application to erect a 3 storey block of 6 flats was refused.
   1991 - Erect a new house was approved.
   1999 - Erect a 3 storey house was approved.
   2000 - Demolish existing dwelling and erect new house and garage was approved.

Current Proposal

   Demolish existing house and erect a block of 3 shops with 3 flats above fronting
    Sandbanks Road and erect 2 detached houses fronting Dorset Lake Avenue.
    Construct an associated basement to accommodate vehicle parking, cycle storage
    and lift enclosure. Vehicular access off Dorset Lake Avenue

Representations

   Natural England - No comment regarding the proposed development.

   The Dorset Lake Avenue Resident's Association and 7 residential occupiers object to
    the proposed development on the grounds that:-
     the development will exacerbate existing parking problems in Dorset Lake Avenue;
     loss of natural vegetation from the site including the Oak tree from the Dorset Lake
       Avenue street scene;
     it constitutes an overdevelopment of the site including the congested vehicular
       access off Dorset Lake Avenue; and
     it will lead to further erosion of the Local Centre where several units remain vacant.

   2 letters of representation have been submitted by Personal Dental Care and Harbour
    front Property Consultants in support of the application acknowledging the commercial
    units could lead to occupation of those supporters, subject to leasing.

Planning Considerations

   The demolition of the existing building is not objected too as its impact upon the
    character and appearance of the street scene is neutral.

   The proposals respect the established building lines of this stretch of Sandbanks Road
    and Dorset Lake Avenue. However Policy PCS5 of the Core Strategy suggests that on
    streets or parts of streets comprised mainly of houses, proposals involving the
    redevelopment or sub-division of existing house plots to flats will be resisted." The
    principle of the proposed houses to Dorset Lake Avenue is acceptable. To Sandbanks



                                             42
    Road it is recognised that above the commercial units in the Local Centre there are
    flats however this plot is the pivotal point where the type of development and character
    alters. The remainder of the street including this site is detached houses except on the
    corner of Dorset Lake Avenue/ Sandbanks Road. This proposal would extend the
    flatted development along Sandbanks Road without justification and would be
    materially harmful to prevailing character of the area.

   The massing of the proposed building fronting Sandbanks Road would in elevation
    stand above the adjacent building. However, as the first and second floors are set
    back to reduce the dominance.

   The design of the proposed houses fronting Dorset Lake Avenue being contemporary
    is acceptable as the evolving street scene accommodates modern and traditional built
    form without material harm. The projecting balconies and overhanging roofs will add
    visual interest to the street scene and therefore accords with Policy PCS23 of the Core
    Strategy (adopted February).

   The proposed commercial units would create an extension to the Lilliput Road Local
    Centre as identified in the Proposals Map. Whilst adding competition to the existing
    Local Centre where 4 are unoccupied, the addition of a vehicle lay-bay and cycle
    parking to the site frontage will facilitate greater accessibility to the Local Centre
    assisting with the viability and vitality of the centre.

   According to Policy T15 the commercial units should be accessible from a rear service
    road or provision available to separate commercial and residential traffic movements.
    Whilst the ramp basement access has a clearance height of 2.1m this maybe
    insufficient to accommodate delivery vans. The proposal to secure a lay bay off
    Sandbanks Road, which could facilitate separate delivery, is permissible in principle
    and accords with the aspirations of Policy T15 of the Local Plan.

   Accessing the proposed basement parking area will be via a single vehicular access
    off Dorset Lake Avenue. The amended plans enable a vehicular width of 5.5m,
    sufficient to enable a vehicle entering the site and another leaving the site, to pass
    each other without blocking Dorset Lake Avenue and thereby causing highway danger.
    Furthermore the bin storage areas on collection day are provided adjacent to the
    roadside, and therefore the scheme accords with Policies PCS23 of the Core Strategy
    and T13 of the Poole Local Plan as amended.

   The proposed basement car parking area will accommodate 2 vehicle spaces per
    residential property, 1 space per commercial unit and secure cycle storage. It is
    considered that the proposed development is adequately served to accord with the
    Council's adopted parking guidelines.

   The proposal involves the trimming of several boundary hedges, the loss of Lime trees
    (which is acceptable as their contribution to visual amenities is minor) and the felling of
    a Holm Oak and Monterey Cypress. Whilst the Holm Oak has evidence of severe die
    back, its loss from the street scene is not immediately necessary. The Monterey
    Cypress has initial signs of health problems and its long-term retention is unlikely.
    Whilst provision for replacement planting is shown, the depth between ground levels
    and the basement construction is insufficient to accommodate the root systems of


                                              43
    specimen trees necessary to retain visual amenities that exist at present, therefore the
    proposals fail to provide quality replacement trees in sustainable locations that will
    enhance the character of the area and provide an acceptable contribution to the
    amenity of the area.

   The applicant has failed to enter into and successfully complete a unilateral
    undertaking to secure the necessary financial contributions towards off site recreation
    facilities, heathland mitigation and transportation infrastructure so the proposed
    development is contrary to relevant planning policies. Regarding the transportation
    infrastructure the applicant has requested that the financial value of preparing and
    dedicating the lay bay should be offset from the total contribution and the balance (if
    any) paid. This approach would be acceptable with Transport Contributions had the
    agreement been completed.

RECOMMENDATION

Refuse

Subject to the following condition(s)

1 - RR000 (Non Standard Reason)
The proposal fails to provide quality replacement trees in sustainable locations that
will enhance the character of the area and provide an acceptable contribution to the
visual amenity. Furthermore the introduction of flatted development to this pivotal
plot where the type of development and character alters would be materially harmful
to prevailing character of the area. The proposals are contrary to Policies NE27 and
NE28 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (as amended by Secretary of
State Direction 2007) which seeks to retain important trees that make a positive
contribution to the visual amenities of an area and Policies PCS05 and PCS23 of
the Core Strategy (adopted February 2009) which seeks to protect the character of
residential areas.

2 - RR010 (Recreational Contribution)
The proposal fails to make a contribution towards recreational open space facilities
within the Borough in accordance with Policy L17 of the Poole Local Plan First
Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by the Secretary of State September 2007).
As such, it would put an additional demand on existing recreational facilities in the
Borough. It would be contrary to Policy L17 and set a precedent that would make it
difficult for the Council to implement this policy effectively in the future.

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

If the Council had been minded to grant permission in all other respects it would
have to carry out an appropriate assessment in accordance with the advice and


                                             44
procedure set out broadly in Circular 06/2005. The applicant has failed to
demonstrate in accordance with the Habitat Regulations that the proposals will
cause no harm to the SPA and SAC heathland. It is clear, on the basis of advice
from English Nature that, the proposed development would in combination with
other plans and projects within close proximity to heathland and in the absence of
any form of acceptable mitigation be likely to have an adverse effect on the
heathland special features including those which are SPA and SAC features.
Having regard to the Waddenzee judgement (ECJ case C-127/02) the Council is not
in a position to be convinced that there is no reasonable scientific doubt to the
contrary. For these reasons, and without needing to conclude the appropriate
assessment, the proposal is considered contrary to the Environmental policies A, B,
C and D of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Structure Plan as well as the
recommendations of the Berne Convention Standing Committee on urban
development adjacent to the Dorset Heathlands, Policies NE16 and NE19 of the
Poole Local Plan (First Alteration) Adopted 2004 and Policies PCS28 and PCS29 of
the Poole Core Strategy 2009.

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




                                           45
Item No:             07

Case Officer:        Eleanor Godesar


Site:                99 Good Road, Poole, BH12 3HW

Application No:      APP/09/01494/P

Date Received:       3 December, 2009

Agent:               Dixon Architects

Applicant:           Mr S Oakley

Development:         Outline application to erect a replacement dwelling plus
                     five 1-bed flats. (Revised scheme) All matters reserved.

Ward:                J100 Newtown


This application is brought before committee due to local residents' concerns,
setting a precedent and over development of the area.


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

PCS05      Broad Locations for Residential Development
PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
PCS15      Access and Movement
PCS28      Dorset Heaths International Designations
T13        Traffic Generated by Development
L17        Provision for Recreational Facilities
NE16       Sites of Special Scientific Interest
NE27       Individual or Grouped Trees

Site Description

The application site is accessed from the end of Good Road and shares a boundary with
Branksome Cemetery. This unusually long plot is occupied by a detached dwelling
fronting Good Road and a group of derelict outbuildings in the rear of the site.

The character of the area is predominantly detached bungalows and two storey dwellings
in Good Road and Southill Road and the application site is also adjacent to flat


                                           46
development at No. 41-43 Southill Road.

Relevant Planning History

APP/09/01494/P – Outline application to erect a replacement dwelling plus five 1-bed flats
was dismissed at appeal in February 2009. Details of this appeal are discussed below.

Current Proposal

Outline application to erect a replacement dwelling plus five 1-bed flats (revised scheme).

Representations

Eight representations have been received with the following concerns:
 Proposed three storey flats would dominate the landscape
 Invasion of privacy to cemetery visitors and properties in the immediate vicinity.
 The revised position of the flats is now closer to houses in Southill Rd.
 Loss of privacy from proposed southeast windows.
 Over crowded site.
 Adverse impact to quiet culs-de-sac, including increased traffic, noise and pollution.
 Impact on trees, landscaping and birds.

Head of Transportation Services – No objection, subject to amended plans with visibility
splays.

Natural England – Objection due to lack of information regarding potential bats on the site.

Planning Considerations

This application is outline with all matters reserved. As such, the application seeks only to
establish the acceptability of a replacement dwelling and five one-bedroom flats on the
application site. Issues such as the exact position and design of the buildings, layout,
scale, landscaping, access and parking layout would be determined at the reserved
matters stage. However, basic information on use, amount of development, indicative
layout, scale parameters and indicative access points have been provided.

The key issues associated with the proposal include the impact on the character and
appearance of the area, neighbouring privacy, trees and amenity and access.

Previous Appeal

A similar scheme was taken to appeal and dismissed in February 2009. The key issues
considered in the appeal were:
 Character and appearance of the area, with particular regard to trees
 Contributions
 Effects on living conditions of neighbours with reference to noise and disturbance

The Inspectors assessment was as follows:
 The boundary hedge along the boundary forms a very important backdrop to the



                                             47
    cemetery and thus should be retained for their amenity value.
   Based upon arboricultural information received at the appeal, the Inspector was “not
    satisfied that the development could be carried out without a very real risk of incurring
    into the root protection area.”
   With regard to the impact upon the character and appearance of the area, the “appeal
    site's lower land level and the position of the flats set back well away from the road”
    would not intrude on the street scene. The Inspector considered that “the new building
    might be higher than the adjoining flats but this in itself would not make it look out of
    place.”
   A planning obligation had not been received to make the development acceptable in
    planning terms.
   The Inspector had the view that “relatively limited comings and goings of slow moving
    vehicles would not be unduly noisy or disturbing”. Amenity concerns raised by
    neighbours did not convince the Inspector that the scheme would be materially
    harmful.

Whilst the appeal was dismissed, this was on limited grounds above. It is therefore
necessary to consider whether the current proposal overcomes these grounds.

Character and Appearance of the Area

The development proposes to replace the existing dwelling with a bungalow or house and
provide an additional building with five flats. A replacement bungalow at the front of the
site would be acceptable within the street scene. A proposed house would be obviously
higher than the existing dwelling, although with a mixture of bungalows and two storey
houses in this part of Good Road, it would be acceptable in the street scene.

The proposed five flats are indicated to be located towards the rear of the application site.
With regard to the Inspectors previous assessment, this positioning would be on lower
land level when viewed from Good Road and behind dwellings when viewed from Southill
Road. It is therefore concluded that a building in this vicinity would cause no material harm
to the street scene.

Whilst the indicative details suggest that the replacement dwelling would be on the Good
Road frontage and the five proposed flats would be located towards the rear of the site,
this outline application does not seek to approve the siting of the buildings. The character
of Good Road is predominantly detached dwellings and Southill Road is detached
dwellings with some flats. Therefore, the position of the buildings which has been
submitted with the application is considered to be acceptable. However, it the positioning
of the two buildings were swapped or substantially re-located, material harm to the street
scene of each road may result. It is therefore considered reasonable to have a condition
that requires the position of the proposed buildings generally conform to the submitted
indicative site layout.

Indicative details suggest that the flats would be three storey accommodation with a 35
pitched roof with eaves about 7.3 metres above ground floor level and a ridge height of
about 10.8 metres above ground floor level. Assessment of the character and appearance
of the area reveals a range of dwelling types, including detached bungalows and houses
and flats, which predominately have pitched roofs and up to two storeys of
accommodation. In order to ensure that the proposed flats would compliment the existing


                                              48
pattern of development, it is considered reasonable to condition the appearance of the
flats to conform to the indicative details provided and have the third storey within the roof
space.

Neighbouring Privacy and Amenity

Given this application is outline, impact to neighbours in terms of privacy cannot be fully
assessed. However, the replacement house with windows facing west towards Good
Road and east towards the rear of the site would be acceptable in terms of neighbouring
privacy.

The indicative position of the proposed flats would be located about 14 metres away from
the nearest flat building at No. 41-43 Southill Road. The northern elevation facing the
existing flats could be designed with no windows or obscure glazed windows.

The proposed indicative siting for the flats would be at least 25 metres from to the
dwellings at No. 33 and 31 Southill Road which is sufficient distance to ensure that facing
windows would cause no material harm to neighbouring privacy. Potential windows of the
west elevation would face towards the proposed replacement dwelling with a distance in
excess of 30 metres which would cause no material harm to the privacy of future
occupants. Windows on the south elevation would look towards Branksome Cemetery
and, in accordance with PCS 23 of the Core Strategy, would face onto public space and
would cause no material harm to neighbouring privacy.

Assuming that the proposed replacement dwelling and flats were built in the indicative
positions, they are not considered to cause a loss of light or overbearing impact to
neighbours.

Access to the five proposed flats would be along a driveway which is indicated to be close
proximity to the replacement dwelling and No. 97 Good Road. This layout is similar to the
dismissed scheme. The Inspector considered that the level of movement of vehicles along
this driveway would not be unduly noisy or disturbing.

Highways

The driveway is of sufficient width in highway terms to accommodate pedestrian and
vehicular traffic. Adequate parking and turning is provided for the dwelling and flats. The
Transportation Officer requested visibility splays for the access and the front parking
space. However, with the positioning of the driveway along the boundary with No. 97, a
visibility splay on northern side would be difficult to secure.

Transportation consider that the driveway width could be reduced to 3.2 metres without
compromising pedestrian safety. If the proposed dwelling were slightly reduced, the
driveway could be reduced to a width of 3.2 metres and re-positioned with a one metre
landscaped strip which would provide some visibility. In addition, the landscaped strip
would benefit the adjoining neighbours by providing some buffer between their boundary
and future passing vehicles. These details can be sought through condition.

Trees



                                              49
The Inspector in dismissing the earlier appeal considered that trees and hedging along the
southern boundary of the application site provided a very important backdrop to the
cemetery and thus should be retained for their amenity value. He concluded that the
position of that proposed development could have a detrimental effect on the health and
amenity of the prominent trees within the site unless special measures are taken to protect
them.

In the current proposal, the submitted Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) now
demonstrates mitigation to any potential detrimental affect on trees. It is also appreciated
that trees previously marked for removal have now been retained. As such, previous
concerns with regard to trees can be overcome with appropriate mitigation. The following
comments are provided to assist the amendment to AMS through condition:
 There is some disagreement with the categories specified within the AMS for each tree
    within the site. However, it is acknowledged that this is open to an individuals’
    interpretation.
 The plans submitted by the agent and the arboricultural consultant differ and
    measuring from each plan is difficult. This can be rectified.
 The tree numbering is different in each plan.
 The parking bays are located in different positions on the plans submitted from the
    agent and the Arboriculturalist.
 The slight re-orientation of the parking bays is required to ensure that bays are not
    below the canopies of the trees. This can be agreed at a later date.
 Further ground protection may be needed for T5 and its associated roots.
 Bicycle stores need to be removed from under the canopy of T5.
 Tree replant will be required.
 The root protection for G1 does not need to be offset and should possibly not be offset.
    Ground protection or fencing should be used in this area.

The line of significant conifers to the north of the site caused concern in the previous
scheme due to potential dominance and reduction of available light to the proposed flats
and its associated garden area. The Inspector did not directly consider this planting in his
decision. However, it has already been suggested that the flats could be designed with no
windows or obscure windows on the northern elevation. Bearing in mind potential
pressure to prune the conifers if windows faced it, it is considered that the north elevation
should be designed with no windows and be sought through condition.

Nature Conservation Issues

Natural England have raised an objection to this development due to potential harm to
bats and other protected species. A survey has been requested but has not been
received. However, given that this is an outline application, it is considered reasonable to
deal with this issue through a condition requiring a protected species survey.

Contributions

The application necessitates the payment of recreational, heathland and transportation
contributions. A draft unilateral undertaking has been sent by Legal Services to the agent
but a signed copy has not yet been received.

RECOMMENDATION


                                             50
Grant Section 106

Section 106 Notes
Details of Section 106 Agreement.

1. A financial contribution of £7280.00 (plus administration fee) towards the
provision of recreational facilities in accordance with Policy L17 of the Poole Local
Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction
September 2007).

2. A financial contribution of £5155.00 (plus administration fee) towards mitigating
the harm to the SSSI protected Dorset Heathlands in accordance with the Dorset
Heathlands Interim Planning Framework 2006-2009 and policies NE16 of the Poole
Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State
direction September 2007) and PCS28 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted on 19th
February 2009.

3. A financial contribution of £17830.00 (plus administration fee) towards the South
East Dorset Transport Contributions Scheme Adopted 2009 and Policy T13 of the
Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State
Direction 20th September 2007).

Subject to the following condition(s)

1 - OL010 (Submission of Reserved Matters)
No development shall take place until approval of the details of the siting, design
and external appearance of the buildings, the means of access thereto and the
landscaping of the site (hereinafter called 'the reserved matters') has been obtained
in writing from the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out
in accordance with the approved details.

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


2 - OL020 (Timing of Reserved Matters Submission)

3 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
The first submission of reserved matters, pursuant to condition 1 above, shall
demonstrate the following:
The front elevation of the proposed detached replacement dwelling shall be located
no more than 8 metres from the front boundary and the rear of the building shall be
located no more than 20 metres from the front boundary.
The proposed detached replacement dwelling shall be no more than two storeys
and have eaves height of no more than 4.8 metres above ground floor level and a
pitched roof with a ridge height of no more than 7.8 metres above ground floor level.
The north side elevation of the detached replacement dwelling shall be constructed
with no windows or doors.


                                            51
The rear elevation of the 5 flats shall be no closer than 10 metres from the rear
boundary.
The five flats shall have eaves no higher than 7.3 metres above ground floor level
and a pitched roof with a ridge no higher than 10.8 metres above ground floor level.
The third storey of the building shall be contained within the roof space.
The north elevation of the five flats shall be constructed with no windows.

Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason -
To ensure satisfactory relationship within the street scene and with neighbouring
and future occupant amenity, in accordance with Policies PCS 5 and PCS 23 of the
Poole Core Strategy (adopted February 2009). To ensure satisfactory present and
future retention of hedging along the north boundary near the flats, in accordance
with Policy NE27 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as
amended by Secretary of State Direction September 2007).

4 - GN030 (Sample of Materials)

5 - AA01 (Non standard Condition)
Prior to commencement of development, and as part of the first approval of
reserved matters, details of the access, including a one metre landscaped strip
along the northern boundary as marked in green, turning space, garaging / vehicle
parking and cycle parking shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the
Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be brought into use until the
approved details have been constructed, and these shall thereafter be retained and
kept available for those purposes at all times.

Reason -
In the interests of highway safety and to ensure a satisfactory relationship with trees
to be retained in accordance with Policies T13 and NE27 of the Poole Local Plan
First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction
September 2007).


6 - HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)
Before the development hereby permitted is brought into use and notwithstanding
the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)
Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment thereof, the land marked in orange as
indicated on the approved plan shall be cleared of all obstructions over 0.6 metres
above the level of the adjoining highway, including the reduction in level of the land
if necessary, and nothing over that height shall be permitted to remain, be placed,
built, planted or grown on the land so designated at any time.

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




                                             52
7 - HW090 (Access Gradient Not to Exceed 1:15)
The first 4.5 metres of the access crossing and drive shall not exceed a gradient of
1:15.

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


8 - GN120 (Storage of Refuse)
Provision shall be made within the site for storage of refuse prior to disposal and
collection, in which respect a scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing
by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of on-site works;
implemented prior to the first occupation and thereafter retained.

Reason -
In the interests of amenity and to ensure that no obstruction is caused on the
adjoining highway and in accordance with Policy PCS 5 and 23 of the Poole Core
Strategy (adopted Febuary 2009) and Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First
Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction September
2007).


9 - LS030 (Implement Landscaping Scheme)

10 - LS070 (Existing Tree Screen/Hedgerow)
The existing natural hedgerow along the north and south boundary of the site, as
marked in orange shall be retained and reinforced where necessary in accordance
with a scheme to be submitted to, and approved in writing 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 and
properly maintained for a period of five years including replacement of any plants
which die, are removed or become damaged or diseased within this period with
plants of a similar size and the same species, unless the Local Planning Authority
gives written consent to any variation, and the approved scheme thereafter retained.
The Local Planning Authority shall be advised in writing when the planting has been
undertaken so that initial compliance with the condition can be checked.

Reason -
In the interests of the amenities of neighbouring properties and to maintain and
enhance the appearance of the site in accordance with Policies PCS 5 and PCS 23
of the Poole Core Strategy (adopted February 2009) and Policy NE27 of the Poole
Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State
Direction September 2007).


11 - TR010 (Arb Method Statement-Submission Required)

12 - TR060 (Tree Protection - No Trenches/Pipe Runs)


                                            53
13 - TR090 (No Pruning)

14 - WL010 (Wildlife Survey)
The first submission of Reserved Matters shall include a wildlife survey and report
for species especially protected by law, including bats. The survey should be
shown on a plan, together with proposals for the retention of features of value
identified in the survey.

No development shall be commenced until the survey and proposals have been
submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.
Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason -
To allow proper consideration of the impact of the proposed development on nature
conservation interests and in accordance with Policy NE21 of the Poole Local Plan
First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State Direction
September 2007).



Informative Notes

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

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

a) The proposal will compliment the character and appearance of the area - Policies
PCS 23 and PCS 5
b) Residential Amenity will be preserved - Policy PCS 5
c) Traffic generated by the development would preserve road and pedestrian safety
- Policies T13 and PCS 15
d) Adequate measures have been taken to preserve protected trees - Policy NE27
e) Recreation, Heathland and Transportation contributions have been secured by
Unilateral/106 agreement - Policies L17, NE16, PCS28 and T13

2 - IN43 (Section 106 Agreement)




                                            54
Item No:               08

Case Officer:          Darryl Howells


Site:                  11 Blake Hill Avenue, Poole, BH14 8QA

Application No:        APP/09/01366/F

Date Received:         6 November, 2009

Agent:                 Building Consultancy Bureau

Applicant:             Mr J Davies

Development:           Erect First floor extension at rear.

Ward:                  E050 Penn Hill


This application is brought before committee due to a Councillor's interest nearby.


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
H12        House Alterations and Extensions

Site Description

   The application site is occupied by a detached 2 storey house positioning in a regular
    pattern of development along Blake Hill Avenue. The character of the area is
    residential with detached houses set within mature landscape plots. The topography
    of the site falls from the front to the rear with a change of level of approximately 4
    metres.

Relevant Planning History

   2007 - Erect a rear extension and detached garage was approved, and subsequently
    implemented.

Current Proposal

   Erect first floor extension at rear.


                                             55
Representations

   None.

Planning Considerations

   The proposed extension will have limited impact upon the appearance of the street
    scene. A strong characteristic of the dwellings in Blake Hill Avenue is fully hipped
    gables which this development retains. The small area of flat roof will be hidden by
    ridges and therefore cause minimal impact to the wider setting of the building.

   Towards the rear of the house, the proposed extension will not material harm
    neighbouring amenities through loss of light or overlooking. Despite the topography of
    the site, the proposed extension with its hipped roof will allow light to penetrate into the
    immediate rear of the neighbouring house at no.9, and not cause a materially harmful
    shadow over their private amenity area.

   The first floor windows on the rear elevation will enable views of the lower half of
    neighbouring gardens, but these views already exist so no additional harm will be
    caused. The first floor window on the side of the house is acceptable as it will cause
    no harm to neighbouring amenities.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant with Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s)

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

2 - GN040 (Match Materials to the Existing Building)


Informative Notes

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

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

a) The proposal will positively compliment or enhance the character and
appearance of the area - Policy PCS23
b) Residential Amenity will be preserved - Policy H12




                                               56
Item No:             09

Case Officer:        Darryl Howells


Site:                29 Links Road, Poole, BH14 9QS

Application No:      APP/09/01209/F

Date Received:       9 October, 2009

Agent:               Chartered Blueprint

Applicant:           Mr & Mrs Parnell

Development:         Demolish existing dwelling, sever land and erect 2
                     detached town houses (as amended plans received 19th
                     January 2010).

Ward:                E050 Penn Hill


This application is brought before committee due to Councillor Parker on grounds
of neighbour concerns and impact upon the street scene.


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

PCS05      Broad Locations for Residential Development
PCS15      Access and Movement
PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
PCS28      Dorset Heaths International Designations
L17        Provision for Recreational Facilities
T11        Car Parking Maxima
T13        Traffic Generated by Development
NE16       Sites of Special Scientific Interest
NE28       Tree Preservation Orders

Site Description

   The application site is located on the southern side of Links Road, opposite the
    junction of Canford Cliffs Avenue. The character of the area is residential comprising
    detached residential properties, predominantly chalet bungalows however the
    neighbouring house at no.31 is a 2 storey pitched roof house with integral garage.


                                             57
   To the side and rear of the existing bungalow (with basement garage) which occupies
    the application site, there are several mature Scots Pine tress, covered by a Tree
    Preservation Order. Between nos. 29 & 31 Links Road, historically there is a public
    footpath which although not abandoned, remains but is blocked up at either end to
    prevent public access.

Relevant Planning History

   None relevant.

Current Proposal

   Demolish existing dwelling, sever land and erect 2 detached town houses (as
    amended plans received 2nd December 2009).

Representations

   The Head of Transportation Services – No objection to the provision of on site car
    parking, however has sought a speed survey of vehicles travelling east to west along
    Links Road, to establish if the visibility splays are adequate and it is safe for vehicles to
    reverse onto the public highway.

   Based on the original plans, 9 households have made representation objecting the
    proposed development on the grounds that: -
     The proposed development represents an over development of the site;
     The design of the proposed houses will dominate the street scene to the detriment
       of the character and appearance of the area;
     The proposals will contribute to an existing sewerage problem experienced by
       neighbouring householders;
     The proposed development could compromise neighbouring foundations when/ if
       the houses are constructed;
     The loss of protected trees from the frontage of the site;
     The proposed development will give rise to increased traffic movements from the
       site; and likely to be detrimental to highway safety due to vehicles reversing out
       from the site onto the public highway.

Planning Considerations

   The proposed demolition of the existing dwelling with basement garage is accepted as
    its contribution to the street scene is neutral.

   The established street scene comprises detached houses and chalet bungalows of
    varying architectural style, although a consistent feature are pitched roofs, albeit
    varying degrees of pitch. The proposed houses take advance of reduced ground
    levels so both are 3 storeys but the height of the eaves and ridge heights follow the
    established transition of building mass along this stretch of Links Road.

   Both proposed houses are individually styled to vary their appearance. No.29a retains


                                               58
    the traditional pitched roof arrangement whereas no29, offers a split ridge with the
    lower mono roof at a height of the existing property and the second higher ridge being
    0.85m above the original height. The varying styles of architectural form offers visual
    interest to, whilst respecting and enhancing the established street scene. The adopted
    Design Code SPG supports development proposals which respect and reflect
    architectural characteristics of nearby buildings, but does not require a redevelopment
    scheme to mimic that exists at present. It is considered that the proposed
    development will not be materially harmful but positively contribute to the character of
    the area.

   The alignment of the proposed houses does not bring built form materially closer to the
    roadside than the existing building. Amended plans have been received which
    substantially reduce the depth of the buildings, to reflect that of neighbouring
    properties. The existing frontage width to the site is 25m whereas the predominant
    plot width along the southern side of Links Road is approximately 15m. The proposed
    houses will have plot widths of 16m to no.29 and 9m to no.29a respectively. Whilst it
    is recognised that the width of the second plot is narrower than the prevailing size,
    defining the actual harm to the wider character is difficult. The building maintains a
    2.4m gap at first floor level to no.29 and a 4.2m gap to its neighbour at no.31 similar in
    character to the area. The proposed development seeks to make an efficient use of
    land within the built environment achieving a density of 14 dwellings per hectare
    (consistent with the predominant character) whilst providing family housing stock
    needed to meet the community's demands.

   The proposed dwellings do not adversely affect neighbouring amenities by reason that
    their layout takes account of neighbouring privacy. Windows positioned on the side
    elevations will be obscured glazed by condition to maintain neighbouring mutual
    privacy.

   The proposal retains the adjacent public footpath, which runs from Links Road to Over
    Links Road, between nos. 29 & 31 Links Road.

   Representation has been made objecting to the proposed development on grounds
    that there is inadequate sewerage provision and this development could increase
    potential for sewerage problems and potential for damage to neighbouring
    foundations. These matters are not controlled under Planning Legislation unless it can
    be demonstrated by Statutory Undertakers that significant problems exist. Ground
    stability is a civil matter.

   The application is supported by an Arboricultural method statement, which has gained
    the support of the Council's Arboricultural officer. The proposed development will
    require the removal of 2 plum trees positioned in the front garden however there
    contribution to the amenity of the area is minimal and their loss is accepted as neither
    tree is covered by a Preservation Order.

   The applicant has indicated his willingness to complete a unilateral undertaking to
    secure the necessary contributions towards off site recreation facilities, heath land
    mitigation and provision towards transportation infrastructure.

   Each of the proposed houses offers off-street car parking provision for at least 2 cars,


                                              59
   with the additional potential for on site turning. The provision of visibility splays access
   onto the highway network is acceptable. A traffic speed survey has been carried out
   by the applicant, and a second by the Transportation Officer which both conclude that
   vehicles travelling in a westerly direction along Links Road do so at an average speed
   of 31mph, which in highway safety terms, the visibility splay serving no.29 as proposed
   is acceptable.

RECOMMENDATION

Grant Subject to Unilateral Undertaking

Section 106 Notes
Details of Section 106 Agreement.

£2260 (+ £33.90 Administration fee) towards off site recreation facilities in
accordance with Policy L17 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (as
amended by Secretary of State Direction 2007)

£1719 (+ £50 Administration fee) towards mitigating the harm to the SSSI protected
Dorset Heathlands in accordance with the Dorset Heathlands Interim Planning
Framework 2006-2009 and policies NE16 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration
Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State direction September 2007) and
PCS28 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted on 19th February 2009.

£5706 (+ £57.06 Administration fee) towards new transportation infrastructure in
accordance with Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration 2004 (as
amended by Secretary of State Direction 2007)

Subject to the following condition(s)

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

2 - GN030 (Sample of Materials)

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

4 - HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

5 - HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)
Before the development hereby permitted is brought into use and notwithstanding
the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)
Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enactment thereof, the land designated as
visibility splays (highlighted GREEN on the approved plan) shall be cleared of all
obstructions over 0.6 metres above the level of the adjoining highway, including the
reduction in level of the land if necessary, and nothing over that height shall be
permitted to remain, be placed, built, planted or grown on the land so designated at
any time.

Reason -
In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy T13 of the Poole


                                              60
Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by Secretary of State
Direction September 2007).


6 - GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the windows coloured
BLUE on the approved plan shall be glazed with obscure glass in a form sufficient to
prevent external views and shall either be a fixed light or hung in such a way as to
prevent the effect of obscure glazing being negated by reason of opening.

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


7 - HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)


Informative Notes

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

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

a) The proposal will positively compliment or enhance the character and
appearance of the area - Policies PCS23 & PCS05
b) The proposals will facilitate the re-opening of an existing public footpath to the
benefit of the wider community - Policy PCS15
c) Adequate measures have been taken to preserve protected trees - Policy NE28
d) Recreation, Heathland and Transportation contributions have been secured by
Unilateral/106 agreement - Policies L17, NE16, PCS28 and T13
e) The proposals provide adequate on site car parking provision - Policy T11

2 - IN00 (Non Standard Informative)
The applicants are advised that the public footpath adjacent to the development site
should be cleared of all debris and undergrowth in consultation with the Council
Rights of Ways Officer and made available for members of the general public to
pass and regress without obstruction.

3 - IN03 (Public Right of Way)

4 - IN26 (Development on Unstable Land)

5 - IN53 (Party Wall Act 1996)




                                             61
Item No:             10

Case Officer:        Emma MacWilliam


Site:                56 Blake Dene Road, Poole, BH14 8HH

Application No:      APP/10/00041/F

Date Received:       13 January, 2010

Agent:               Samways Surveying Ltd

Applicant:           Mr & Mrs D Lamb

Development:         Erect 2 storey front/side extension (to include rooms in
                     roofspace). Erect conservatory at rear.

Ward:                E050 Penn Hill


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


Relevant Planning Policy

The following policies of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004) (as
amended by the Secretary of State Direction September 2007) and the Poole Core
Strategy (as amended by the Binding Report on the Examination), adopted on 19
February 2009 are relevant to this application:

PCS23      Local Distinctiveness
H12        House Alterations and Extensions
NE28       Tree Preservation Orders

Site Description

The site is occupied by a detached two-storey house with a steep sloping rear garden,
located on the east side of Blake Dene Road. The Blake Dene Road streetscene consists
of predominantly two storey dwellings and bungalows within regular shaped plots.

The property is bound to the rear by a public footpath and area of land containing several
trees. The surrounding area is characterised by a mix of detached houses and bungalows
of varying ages with a variety of styles where soft landscaping is a strong characteristic of
the area.

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


                                             62
Dene Road.

There are a variety of extensions that been approved and implemented along Blake Dene
Road including those with front balconies.

Relevant Planning History

None.

Current Proposal

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

REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

Planning Considerations

   The proposals would significantly change the external appearance of the property.
    The proposals would not increase the height of the main ridge, however the ridge to
    the front gable would be increased, bringing it level with the ridgeline of the main roof
    of the house.

   The front extension would bring the property forward in its plot towards the street by
    approximately 1.5m. However the house would still be set back from the street by
    some 14m.

   Spaces between properties is characteristic in Blake Dene Road. Whilst the proposal
    would reduce the gap between the properties the backdrop of tree would remain. It is
    considered that the development will positively contribute to the appearance of the
    streetscene, would not detract from the character layout of Blake Dene Road and
    would not compromise the visual amenity of the adjacent trees.

   Although the proposed front balcony and veranda would create a more prominent site
    frontage this is not too dissimilar to other properties in the immediate area.

   It is considered that this would not be visually intrusive or harmful to the streetscene,
    character of the area or to the amenity of neighbouring properties. The proposed
    alterations to the roof would cause no material harm to the appearance of the
    streetscene due to the variety of property styles and roof types. The proposed design
    and materials will positively contribute to the appearance of the streetscene and would
    not compromise the visual amenity of the trees to the rear.

   The additional rear windows would cause no further levels of overlooking to any
    neighbouring properties than currently exists. The velux windows in the roof would not
    give rise to harmful levels of overlooking into rear garden areas of the neighbouring


                                             63
    properties.

   The single storey rear extension would cause no harmful loss of outlook or light to
    neighbouring properties and would be screened by boundary treatments.

   There would be no materially harmful loss of outlook caused to No’s. 54 or 58 and the
    proposals would not appear unduly overbearing when viewed from these properties.
    There would be some impact upon light, but this would not be materially harmful.

   There would be some loss of privacy caused to the occupants of No. 54 due to the
    velux in the roof of the front gable since this would give rise to oblique views into the
    side dormer of this neighbouring property. This will be mitigated by obscure glazing.

   No trees or hedges are proposed to be pruned or removed. The proposals would have
    no harmful impact upon any trees provided that protective fencing was erected and
    retained before and during works.


RECOMMENDATION

Grant with Conditions

Subject to the following condition(s)

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

2 - GN040 (Match Materials to the Existing Building)

3 - GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the window coloured
pink on the approved plan (drawing no. 002) on the south elevation shall be glazed
with obscure glass in a form sufficient to prevent external views and shall either be a
fixed light or hung in such a way as to prevent the effect of obscure glazing being
negated by reason of opening.

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


4 - TR070 (Tree Protection - Protective Fencing)


Informative Notes

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



                                             64
The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of the
Development Plan and, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in
conflict with the following policies:

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




                                           65

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:9/27/2012
language:English
pages:65