Borough of Poole
Planning Committee
List of Planning Applications
23 February, 2017
1
BOROUGH OF POOLE
Planning Committee
DATE: 23 February 2017 at 13.00
NOTES:
1. Items may be taken out of order and therefore no certain advice can be provided
about the time at which any item may be considered.
2. Applications can be determined in any manner notwithstanding the
recommendation being made.
3. Councillors who are not members of the Planning Committee but who wish to
attend to make comments on any application on this list or accompanying agenda
are required to give notice by informing the chairman or Head of Planning and
Regeneration Services before the meeting.
4. Councillors who are interested in the detail of any matter to be considered should
consult the files with the relevant officers to avoid queries at the meeting.
5. Any members of the public wishing to make late additional representations should
do so in writing or by contacting their Ward Councillors prior to the meeting.
6. Letters of representation referred to in these reports together with any other
background papers may be inspected at any time prior to the Meeting and these
papers will be available at the Meeting.
7. For the purposes of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985,
unless otherwise stated against a particular report, “background papers” in
accordance with section 100D will always include the case officer’s written report
and any letters or memoranda of representation received (including
correspondence from all internal Borough Council Service Units).
8. Councillors are advised that if they wish to refer to specific drawings/plans which
are not part of these papers to contact the relevant case officer at least 24 hours
before the meeting to ensure these can be made available.
9. Members are advised that, in order to reduce the size of the agenda, where
conditions are marked on the plans list as Standard these will no longer be
reported in full. The full wording of the condition can be found either in hard copy
in the Members rooms, or via the following link on the Loop
http://bopwss3/sus/ww/Shared%20Documents/Standard%20Conditions.doc
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Planning Committee
23 February 2017 at 13.00
Not before 13:00
01
02
03
04
34-40 Dorset Lake Avenue, Poole, BH14 8JD
25 Beckhampton Road, Poole, BH15 4PH
72 Kings Avenue, Poole, BH14 9QJ
37 St Osmunds Road, Poole, BH14 9JT
3
APP/16/01147/F
APP/16/01713/F
APP/16/01890/F
APP/16/01774/F
4
17
22
27
ITEM NO
APPLICATION NO.
APPLICATION TYPE
SITE ADDRESS
01
APP/16/01147/F
Full
34-40 Dorset Lake Avenue, Poole, BH14 8JD
PROPOSALS
REGISTERED
APPLICANT
AGENT
Demolition of existing buildings and construction of 3
blocks of flats totalling 23 flats and 3 houses with
underground parking.
3 August, 2016
Avante (Dorset Lake) Ltd
David James Architects & Associates Ltd
WARD
Canford Cliffs
CASE OFFICER
James Gilfillan
INTRODUCTION
This application is brought before committee at the request of Cllr Mrs Haines, because of
the concerns of residents.
Recommendation for Grant With CIL Contribution
THE PROPOSAL
Demolition of existing buildings and construction of 3 blocks of flats totalling 23 flats and 3
houses with underground parking.
MAIN ISSUES
The principal issues for consideration in this case relate to the principle of flats, the
character and appearance of the area, residential amenity and flood risk.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The application site consists of four residential plots, two of which are occupied by detached
houses, the other two each have consent for the erection of a detached houses. Each of the
plots has access from Dorset Lake Avenue adjacent to its junction with Sandbanks Road.
The area is entirely residential consisting of a mixture of flats and large detached houses.
There has been much development in the area over the past 10 years as properties have
been modernised; enlarged or replaced.
The plots extend from Dorset Lake Avenue to front Poole Harbour, with ground levels falling
towards the waters edge and adjacent properties on Firs Lane, Dorset Lake Avenue and
Sandbanks Road.
The character of the area is residential, as such the principle of residential development is
appropriate. The application site is occupied by two houses, with two more approved. To
the north-west, on Dorset Lake Avenue, the character is predominantly detached houses.
4
To the south, on Sandbanks Road, and immediately opposite the site at the corner of Dorset
Lake Avenue, flats occupy both sides of the street towards Evening Hill.
There are trees on the site which are covered by a TPO.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
34-36 Dorset Lake Avenue.
2003: Demolish the existing houses and erect 2 replacement houses. Approved
(03/07869/008)
2004: An alternative design for 34 Dorset Lake Avenue to that approved by the above
2003 application. Approved. The original house has been demolished, but the new house
has not been built (04/01752/009)
38 Dorset Lake Avenue.
1999: Demolish the existing house and erect a replacement house. Approved
(99/15694/006)
40 Dorset Lake Avenue.
2010: Demolish the existing house and erect a replacement house. Approved. The original
house has been demolished, but the new house has not been built (10/01557/F)
324 Sandbanks Road.
2008: Demolish the existing buildings and erect a block of 4 flats. Approved
(08/07222/022)
32 Dorset Lake Avenue.
2015: Erection of a detached house. Approved. (15/01773)
21 Dorset Lake Avenue.
2004: Demolish existing dwelling and erect a block of 5 flats. Approved (04/18365/012)
PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE
2016: A proposal to demolish the existing houses and redevelop the site to include circa. 40
units of residential accommodation covering approximately 5000 sq. m. was given a
negative response on the basis that the principle of flats was contrary to PCS05 and was not
appropriate (16/00008).
The pre-app advice concluded that the development of flats on this site was contrary to
policy PCS5, as the site did not satisfy the criteria in part (i). Whilst it is within 400m of the
Lilliput Local Centre it is not on a Prime Transport Corridor or other busy artery. The
pre-app advice considered that the character of the area changed at 40 Dorset Lake
Avenue, from the predominately flat character to the south to detached houses, as such it
would not comply with part (ii), by which flats could be considered appropriate if they already
predominated.
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION
None
5
CONSULTATIONS
The Head of Transportation Services: Supports the scheme, subject to conditions, for
delivering additional residential development with sufficient parking, whilst preserving
highway and pedestrian safety.
The Head of Environmental & Consumer Protection Services: The Waste Collection
Authority has no objection to the scheme which can provide adequate bin storage in
appropriate locations.
The Lead Local Flood Risk Authority: Encourage that surface water drainage is direct to
the harbour.
Environment Agency: No objection if the LPA are satisfied that the Sequential Test is
passed, subject to the imposition of conditions to prevent alterations that could reduce the
flood resilience of the site.
Natural England: No objection to the impact on Dorset Heathland SSSI habitats if SAMMS
and CIL contributions are secured. Indicate that the site is close to protected habitats in
Poole Harbour that it may have an impact upon.
Dorset Police Crime Prevention and Design Advisor: Raises concerns regarding the lack
of secure access between communal areas and private areas of the buildings and access
throughout the site and the potential for arguments whilst vehicles wait to use the car lifts.
Poole Harbour Commissioners: No objection to the proposal and indicate that new Marine
Licences would be required for any structures or development in the harbour.
Dorset Wildlife Trust: Object to the lack of a biodiversity survey and opportunities to
enhance biodiversity on the site and advocate the instructions of Natural England in respect
of protecting species using the harbour.
Wessex Water: Initially objected to the conflict with a sewer crossing the site. Revisions
to the scheme have removed the conflict and they no longer object.
REPRESENTATIONS
Letters of representation have been received in which the following concerns are raised:
 overdevelopment of the site
 flats being out of character with the streetscene and shoreline, the size, height, lack of
gaps and number of units being detrimental to the character and appearance of the area
 loss of privacy and amenity for local residents
 highway and pedestrian safety and congestion along Dorset Lake Avenue and its
junction with Sandbanks Road
 setting a precedence for future development of flats along Dorset Lake Avenue
 loss of greenspace and habitats
 disturbances during construction detrimental to residential amenity
Many objectors reference the Council's negative 'pre-app' response as a reason for
objection.
Lilliput and Neighbourhood Residents Association raise the same objections.
6
The Society of Poole Men object to the size and scale of the scheme.
Robert Syms MP objected to the original submission due to overdevelopment of the site that
would result in a significant increase in traffic movements.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
POLICY AND GUIDANCE
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
National Planning Policy Framework (Adopted March 2012)
Dorset Heathlands Framework 2015-2020 SPD
LOCAL CONTEXT
The following policies are listed as applying to this application.
Poole Core Strategy (2009)
PCS05
Broad Locations for Residential Development
PCS23
Local Distinctiveness
PCS28
Dorset Heaths International Designations
PCS29
Poole Harbour Spa and Ramsar Site
PCS31
Sustainable Energy - General
PCS32
Sustainable Homes
PCS34
Flood Risk
Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies DPD (2012)
DM1
Design
DM4
Coastal Zone
DM7
Accessibility and Safety
DM8
Demand Management
DM9
Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity
Shoreline Character SPG
Affordable Housing SPD
Parking and Highway Layout in Development SPD
PLANNING JUDGEMENT
The scheme proposes to demolish the two existing houses; combine the four sites; and
erect three blocks of flats totalling 23 flats with a shared basement garage. Three houses,
with basement accommodation, would be attached to the rear of the 'basement' level.
Access would be from Dorset Lake Avenue with car lifts providing access to the basement.
The applicant has highlighted that the pattern of development to the south, where flats
predominate, is based on plots extending between Sandbanks Road and the harbour, a
characteristic which is shared by the application site, which extends between Dorset Lake
Avenue and the harbour. They consider that proposals would preserve and reflect that
characteristic, which changes at 32 Dorset Lake Avenue, where the plots are significantly
shorter with intervening waterside residential properties on Firs Lane.
7
They therefore submit that the application site falls on part of a street where flats
predominate and would therefore accord with the principle of PCS5 (ii).
Recently, the Council has approved flats as appropriate on sites at 5-7 Chaddesley Glen; 8
Martello Road South; and 21 Springfield Road. Each was considered appropriate because
they were considered to sufficiently satisfy a broader interpretation of policy PCS5 when
also considered against the broader Strategic Objectives of the Local Plan. Development
proposal will rarely satisfy the entirety of the development plan or policies therein, and it is
therefore for the decision maker to determine the weight to be applied to the balance of
judgements under consideration.
PCS5 (ii) allows flats on streets or 'parts of streets' where 'flats predominate'. The term 'part
of street' is not defined. The Inspector considering a recent appeal at Cherry Court
(APP/16/00919/F) considered this point and opined that "therefore the decision-maker is
required to make a judgement having regard to the particular circumstances of the case".
In this case, there are flats in the area, immediately adjoining the site and opposite at 21
Dorset Lake Avenue. The physical form and characteristics of the application site are
shared with the characteristics of the adjoining sites where flatted development to the south
exist and not the houses to the north. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that the site can
be considered as being part of the street to the south when assessing the prevailing
character, including the predominance of flats. This was the approach taken at 8 Martello
Road South and 5-7 Chaddesley Glen.
The site is close to the local centre, but is not on the frontage of a prime transport corridor.
This was also the case with No.21 Springfield Road.
On the basis of the context of the site and the decisions taken on other sites recently the site
can be considered as being suitable for flatted developments within the provisions of PCS5.
Concluding that flats predominate on this part of the street, in accordance with PCS5 (ii), the
density would be approximately at 38dph which is within the indicative density range of
30-50dph. Whilst this would be higher than the density of the immediately adjacent flats to
the south, it would be less than at 336 & 338 Sandbanks Road, both of which have been
permitted during the last 2 years. The policy goes on to set conditions of acceptability.
The contemporary design is consistent with the evolving appearance of the area which has
seen most of the nearby properties replaced or radically refurbished in recent years,
resulting in a wide variety of styles and materials. Where intensification has occurred
those schemes have a degree of consistency across the buildings in a similar manner to the
current proposals. The existing empty plots contribute little to the area
Existing houses would not be isolated and would continue to be the predominate
characteristic along Dorset Lake Avenue to the north.
Plot coverage of buildings and hard surfaces would exceed 50%, when taking into account
basement parking, although given this basement roof level is to be landscaped when
viewed in the streetscene this will appear to be no more than approximately 45% of the site
area covered. The scheme includes extensive areas of landscaped gardens for residents;
landscaped edges to the site; front boundary planting and setting between the buildings; a
8
setting that is not achieved between the existing and approved houses.
Parking would be predominantly in the basement with some to the frontage. Access points
would be from Dorset Lake Avenue at the front of the site, avoiding the rear gardens of the
adjoining sites.
There would be sufficient retention of landscape across the entire site frontage, together
with areas of new landscape space, to preserve the contribution of the front gardens to the
streetscene.
Whilst the scheme would comply with PCS05 (ii) a-e, part (v) requires a more detailed
analysis of the response and relationship to the attributes of the area's character.
The layout of the scheme maintains a wide separation from the front of the site, and relates
to the siting of adjoining buildings. The overlap and gaps between the blocks introduces a
better landscape setting and spaciousness than exists between the two existing houses or
the four houses if they were built. It avoids the size and width of the buildings creating an
unrelieved; unbroken wall of development extending across the full width of the site. Whilst
views of the Harbour are not a feature of the streetscene, the gaps would allow glimpses of
longer distance views. Seen from the Harbour it would enhance the contribution of the
backdrop of trees, seen around the buildings, preserving the existing shoreline character.
The palette of materials proposed would compliment the design and would contribute
positively to the appearance of the streetscene and the emerging character.
The buildings are designed to maximise views of the harbour, which is typical of
harbourside buildings, including The Tides, 326 Sandbanks Road, the neighbouring site.
The gaps between the buildings and staggered layout would avoid the development
appearing as a single monolithic glass block on the shoreline. Furthermore the scheme
proposes to incorporate sliding screens for the rear windows which will create a degree of
variety as residents move screens to provide internal shading to suit their needs.
Buildings along Sandbanks Road, to the east of the site, follow the topography, rising up
with the land towards the apex of Evening Hill, whereas levels are more consistent across
the application site. Block B would be a storey higher than A and C and would be taller than
adjacent buildings. This would make it more prominent and dominant in both the
streetscene and from the Harbour. The top floor of each building is recessed on each
elevation. Coupled with different articulation; window arrangement; and materials, these are
appropriate architectural devices for reducing the apparent scale and bulk of the top floor.
Taken together with the siting of the buildings; intervening landscape; gaps between the
buildings; and the intervening garage car lifts, the additional height and prominence would
not render the buildings overbearing in the streetscene or harmful to the wider character of
the area. Furthermore when viewed from the Harbour there would be an extensive
backdrop of trees, and the buildings would be seen in the context of a much wider
panorama of shoreline and over greater distances, mitigating any potential harm.
Seen from the Harbour, the three garden apartments would appear as a plinth to the flatted
blocks. This is an emerging feature of development along the shoreline, as development
takes advantage of the opportunity afforded by the sloping topography with the introduction
of beachside properties. Their position within the site would not harm the shoreline
9
character since there are houses much closer to the shoreline along Firs Lane. They would
retain their landscape setting and would not be seen in the streetscene from Dorset Lake
Avenue. Whilst glimpsed view from Firs Lane will exist these views would be partially
screened by intervening landscape and boundary fencing.
Whilst the flatted buildings extend deep into the site, the plots are so large that sufficient
space remains to provide extensive landscaping across the rear garden to preserve the
landscape separation of buildings from the shoreline. Green sedum roofs would be
provided to the garden apartments and the car lifts at the front of the site, contributing to the
landscape enhancement of the site.
The previously developed nature of the site has resulted in the only important trees being
positioned towards the front boundary. Some are poor quality and would be removed
whilst others, most notably an Oak and 3 Holm Oaks make a significant positive contribution
to the streetscene and would be retained and protected through out the development and
thereafter retained.
The front gardens provide the opportunity for new tree planting to enhance the landscape
appearance of the area. Boundary planting on the waterside of the buildings is also
proposed which would contribute to the shoreline character.
The majority of the parking would be provided in a basement garage, minimising the
reliance on and visual impact of open parking on the frontage. Car lifts would provide
access to the basement, removing the need for a potentially intrusive access ramp serving
the basement.
The scheme proposes large buildings that would be more visible and prominent but, by
reason of their design; siting and layout; the size of the site; and existing and proposed
landscaping, the scale of the scheme can be accommodated without causing harm to the
existing predominant character of the area. In the streetscene and shoreline they would be
seen in the context of other large blocks of flats and are in an area where flats predominate,
thereby preserving the characteristic of flatted development.
Given the scale of the scheme it will inevitably have some impact on the amenities of
neighbours, most particularly at 32 Dorset Lake Avenue.
Block C would be close to no.32, but not as close as the approved replacement house on
the empty plot at no.34 would be. Nor would it be as deep alongside the rear garden of
no.32. Where Block C extends forward of the approved replacement house, towards the
road, it is angled away from the side elevation of no.32, resulting in separation distance of
10m. Whilst block C would be visible from the rear facing balconies and windows and
there would be some loss of outlook, the amenities of the occupiers of no. 32 would not be
materially harmed. Any overbearing or shading would not be materially greater than that
arising from the previously approved house. The scheme has been designed to minimise
overlooking towards no.32, and this can be reinforced by appropriate conditions to ensure
that measures intended to ensure the privacy of the neighbour are implemented.
Due to its siting, orientation and the design of 'The Tides' at 324 Sandbanks Road,
adequate outlook, light and privacy for the occupiers of those flats would be preserved. As
with no.32 Dorset Lake Avenue, block A would be visible from these neighbouring flats, but
10
it would not give rise to material harm to the amenities of the occupiers. There would be
views from the side of block A towards the windows and terraces on the north elevation of
this neighbouring block, however the angle, distance and topography would mitigate any
harm.
Flats at 21 Dorset Lake Avenue and houses in Avalon are sufficiently distant that their
amenities would be preserved. As with any development, they would be able to see the
proposals, however it would not materially harm their outlook, light or privacy.
The occupiers of the flats would benefit from attractive outlook across the harbour, external
terraces and balconies. A communal pool and spa suite; shared gardens with space for
different activities; and access to the waterfront with jetties and a slipway would be provided
for residents. 324 Sandbanks Road and the proposed blocks would each cause some
overshadowing to its neighbour, but not to a degree that would materially harm their
amenities, particularly given the gaps between the blocks. As with any scheme in such an
urban context, there would be a degree of mutual overlooking between the new flats within
the scheme and this would be addressed and managed by residents introducing the degree
of secondary screening they require.
The garden apartments would have large skylights and lightwells that would allow light to
penetrate into the lower level 'basement' rooms. They would also have large terraces and
access to the other shared elements, ensuring sufficient amenity.
Sufficient parking and manoeuvring space is provided in the basement garage, accessed by
car lifts, a solution acceptable to the Transportation Officer, and already accepted on other
schemes. Visitor parking; cycle racks; and bin stores are provided across the frontage to
meet the needs of the development. The four existing access points would be reduced to
two from Dorset Lake Avenue, providing an 'in' and 'out' arrangement with sufficient visibility
and set back gates to maintain highway and pedestrian safety.
The additional volume of traffic generated by this development would not undermine
highway safety on adjacent streets or compromise the free flow of traffic. Given the
numbers of vehicle movements that already occur, this would add a very small percentage
to the overall numbers.
No access to the site would be provided from Firs Lane thereby avoiding the prospect of
creating highway and pedestrian safety issues along that narrow road.
As the site abuts the Harbour, it would be subject to flooding over the life of the
development, however due to the topography and as with the other sites along this section
of the shoreline, all of the development is raised above the predicted flood levels and has
safe access to the public highway, for escape in the event of an emergency. Whilst there
are basement levels below the building, that are below the predicted flood levels, they are
entirely contained within the surrounding ground, do not include habitable accommodation
and can be constructed in a manner to prevent ingress of water. No access point to
habitable accommodation is below the 3.6m. AOD required to secure safety from tidal
inundation. Conditions could be used to prevent changes being made that would
undermine this position.
Surface and storm water drainage could discharge directly to the harbour, subject to
11
appropriate attenuation during high tides, and could limit the discharge flow rates.
There are no identified protected habitats on the site, or likelihood of protected species.
Due to the siting of the development it would not have a direct impact on the integrity of the
harbour SPA, SSSI, Ramsar Site. Conditions could be imposed to safeguard the harbour
habitats during construction, especially noisy activities whilst birds are overwintering in the
Harbour.
At more than 10 units the viability of the scheme has been externally assessed. Due to the
existing use value of the site and the high build costs and specification for a scheme of the
quality required for this location, it would not be sufficiently viable to make a contribution
towards the delivery of affordable housing in the Borough.
The site is making efficient use of land in the urban area that is close to services and
facilities. Being a new build it would be readily possible to deliver an energy efficient and
sustainable development. A condition could be imposed securing details of measures to
deliver 20% of the sites energy needs from renewable sources of energy.
Construction of such a scheme would have an impact on the amenities of local residents,
but would be a short term impact and not involve activities of techniques inappropriate to a
residential area. Construction operatives parking along DLA have been a feature of the
road for many years as multiple residents have chosen to develop their properties, without
causing severe conflict with highway safety. The LPA is not able to prevent lawful parking
on roads close to the site.
INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS
Mitigation in respect of the impact of the proposed development on recreational
facilities, Dorset Heathlands and Poole Harbour Special Protection Areas and strategic
transport infrastructure is provided for by the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging
Schedule adopted by the Council on 18th September 2012. In accordance with CIL
Regulation 28 (1) the Adopted Charging Schedule which came into effect in Poole on 2 nd
January 2013 confirms that all planning applications for residential dwellings are CIL liable
development and now required to pay CIL in accordance with the rates set out in the
Council’s Charging Schedule. The Borough of Poole’s adopted Regulation 123 List of
Infrastructure confirms that the infrastructure projects required to mitigate development’s
impact on recreational facilities, Dorset Heathlands and Poole Harbour Special Protection
Areas and strategic transport infrastructure will be provided for by CIL instead of (and not in
addition to) Planning obligations secured through S106 of the Town and Country Planning
Act The proposal therefore accords with Core Strategy Policies PCS15, PCS28, PCS 36
and PCS37, DPD Policies DM9, IN1 and IN2 and Dorset Heathlands SPD.
In addition, a new planning contribution also came into effect 8th April 2015. The site is
beyond 400 metres of Heathland SSSI, but within 5km and as such, the proposal additional
net increase in dwellings may be acceptable subject to appropriate mitigation of impact
upon heathlands. The contribution will be taken from all qualifying residential development
to fund Strategic Access Management and Monitoring as part of the Dorset Heathland
Planning Framework, the overarching strategy for managing the adverse effects of
development upon the internationally important Dorset Heathlands. The charge is based
on the cost of delivering SAMM in Poole and is £355 per additional house/£242 per
additional flat + admin fee. This proposal requires such a contribution and would
12
be payable either through a Unilateral Undertaking or Section 111 agreement. The
applicant has submitted a Section 111 Agreement and paid the contribution of £5,921.00 +
admin fee.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
If this development is granted permission and the dwellings built, the Council could receive
up to £30,219 in each of the following six years from the dwellings completion, a total of up
to £181,314 in government grant under the New Homes Bonus. The Government are
however currently reviewing the operation of the New Homes Bonus which could
significantly reduce its value.
This application currently falls into CIL Zone A which at present has a CIL chargeable rate of
£150 per square metre of chargeable residential floorspace. The chargeable residential
floorspace for this development will be calculated against this rate and indexed against the
BCIS All-in Tender Price Index. The precise CIL liability in relation to this application will be
confirmed in the CIL Regulation 65 Liability Notice which will be issued as soon as
practicable after the day on which a planning permission first permits development.
Local financial considerations are material to the decision on this application. It is a matter
for the decision maker to conclude how much weight should be attached to those
considerations.
The planning merits of the scheme stand alone, and whilst financial considerations are of
obvious benefit to the Council, those considerations are not of such significance to outweigh
any harm identified.
CONCLUSION
The scheme proposes a significant change in the appearance of the site and introduces
large buildings that would be visible from nearby properties and would be seen in the
streetscene of Dorset Lake Avenue and Sandbanks Road and from the Harbour. Flatted
development would be consistent with the character of this part of the streetscene and the
layout, siting; gaps; and landscape would enhance the existing character of the area. The
proposals would not materially harm the amenities of neighbours and preserves highway
and pedestrian safety.
Whilst it is acknowledge that there are a number of residents who object to the proposal,
many of which consider that flats do not predominate, and also acknowledged that where a
proposal is contrary to the Development Plan that scheme should be Refused, unless other
Material Considerations indicate otherwise.
In this case, however, having regard to the substantial difference in the characteristics to the
north-east part of Dorset Lake Avenue to that in the south and immediately opposite, the
character of this site is considered to form part of the visual context to the south where flats
predominate. The proposal in this regard, and in all other respects, accords with the
Development Plan and the application is therefore recommended for approval. Any
Development that accords with the Development Plan is considered to be Sustainable
Development where there is a presumption in favour of development.
RECOMMENDATION
13
It is therefore recommended that this application be Granted With CIL Contribution
1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))
2. PL01 (Plans Listing)
3. GN030 (Sample of Materials)
4. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the windows
annotated OG on the approved plans on the side elevation of block C 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 Policies PCS05 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009 & DM1(v) of the Site
Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies 2012.
5. GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 2015 and the Town and Country Planning Act
1990 or any subsequent re-enactments thereof, no further balcony, roof garden
or similar amenity area, other than those marked as such on the approved plans
shall be formed. Nor shall the green roof of the garden apartments, as
indicated on the approved plans, be accessible as an amenity area.
Reason To protect the amenity and privacy of adjoining residential properties and in
accordance with Policy DM1(v) of the Site Specific Allocations & Development
Management Policies 2012.
6. TR010 (Arb Method Statement-Submission Required)
7. LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)
8. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)
9. HW010 (No Other Access Except That Shown)
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any order revoking and re-enacting that
Order, no access, vehicular or pedestrian, other than that shown on the
approved plan, shall be formed to the site.
Reason In the interests of highway safety, most particularly along Firs Lane and in
accordance with Policy PCS15 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009, and DM7 and
DM8 of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management DPD Policies
2012.
14
10. AA01 (Non standard Condition)
Prior to the commencement of development, details of the car lifts to be used
shall be submitted to and approved in writing. The agreed details shall then be
implemented and thereafter maintained in accordance with the manufacturers
instructions and retained.
Reason.
In order to achieve appropriate and safe access for motorists and cyclists to the
basement garage and in accordance with PCS15 of the Poole Core Strategy
2009, and DM07 & DM08 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and
Development Management policies 2012.
11. DR040 (Sustainable Urban Drainage)
Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme for the provision of
sustainable urban drainage shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by,
the Local Planning Authority. The drainage works shall be implemented in
accordance with the approved scheme and thereafter retained.
Reason To prevent the increased risk of flooding by ensuring the provision of a
satisfactory means of surface water disposal.
12. GN162 (Renewable Energy - Residential) (20%)
13. RC010 (Remove Residential Permitted Development)
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 2015, and the Town and Country Planning Act
1990, or any subsequent re-enactment thereof, no alterations or extensions
shall be erected to the garden apartments or additional accesses formed to the
basement without express planning permission first being obtained from the
Local Planning Authority.
Reason Due to the proximity to flood zones and consequences for human safety from
flooding and in accordance with Policy PCS34 Poole Core Strategy 2009.
14. HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)
15. AA01 (Non standard Condition)
Prior to first occupation of the scheme the bin stores shown on the approved
plans shall be available for use and thereafter maintained and kept clear for
such purposes thereafter.
Reason
In order to make appropriate provisions for storage and collection of refuse in
accordance with DM01 and DM07 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and
Development Management policies 2012.
15
16. AA01 (Non standard Condition)
No external construction works related to the construction of foundations shall
be undertaken between the 31st October and the 31st March.
Reason:
In order to avoid harmful disturbance to protected bird species in Poole Harbour
and in accordance with PCS29 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009, and DM09 of
the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies
2012.
Informative Notes
1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval)
2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval)
3. IN81 (SAMM Approval)
4. IN82 (Demolition of Buildings)
16
ITEM NO
APPLICATION NO.
APPLICATION TYPE
SITE ADDRESS
02
APP/16/01713/F
Full
25 Beckhampton Road, Poole, BH15 4PH
PROPOSALS
REGISTERED
APPLICANT
AGENT
Sever land & erect 1 No. 3 bed semi detached house with
parking.
21 November, 2016
Mr Hardy
Anders Roberts & Assoc
WARD
Hamworthy East
CASE OFFICER
Caroline Palmer
INTRODUCTION
This application is brought before committee at the request of Councillor White because of
residents' concerns.
Recommendation for Grant With CIL Contribution
THE PROPOSAL
Sever land & erect 1 No. 3 bed semi detached house with parking.
MAIN ISSUES
The principal issues for consideration in this case relate to:
The impact on the character of the area and the street scene.

The impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties.

The impact on highways and parking.

Sustainability issues.

Section 106 Agreement/CIL compliance
SITE DESCRIPTION
The character of the area is predominantly one of detached houses and semi-detached
houses, similar to the one that currently occupies the application site.
No. 25 has been extensively extended and altered to include a two-storey side extension
which incorporates an integral garage; a single storey rear extension; and, most recently, a
conservatory at the rear (2005).
17
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
None.
PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE
2016: To erect an attached dwelling to an existing property. Positive response given
subject to detailed elevation and site plans (PREA/16/00043)
CONSULTATIONS
Natural England: no objection subject to CIL.
The Head of Transportation Services: supports the proposals.
REPRESENTATIONS
Representations have been received in which the following concerns are raised:
 Impact on parking, access and highway safety.
 Impact on light to neighbouring properties.
 Overdevelopment of the site.
 Drainage issues.
 Bin collection issues.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
POLICY AND GUIDANCE
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
National Planning Policy Framework (Adopted March 2012)
LOCAL CONTEXT
The following policies are listed as applying to this application:
Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009):
PCS23
Local Distinctiveness
PCS05
Broad Locations for Residential Development
PCS31
Sustainable Energy - General
PCS32
Sustainable Homes
PCS35
Energy And Resources Statements
PCS37
The Role of Developer Contributions in Shaping Places
PCS28
Dorset Heaths International Designations
Poole Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies DPD (Adopted April
2012)
18
Development Management Policies:
DM1
Design
DM7
Accessibility and Safety
DM8
Demand Management
DM9
Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity
PLANNING JUDGEMENT
The impact on the character of the area and the street scene
The proposed new house would be attached to no.25 to create a short terrace. Whilst the
character of the area is predominantly one of detached houses and semi-detached houses,
the creation of a terrace in this location would preserve the character of the area and the
street scene, given that the scale and design of the proposed house would be similar to the
existing.
The location of the existing house on a corner plot means that it occupies one of the larger
plots in the area. The subdivision of this plot would create two plots that would both reflect
typical plot sizes in the area. Given the pattern of development in the area and the size and
location of the corner plot, the proposed footprint would assemble sufficient land so as to
ensure that the scheme would preserve the character of the area.
The impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties
The proposed house would be parallel with the existing house at no.25 and as such would
cause no material overlooking; loss of light; or outlook to no.25 because of its orientation.
Whilst it would project beyond the first floor rear elevation of no. 25, the dropped rear eaves
height of the proposed house would reduce any impact on the light and outlook currently
enjoyed by an adjacent 'dressing room' window. Two windows to the side elevation of no. 25
would be lost, but these are to the integral garage and would not cause any material loss of
amenity. The proposed house would be sufficiently distant from the houses opposite and to
the rear of the site so as not to cause material harm to their light, outlook or privacy.
The impact on highways and parking
The existing and proposed house would both have two parking spaces and pedestrian
visibility splays on both sides of the accesses. Two parking spaces on the frontage would
serve the existing house and two at the rear would serve the proposed house.
Transportation Services support this arrangement.
Sustainability issues
The Energy and Resources Statement submitted states how the scheme would comply with
the provisions of Policy PS32 of the Poole Core Strategy. A condition should be imposed to
secure the use of on-site renewable energy sources to meet a minimum of 10% of predicted
energy use of the residential development.
Drainage issues would be addressed through the Building Regulations process. The bins
would be brought out on collection day and taken back in, as is the case for all nearby
houses.
INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS
Mitigation in respect of the impact of the proposed development on recreational
facilities, Dorset Heathlands and Poole Harbour Special Protection Areas and strategic
transport infrastructure is provided for by the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging
19
Schedule adopted by the Council on 18th September 2012. In accordance with CIL
Regulation 28 (1) the Adopted Charging Schedule which came into effect in Poole on 2nd
January 2013 confirms that all planning applications for residential dwellings are CIL liable
development and now required to pay CIL in accordance with the rates set out in the
Council’s Charging Schedule. The Borough of Poole’s adopted Regulation 123 List of
Infrastructure confirms that the infrastructure projects required to mitigate development’s
impact on recreational facilities, Dorset Heathlands and Poole Harbour Special Protection
Areas and strategic transport infrastructure will be provided for by CIL instead of (and not in
addition to) Planning obligations secured through S106 of the Town and Country Planning
Act The proposal therefore accords with Core Strategy Policies PCS15, PCS28, PCS 36
and PCS37, DPD Policies DM9, IN1 and IN2 and Dorset Heathlands SPD.
In addition, a new planning contribution also came into effect 8th April 2015. The site is
beyond 400 metres of Heathland SSSI, but within 5km and as such, the proposal additional
net increase in dwellings may be acceptable subject to appropriate mitigation of impact
upon heathlands. The contribution will be taken from all qualifying residential development
to fund Strategic Access Management and Monitoring as part of the Dorset Heathland
Planning Framework, the overarching strategy for managing the adverse effects of
development upon the internationally important Dorset Heathlands. The charge is based
on the cost of delivering SAMM in Poole and is £355 per additional house/£242 per
additional flat + admin fee. This proposal requires such a contribution and would be
payable either through a Unilateral Undertaking or Section 111 agreement. The applicant
has submitted a Section 111 Agreement and paid the contribution of £355+ admin fee
upfront.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
If this development is granted permission and the dwellings built, the Council could receive
up to £1439 in each of the following six years from the dwellings completion a total of up to
£8634 in government grant under the New Homes Bonus. The Government are currently
introducing changes to the operation of the New Homes Bonus which could significantly
reduce its value.
This application currently falls into CIL Zone C which at present has a CIL chargeable rate of
£75 per square metre of chargeable residential floorspace. The chargeable residential
floorspace for this development will be calculated against this rate and indexed against the
BCIS All-in Tender Price Index. The precise CIL liability in relation to this application will be
confirmed in the CIL Regulation 65 Liability Notice which will be issued as soon as
practicable after the day on which a planning permission first permits development.
Local financial considerations are material to the decision on this application. It is a matter
for the decision maker to conclude how much weight should be attached to those
considerations.
The planning merits of the scheme stand alone, and whilst financial considerations are of
obvious benefit to the Council, those considerations are not of such significance to outweigh
any harm identified.
20
CONCLUSION
For the reasons given in the Planning Judgement section above, the proposal would comply
with the provisions of the relevant policies in the Core Strategy and the Site Specific
Allocations & Development Management Policies DPD.
RECOMMENDATION
It is therefore recommended that this application be Granted With CIL Contribution
1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))
2. GN050 (Matching Materials)
3. GN162 (Renewable Energy - Residential) (10%)
4. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)
5. HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)
6. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)
7. PL01 (Plans Listing)
Informative Notes
1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval)
2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval)
3. IN13 (Kerb Crossing to be Lowered)
21
ITEM NO
APPLICATION NO.
APPLICATION TYPE
SITE ADDRESS
03
APP/16/01890/F
Householder
72 Kings Avenue, Poole, BH14 9QJ
PROPOSALS
REGISTERED
APPLICANT
AGENT
Extensions and alterations to existing bungalow to form a
two storey house.
28 December, 2016
Mr & Mrs Sandever
Tony Holt Design
WARD
Penn Hill
CASE OFFICER
Chloe Harrod
INTRODUCTION
This application is brought before committee because the application site is adjacent to a
Councillor's house.
Recommendation for Grant with Conditions
THE PROPOSAL
Extensions and alterations to existing bungalow to form a two- storey house.
MAIN ISSUES
The principal issues for consideration in this case relate to: Appearance of the proposal
 Impact on the streetscene and character of the area
 Impact on neighbouring privacy and amenities
 Parking provisions
 Protected trees
SITE DESCRIPTION
The application site contains a detached bungalow and is situated in a wholly residential
area. The site provides off-road parking for at least three cars on a driveway to the side of
the house. The site sits between another bungalow and a new development of two
semi-detached two storey houses, and has a wide frontage to Kings Avenue. A large tree in
the garden of 16 Milton Road overhangs the rear garden.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
70 Kings Avenue
None
22
72 Kings Avenue
2015: Demolition of the existing building and the erection of a pair of semi-detached
dwellings with associated access and parking. Approved and currently being implemented
(APP/14/01669/F)
A subsequent scheme was approved in 2016 for a similar development. This has not been
implemented.
16 Milton Road
January 2017: Fell Macrocarpa (TPO 40/1969). Approved (TP/16/00937/X)
37 St Osmunds Road
2014: Partial demolition and provision of extensions to existing single family dwelling.
Approved (APP/14/00254/F)
2017: Demolition of the existing dwelling and erection of a replacement dwelling. Current
(APP/16/01774/F)
PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE
None.
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION
None.
CONSULTATIONS
None.
REPRESENTATIONS
None.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
POLICY AND GUIDANCE
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
National Planning Policy Framework (Adopted March 2012)
LOCAL CONTEXT
The following policies are listed as applying to this application.
23
Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009)
PCS23
Local Distinctiveness
Poole Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies DPD (Adopted April
2012)
Development Management Policies:
DM1
Design
DM8
Demand Management
PLANNING JUDGEMENT
The proposal would extend the existing bungalow at ground floor and add a first floor. The
design of the proposal is significantly different to the existing bungalow in terms of materials
and scale, but would sit comfortably on the plot and, given the variety of nearby
development, it would not be out of character. The proposal would sit comfortably on the
plot, whilst extending its width across the plot, and would still retain a spacious character to
the site, and would not constitute overdevelopment of the site. The proposal would be
situate between a bungalow at No.74, and two new build semi-detached houses which have
a partial two storey appearance, however given the mixed development and large gaps
between properties, it would integrate well into the streetscene and preserve the existing
character of the area.
The proposed development would be set back from both side boundaries; would have a
further first floor setback on either side; and would have reduced eaves height to the
adjacent bungalow no.74. The proposals would not be materially overbearing to any
neighbouring home. The proposal would give rise to some additional shading of
neighbouring properties at the start and end of the day, however this would not be so
marked so to cause material harm to neighbouring amenities.
There would be no loss of privacy to neighbouring properties from ground floor windows or
windows at first floor on the front elevations. A first-floor window in the east elevation
serving a dressing area/en-suite could reasonably be obscure glazed to prevent mutual
overlooking with velux windows serving bedrooms in the new development at No.70 Kings
Avenue.
Windows on the first-floor rear elevation to bedrooms and an en-suite would have views into
neighbouring gardens, most particularly into the rear garden of no.37 St. Osmunds Road.
There is however already views across this garden from adjacent homes on Milton Road
and the 14m. rear garden at the application site would provides sufficient separation to
prevent any material loss of privacy to the bungalow or garden at no.37 Osmunds Road. No.
37 does itself benefit from an extant planning consent for extensions and alterations to
create a two-storey dwelling, and should this be constructed, the relationship between the
two homes would be further improved. A current application at no.37 for a new dwelling
would give rise to essentially the same relationship with no. 74 as the previous approval for
extensions and alterations.
As a result of the proposed side extensions there would be some loss of car parking on the
site, but the proposed garage and hardstanding to the frontage could accommodate at least
24
three cars and the proposals therefore comply with the Council's Parking SPD.
There is a protected Monterey Cypress (Cupressus Macrocarpa) adjacent to the application
site in the rear garden of no.16 Milton Road and the single storey rear extension would
encroach into the Root Protection Zone of this tree. The Local Planning Authority has
nevertheless already taken a view on the amenity value of this tree and consent for it to be
felled was given in January 2017.
INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS
Not applicable.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Not applicable.
CONCLUSION
The proposal would sit comfortably on the plot; would integrate well into the streetscene;
would preserve the residential character of the area; would not give rise to harm to
neighbouring amenities of privacy, subject to an obscure glazing condition; would have
sufficient off-road parking; and would not cause undue harm to a protected tree. The
application is recommended for approval is recommended for approval.
RECOMMENDATION
It is therefore recommended that this application be Granted with Conditions subject to
the following:
Conditions
1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))
2. AA01 (Non standard Condition)
The materials to be used for the external wall and roof shall match those
detailed on the application form for this application, APP/16/01890/F.
Reason To ensure a satisfactory visual relationship of the new development and that
existing and in accordance with Policy PCS23A of the Poole Core Strategy
(February 2009).
3. GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)
4. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Windows)
Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the window at first
floor on the east elevation serving a dressing area and ensuite on the approved
plan (drawing no. 004) 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.
25
Reason To protect the amenity and privacy of the adjoining properties and in accordance
with Policy DM1(v) of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management
Policies (April 2012).
5. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)
6. PL01 (Plans Listing)
Informative Notes
1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval)
26
ITEM NO
APPLICATION NO.
APPLICATION TYPE
SITE ADDRESS
04
APP/16/01774/F
Full
37 St Osmunds Road, Poole, BH14 9JT
PROPOSALS
REGISTERED
APPLICANT
AGENT
Demolition of the existing dwelling and erection of a
replacement dwelling.
14 December, 2016
Mr & Mrs Toll
ECA Architecture & Planning
WARD
Penn Hill
CASE OFFICER
Steve Llewellyn
INTRODUCTION
This application is brought before committee because it is adjacent to the home of a
Councillor.
Recommendation for Grant With CIL Contribution
THE PROPOSAL
Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of a replacement dwelling.
MAIN ISSUES
The principal issues for consideration in this case relate to:






Impact on Street Scene and the Character of the Area
Impact on Residential Amenity
Highway Issues
Impact on Protected Trees
Sustainability Issues
CIL Compliance
SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is located on the east side of St Osmunds Road, a short distance to the north of its
junction with Kings Avenue, and is currently occupied by a single-storey detached
bungalow. The property has a hipped roof form with a subservient projecting gable to the
front elevation.
There is a vehicular access at either end of the site frontage to St Osmunds Road, albeit
that the southernmost access does not benefit from having a dropped kerb crossing, with a
low wooden fence with a hedge boundary enclosing the front boundary of the site between
27
the vehicular accesses. To the front of the dwelling, the site is laid to hardstand with a
driveway running along the northern side of the property and leading to a detached, pitched
roof garage that is set behind the rear elevation of the dwelling.
The site is located within a section of St Osmunds Road that rises from the south to the
north and therefore the existing dwelling is set a slightly higher level than 74 Kings Avenue
to the south and slightly lower level than 35 St Osmunds Road to the north. To the north, 35
St Osmunds Road is also a single storey detached bungalow, whilst 74 Kings Avenue to the
south is orientated to front Kings Avenue with its rear elevation facing the application site.
This latter property is separated from the boundary with the application site by a detached
flat roof garage and driveway that is separated from the property and the remainder of its
curtilage by fencing. This part of St Osmunds Road is characterised by mainly detached
dwellings of varying types, architectural styles, materials, sizes and ages including single
storey bungalows, chalet style bungalows and two-storey houses.
The site is covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO No. 40/1969) and contains a mature
Sweet Chestnut adjacent to the front boundary of the site and a Sweet Chestnut to the rear
garden and close to the rear boundary.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
Application Site
2014: Partial demolition and provision of extensions to existing dwelling. Approved
(APP/14/00254/F).
2015: Extensions and alterations to existing dwelling with the formation of a grass roof
terrace (revised scheme) (APP/15/00810). Refused for the following reason:
The proposed rear terrace would give rise to levels of overlooking and perceived
overlooking to No.72 Kings Avenue and to No.35 St Osmonds Road which would materially
harm the privacy and amenities of their occupiers and which would therefore be contrary to
the provisions of Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy (adopted 2009).
No.70 Kings Avenue
March 2015: Demolish the existing bungalow and erect a pair of semi-detached
dwellings with associated access and parking. Approved (APP/14/01669/F).
July 2015: Demolish the existing building and the erection of two detached dwellings
with associated access and parking (revised scheme). Refused and subsequently
dismissed at appeal (APP/15/00701/F).
June 2016: Demolish existing buildings and erect pair of semi-detached houses with
parking and garages. Approved (APP/16/00691/F).
No.72 Kings Avenue
2016 – Extensions and alterations to existing bungalow to form a two storey house. This
application is Current (APP/16/01890/F).
28
PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE
None.
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION
None.
CONSULTATIONS
Head of Transportation Services: Supports the application subject to a condition requiring
the access, turning space and vehicle parking within the site to be provided prior to the
occupation of the dwelling.
REPRESENTATIONS
None
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
POLICY AND GUIDANCE
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012)
National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) (March 2014)
LOCAL CONTEXT
The following policies are listed as applying to this application.
Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009)
PCS05
PCS08
PCS15
PCS23
PCS28
PCS31
PCS32
PCS35
PCS37
Broad Locations for Residential Development
Lifetime Homes
Access and Movement
Local Distinctiveness
Dorset Heaths International Designations
Sustainable Energy - General
Sustainable Homes
Energy and Resources Statements
The Role of Developer Contributions in Shaping Places
Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (Adopted April
2012)
Development Management Policies
29
DM1
DM7
DM8
Design
Accessibility and Safety
Demand Management
Delivering Poole’s Infrastructure DPD (Adopted April 2012)
IN1
IN2
Poole’s Infrastructure Delivery Framework
Developer Contributions
Supplementary Planning Document
Parking and Highway Layout in Development (Adopted July 2011)
The Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework 2015-2020 (Adopted November 2015)
PLANNING JUDGEMENT
Planning permission was granted in April 2014 for the partial demolition of the existing
dwelling and the erection of extensions to remodel the existing dwelling to create a
two-storey house (APP/14/00254/F). This current application seeks planning permission to
demolish the existing dwelling and to erect a replacement dwelling that would be of
substantially the same footprint, design and scale/massing as the resultant dwelling of the
previously approved scheme. The current proposals include minor alterations to the internal
room layout and fenestration arrangements that alter the external appearance of the
proposed house and which include:
 Removal of ground floor window to lounge to the side (south) elevation;
 Repositioning of ground floor window to living space to the side (south) elevation;
 Removal of ground floor window to kitchen to the side (north) elevation;
 Full height ground floor window to kitchen to rear (east) elevation amended to French
doors;
 Additional sky light added above kitchen to flat roof of single storey element to side
(north) elevation; and
 Reduction of central recess to entrance door and wall above between the front gables to
the front (west) elevation.
Since the approval of the previous scheme (APP/14/00254/F) in April 2014, there has not
been any change in the site circumstances or planning policy context that would indicate
that, in principle, a dwelling of the design and scale/massing as previously approved should
no longer be considered acceptable in the context of the street scene of St Osmunds Road.
The acceptability of the proposed scheme, therefore, rests with an assessment of the
detailed design of the proposed replacement dwelling and whether the amendments to the
external appearance resulting from the altered fenestration arrangements in comparison to
the previously approved scheme are acceptable.
Impact on Street Scene and Character of the Area
The site is located within an established residential area where the principal of residential
development is accepted. Whilst the current proposal would result in the complete
demolition of the existing bungalow, it is not considered to be of any particular architectural
merit or value in terms of its contribution to the character and appearance of the area.
Therefore, in principle, its demolition is not considered to be harmful.
30
St Osmunds Road is of a predominantly residential character and comprises a mixture of
house types; architectural styles; materials; sizes and ages. The part of the eastern side of
the road in which the application site is located is characterised by mainly single-storey and
chalet style bungalows although there are two-storey houses closer to the junction with
Munster Road. The opposite side of the road consists mainly of two storey houses. In
assessing the previous application, it was stated that the prevailing character of the area is
single and two storey dwellings with pitched roofs and a window design that has a horizontal
emphasis. The underlying pattern of development of the area is clearly shaped by
properties following a conventional street pattern with a main building frontage set behind
front gardens and set within reasonable sized plots that creates a generally spacious
character to the development along the road.
In determining the previously approved scheme, it was accepted that the contemporary
design, form and materials of the proposed resultant dwelling, together with its scale and
massing, would be in keeping with and integrate into the street scene given the mixed
character of the built form that is evident in St Osmunds Road. In this regard, it was stated
that the contemporary design incorporates a number of elements that reflect the form of
existing houses in the street, such as pitched roofs and a horizontal window emphasis,
whilst the proposed materials that comprised of render and horizontal timber cladding with
plain roof tiles were considered to be appropriate to the setting. Although the previous
scheme included a small increase in the ridge height above the height of the existing
bungalow, it was also determined that the scale of the resultant dwelling would fit within the
existing street scene without causing additional harm. As such, it was concluded that the
resultant dwelling would comfortably assimilate into the street scene and surrounding area.
With regards to the current proposal, it is evident that the proposed dwelling would be of the
same design and scale/massing as the previously approved scheme with the exception of
some minor alterations to the fenestration arrangements that would slightly alter the
external appearance of the building. The proposed alterations to the fenestration
arrangements to the side and rear elevations would not materially alter the overall design of
the proposed replacement dwelling in comparison to that previously approved. Similarly, the
slight reduction to the depth of the recessed central section of the proposed dwelling
between the two gabled elements to the front elevation would not cause any harm to the
appearance of the dwelling within the street scene. As such, the current proposals would
not cause any harm to the character and appearance of the street scene of St Osmunds
Road and surrounding area and would continue to respect the residential character of the
area in accordance with the provisions of Policies PCS5 and PCS23 of the Poole Core
Strategy (February 2009).
Impact on Residential Amenity
In determining the previously approved scheme it was accepted that the proposal would
result in an increase to the overall scale, bulk and massing of the built form in comparison to
that of the existing bungalow. Notwithstanding the site being to the south of 35 St Osmunds
Road, that has several windows in the southern elevation and a rear conservatory close to
the boundary with the application site, it was concluded that neither the additional height nor
increased depth of the proposals would result in materially harmful shading or loss of light to
no.35. It was recognised that the proposals would impact on the outlook from windows in
the south (side) elevation of no.35, including a kitchen window, but this would not cause
31
material harm. Similarly, the separation distance that would be retained with 74 Kings
Avenue, together with the orientation between the two sites, were considered to not give
rise to an overbearing relationship or give rise to any material loss of light or outlook. It was
also concluded that given the separation distance involved, the increased height; bulk; and
closer proximity of the proposals to the adjacent homes in Milton Road, to the rear of the
site, would not lead to any material loss of light or outlook to these properties.
The proposed replacement dwelling would occupy the same footprint as the previously
approved scheme, with the exception of a minor reduction in the depth of the central
recessed element to the front elevation, and would also be of the same overall bulk, scale
and massing. As a result, the proposed replacement dwelling would not appear any more
dominant and would not give rise to any greater loss of outlook, loss of sunlight/daylight or
additional overshadowing to any of the neighbouring properties than the impacts that have
previously been determined to be acceptable. As a result, there is no reason to now reach a
different conclusion in respect of these matters.
The previously approved scheme included a first-floor obscure-glazed window to a study in
the south (side) elevation facing 74 Kings Avenue. This window is retained but is now
proposed to serve a bathroom and is shown to be obscure glazed. This can be secured by
condition. The proposal still includes a full-height ground floor window to the ‘living space’ to
this side elevation, albeit repositioned slightly further forward than in the previously
approved scheme. Given the existing boundary screening to 72 and 74 Kings Avenue this
would not give rise to any overlooking. The previously approved scheme also included a
secondary window to the lounge to the south (side) elevation which is now omitted.
The previously approved scheme included a ground-floor obscure glazed kitchen window to
the north (side) elevation facing 35 St Osmunds Road which is now omitted. The first floor
windows remain unaltered from the previously approved scheme and include windows
serving a bathroom and staircase. These could allow some mutual overlooking of the
windows in the side elevation of No.35 and it would be reasonable to condition that these
windows are obscure glazed.
The rear windows remain unaltered from those previously approved with the exception that
ground floor 'French doors' are now proposed to the kitchen rather than a full height window.
The rear elevation includes full height glazed windows with Juliet style balconies serving
bedrooms that would allow increased mutual overlooking of the adjacent dwellings relative
to the existing situation but, as previously determined, the intervening vegetation; trees; and
separation distance of approximately 29m. to the homes in Milton Road at the rear of the
site would ensure that there would be no material loss of privacy. Any overlooking would
therefore be no more harmful than the degree of overlooking that already occurs from those
properties towards the application site. The proposal also includes a flat roof area to the rear
elevation of the proposed house and a condition to prevent it being used as a balcony/roof
terrace should again be imposed.
The proposals are therefore in accordance with the provisions of Policy DM1 of the Poole
Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD which seeks to
protect neighbouring amenity and ensure that development proposals do not result in
overbearing or oppressive development; a loss of outlook; loss of sunlight and daylight; or a
loss of privacy.
32
Highway Issues
There is an existing vehicular access opening at either end of the site frontage to St
Osmunds Road, although only the northernmost of these benefits from having a dropped
kerb crossing. The current proposal would retain of the existing vehicular access openings
and form a hard surfaced forecourt to the frontage to allow an “in and out” access
arrangement to St Osmunds Road. This would ensure that vehicles could enter and exit the
site in a forward gear. The proposed access arrangements are acceptable.
The hard surfaced forecourt area would provide space for at least two parking spaces,
which would accord with the Council’s adopted parking SPD. The transport/highway needs
of the proposed development would therefore be met and the Head of Transportation
Services supports the proposal.
Impact on Protected Trees
The application is supported by an Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) that sets out
general principles for tree protection measures, including tree protection barriers; ground
guard protection; and height restrictors intended to prevent high vehicles damaging
overhanging branches. Their implementation would ensure that the preserved Sweet
Chestnut trees on the site would not be harmed during the demolition and construction
works. To avoid damage to tree roots, the report also identifies a methodology to be
followed in respect of the resurfacing of the drive and forecourt or in the event of the removal
of the existing hard surfacing within the root protection areas. The AMS demonstrates that
the proposed development can be achieved without detriment to the protected trees within
and adjacent to the site. The measures set out in the AMS can be secured by condition.
Sustainability Issues
Being a new build house, it would be required to meet the latest Building Regulations,
therefore achieving a high level of energy efficiency and sustainability. The Energy and
Resources statement submitted as part of this application sets out how the proposed
development could comply with the requirements of Policies PCS32 and PCS35 to achieve
10% of the predicted energy needs for the proposed dwellings. This can be secured by
condition.
INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS
Mitigation in respect of the impact of the proposed development on recreational
facilities, Dorset Heathlands and Poole Harbour Special Protection Areas and strategic
transport infrastructure is provided for by the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging
Schedule adopted by the Council on 18th September 2012. In accordance with CIL
Regulation 28 (1) the Adopted Charging Schedule which came into effect in Poole on 2nd
January 2013 confirms that all planning applications for residential dwellings are CIL liable
development and now required to pay CIL in accordance with the rates set out in the
Council’s Charging Schedule. The Borough of Poole’s adopted Regulation 123 List of
Infrastructure confirms that the infrastructure projects required to mitigate development’s
impact on recreational facilities, Dorset Heathlands and Poole Harbour Special Protection
Areas and strategic transport infrastructure will be provided for by CIL instead of (and not in
addition to) Planning obligations secured through S106 of the Town and Country Planning
33
Act. The proposal therefore accords with Core Strategy Policies PCS15, PCS28, PCS36
and PCS37, DPD Policies DM9, IN1 and IN2 and Dorset Heathlands SPD.
In addition, a new planning contribution also came into effect on 8th April 2015. The site is
beyond 400 metres of the Heathland SSSI, but with 5km, and as such the proposed
additional net increase in dwellings may be acceptable subject to appropriate mitigation of
the impact upon heathlands. The contribution will be taken from all qualifying residential
development to fund Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) as part of the
Dorset Heathland Planning Framework, the overarching strategy for managing the adverse
effects of development upon the internationally important Dorset Heathlands. The charge is
based on the cost of delivering SAMM in Poole and is £355 per additional house/£242 per
additional flat + admin fee. This proposal, however, does not require such a contribution as
it does not result in a net increase in dwellings.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
If this development is granted permission and the new dwelling built, the Council would not
receive any Government grant under the New Homes Bonus as there is not a net gain in
residential units.
This application currently falls into CIL Zone C which at present has a CIL chargeable rate of
£75 per square metre of chargeable residential floor space. The chargeable residential floor
space for this development will be calculated against this rate and indexed against the BCIS
All-in Tender Price Index. The precise CIL liability in relation to this application will be
confirmed in the CIL Regulation 65 Liability Notice which will be issued as soon as
practicable after the day on which a planning permission first permits development.
Local financial considerations are material to the decision on this application. It is a matter
for the decision maker to conclude how much weight should be attached to those
considerations.
The planning merits of the scheme stand alone, and whilst financial considerations are of
obvious benefit to the Council, those considerations are not of such significance to outweigh
any harm identified. The scheme should be approved in any event.
RECOMMENDATION
It is therefore recommended that this application be Granted With CIL Contribution
1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))
2. PL01 (Plans Listing)
3. GN030 (Sample of Materials)
4. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the first floor
window to the bathroom to the side (south) elevation and the first floor windows
to the bathroom and the staircase to the side (north) elevation of the dwelling,
hereby approved, 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
34
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 DM1 (v) of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and
Development Management Policies DPD (April 2012).
5. GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)
6. GN162 (Renewable Energy - Residential) (10%)
7. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)
8. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)
9. TR030 (Implementation of Details of Arb M Stmt)
10. TR040 (Pre-commencement Meeting)
11. TR110 (Arboricultural Supervision)
Informative Notes
1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval)
2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval)
3. IN13 (Kerb Crossing to be Lowered)
4. IN82 (Demolition of Buildings)
35