BOROUGH OF POOLE PLANNING COMMITTEE 16 JULY 2015

Transcription

1 BOROUGH OF POOLE PLANNING COMMITTEE 16 JULY 2015 The Meeting commenced at 1:00pm and concluded at 3:40 pm. Present: Councillor Pawlowski (Chairman) Councillor M Pope (Vice-Chairman) Councillors Bagwell, Burden, Mrs Butt, Challinor, M Le Poidevin, Parker and Wilson. Others in Attendance: Councillors Ms Atkinson, Brown and Mrs Newell Members of the public present: Approximately 18 PC APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE There were no apologies for absence. PC DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTEREST PC MINUTES There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interest. Other Non-Statutory Interests Members Wished to be Recorded All Councillors had been lobbied on Plans List Item Numbers 6 and 9. Councillors Bagwell, Mrs Butt, Challinor, Le Poidevin, Pawlowski, Pope, Parker and Wilson have been lobbied on Plans List Item Numbers 2, 4 and 8. Councillors Bagwell and Wilson have been lobbied on Plans List Item Number 3. Councillors Bagwell, Mrs Butt, Le Poidevin, Parker, Pawlowski, Pope and Wilson have been lobbied on Plans List Item Number 10. RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Meetings of the Planning Committee dated 16 June 2015, having been previously circulated, be taken as read, approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman. 1

2 PC PLANNING APPLICATIONS The Committee considered the Planning Applications as set out in the Schedule to the Minutes and dealt with therein. PC PLANNING APPEALS RECEIVED AND PLANNING APPEAL DECISIONS RECEIVED The Information Report was noted. PC THE PLANNING DELEGATIONS REVIEW WORKING PARTY RESOLVED that Councillors Pawlowski, Pope, Burden and Bagwell be appointed to the Planning Delegations Review Working Party. Voting For : Unanimous PC26.15 SUCH OTHER BUSINESS AS IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIRMAN IS OF SUFFICIENT URGENCY TO WARRANT CONSIDERATION There was no urgent business. CHAIRMAN 2

3 SCHEDULE TO THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 16 JULY 2015 PLANNING APPLICATIONS ITEM NO 01 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00599/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS Land adjacent Holes Bay Road & Sterte Road, Poole BH15 PROPOSALS Erection of 46 affordable apartments with undercroft parking, internal cycle, refuse and recycling storage, and comprehensive hard and soft landscape scheme including public art. Accessed from Sterte Road. REGISTERED 1 May, 2015 APPLICANT Spectrum Housing Group AGENT Drew Smith Ltd. WARD Poole Town CASE OFFICER James Gilfillan This Application was brought before Committee because the Council was the land owner, the Application was not of a minor nature and the Applicant was a Housing Association. James Gilfillan, Senior Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding area. Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet, and, in particular, an amended description of the development, additional consultations received, an update on the Case Officer Report including a revision in the number of Affordable Housing Units, a revised recommendation and both revised and additional conditions. The Senior Planning Officer outlined in detail the objections received from the Environmental Agency regarding flood risk. The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, pre-application advice, consultations, representations, planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Senior Planning Officer, reminded Members of the revised recommendation to refer to the Secretary of State with the recommendation that, had it fallen to the Borough of Poole to determine the Application, permission would be granted subject to Section 106, CIL and conditions. Kate Walker, Applicant, expressed her views, details included: Had worked in partnership with the Borough of Poole A development for local people Referred to previous successful schemes in the Poole area Borough of Poole would keep control of the land, the Scheme would be built under 3

4 license 100% nomination rights to the Borough of Poole Referred to changes in the recent Budget affecting Affordable Housing Original plan was for a 100% Affordable Housing Scheme Due to viability, other forms of tenancy would also need to be included Worked with the Borough of Poole regarding open market rent levels Officers responded to Members requests for clarification, details included: The Addendum Sheet detailed the amended Scheme description Details regarding the balcony design were not included in the Application This Scheme would provide 37 parking spaces Following concerns raised by ECPS regarding noise levels, the Applicants were investigating improved ventilation to all units Sterte Esplanade was the nearest amenity space to the units, other than the balconies Lee Smith, Transportation Services, stated that there was an existing pedestrian crossing close to the planned entrance to the Scheme Officers would liaise with Members outside of the Meeting regarding the history to the Commemoration Stone on Site The level of CIL depended on the ratio of Affordable Housing units to other open market tenancies A Member stated that it was good to see an Application for Affordable Housing, however, she was disappointed to note that it was no longer for 100%. She added that Officers should ensure proper investigations were carried out regarding the Marconi Commemoration Stone. A Member expressed concern regarding the safety of children, bearing in mind the plot was an island surrounded by a railway line and a dual carriageway. A Member stated that she had real concerns over the Environmental Agency remarks concerning flood risk. The Chairman stated that, in his opinion, the Scheme was not ambitious enough, for what was a gateway Site. He reminded Members that the decision would be referred to the Secretary of State, who would judge the flooding issues. Kate Walker, summed up her views, details included: Had worked very closely with the Borough of Poole regarding the Scheme Had worked with Transportation Services Officers regarding access arrangements RESOLVED to refer to the DCLG with the recommendation that, had it fallen to the Borough of Poole to determine the Application, permission would be granted subject to a S106 Agreement, CIL and the following: 1. The provision of Affordable Housing in accordance with Policy PCS06 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009, Policy IN2(E) of the Delivering Poole's Infrastructure 4

5 Development Plan Documents 2012 and Affordable Housing SPD A financial contribution of 11,132 (plus admin fee) towards mitigating the harm to the Dorset Heathlands SPA and SSSI in accordance with the Dorset Heathlands Framework Draft SPD, Policies PCS28, PCS36 and PCS37 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009, Policy DM9 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard)) 2. PL01 Updated List of Approved Plans 3. LS040 (Landscaping Scheme to be Implemented) 4. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) 5. AA01 (Non standard Condition) The recommendations of the ECOSA ecology assessment, dated Feb 2015, shall be implemented in conjunction with the delivery of the development hereby approved, and thereafter retained. Reason- In the interests of ecological enhancement and in accordance with DM09 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management policies HW080 (First 4.5 Metres Constructed) 7. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Prior to first occupation of the development, an artist shall have been engaged to deliver a strategy for the design and delivery of the railings along the east elevation of the car park (and any other area appropriate) which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council, prior to first occupation of the development. That strategy shall include timings of the design programme and should seek to include residents in the project. The agreed design shall then be installed in accordance with those agreed timescales and thereafter retained. Reason- In order to enhance the appearance of the car park, and the public route and in accordance with PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009, and DM01 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management policies AA01 (Non standard Condition) Prior to occupation details of the external lighting and car park lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed details shall then be implemented and thereafter retained. Reason In the interests of highway and pedestrian safety and in accordance with DM07 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management policies

6 9. AA01 (Non standard Condition) The recommendations and conclusion of the Flood Risk Assessment received on the 25th June 2015 shall be adhered to and implemented concurrently with the development of the site and completed prior to first occupation of the development Reason In order to safeguard the development from tidal flooding and in accordance with PCS34 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted AA01 (Non standard Condition) Prior to first occupation of the building, the owner of the building shall register its management company with Environment Agency's Early Warning Hotline (Or subsequent equivalent). Reason- In order to ensure the barriers required to protect the site from flooding are in place prior to a flood event occurring and in accordance with PCS34 of the Poole Core Strategy GN160 (Sustainable Homes - Code Level 3) No flat shall be occupied until a verification report has been issued to the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that equivalent to level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes has been achieved for the water and energy efficiency of the development. Reason: In order to ensure the delivery of a sustainable and energy efficient scheme and in accordance with Policies PCS31, PCS32(ii) and (iii) and PCS35 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted Feb 2009 and guidance contained within Section 10 - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change of the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012). 12. GN030 (Sample of Materials) 13. NP100 (Full Contaminated Land Condition) 14. Prior to commencement of development hereby approved, a scheme of works to alter the road markings on Sterte Road adjacent to the approved vehicle access to the site, to include a right turn lane in to the site and Keep Clear markings, and to relocate the existing traffic calming features, as appropriate, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the agreed details prior to occupation of any residential unit. Reason In order to secure safe vehicle access to the site and in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies PCS15 and PCS26 of the Poole Core Strategy (2009) and DM7 of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (2012). 15. Concurrently with the implementation of the scheme hereby approved, the measures/recommendations and conclusions in the Noise and Vibration Assessment 6

7 report dated 8 th June 2015 shall be implemented and thereafter retained. Reason In order to ensure appropriate amenity for occupiers and in accordance with the NPPF Concurrently with the implementation of the scheme hereby approved, the conclusions and recommendations as set out in the approved Calcinotto Drainage Strategy Statement dated June 2015 shall be followed/installed/implemented and thereafter retained. Reason- In order to ensure appropriate drainage from the site. 17. Prior to occupation of the development hereby permitted, the solar PV indicated on the approved plans shall be installed and provide for the energy needs of the development, retained and maintained in accordance with the manufacturers instructions. Reason: In the interests of delivering a sustainable scheme and reducing reliance on centralised energy supply and in accordance with Policies PCS31, PCS32 and PCS35 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009 and guidance contained within Section 10 - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change of the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012). Informative Notes 1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval) 2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval) 3. IN43 (Section 106 Agreement) 4. IN00 (Non Standard Informative) This application is subject to a negative EIA Screening request. Voting: For 6 Against 3 Abstentions 0 7

8 ITEM NO 02 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00701/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 70 Kings Avenue, Poole, BH14 9QJ PROPOSALS Demolition of the existing building and the erection of two detached dwellings with associated access and parking (Revised scheme) REGISTERED 22 May, 2015 APPLICANT KLF Developments AGENT Pure Town Planning WARD Penn Hill CASE OFFICER Claire Moir The Application was before Committee due to its proximity to the home of a Councillor. Claire Moir, Planning Office, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding area. The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, pre-application advice, representations, planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Planning Officer stated the extant scheme for two semi-detached dwellings would change the character of this part of Kings Avenue. The proposed development, by virtue of the creation of two detached dwellings, their siting in close proximity to each other, design and scale would further change this character, and result in a development which did not preserve the character and appearance of the street scene, failing to respect the existing urban grain and rhythm of development and appearing as a cramped form of development domineering the plot size. Mr Annen, Applicant, expressed his views, details included: Case Officer had no issues regarding amenity, trees or highways Referred to the planning history of the Site Not out of character There had already been Planning Permission for two units Applicant just wanted to split a large building into two smaller units Semi-detached houses were alien to the area Proposal was far more in keeping with the street scene Only 0.7% increase in footprint Roof height only 900mm higher, and only at the centre Proposal not considered to be harmful Separation distance similar to many other properties in the area. Some were even closer together Suitable domestic scale Application would result in the loss of a bulky roof form No harm to the street scene Ward Councillor Parker, expressed his views, details included: 8

9 Previous Scheme, on balance, was approved Application before Members was a step too far Would dominate the street scene Would create over-shadowing A Member stated that the extant scheme was approved due to the two semi-detached properties looking like one house. Proposed Scheme to separate the units was contrived. The Chairman agreed with comments regarding the extant Scheme looking like one property and added that he could not support this application. Mr Annen summed up his views, details included: Character of area was changing, and the plot split would not be out-of-place No issues regarding sunlight, in fact the proposal would be better than the extant Scheme. RESOLVED that Planning Permission be Refused for the following reasons: 1. RR000 (Non Standard Reason) The proposed development of 2 detached dwellings by virtue of their siting in close proximity to each other, design, scale and massing would result in a development which does not preserve the character and appearance of the street scene, failing to respect the existing urban grain and rhythm of development and appearing as a cramped form of development dominating the plot size. The proposals do not therefore assemble sufficient land to accommodate a scale and layout of development which preserves or enhances this areas residential character contrary to Policies PCS05 and PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted Informative Notes 1. IN76 (List of Plans Refused) 2. IN73 (Working with applicants: Refusal) 3. IN75 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Refusal) Voting: For Unanimous 9

10 ITEM NO 03 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00463/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 1 Merley Gardens, Wimborne, BH21 1TA PROPOSALS Sever land and erect chalet bungalow with access from Merley Gardens REGISTERED 10 April, 2015 APPLICANT Mr Schiel AGENT Evans & Traves LLP WARD Merley & Bearwood CASE OFFICER Caroline Palmer The Application was before Committee as a red card had been received from Councillor Brown due to the concerns of neighbouring residents. James Gilfillan, Senior Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding area. Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet, and, in particular, details of a further representation and an amended condition number 5. The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, pre-application advice, consultations, representations, planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Senior Planning Officer stated that, for the reasons given in the Planning Judgement Section of the Report, the Proposals would comply with the provisions of the relevant policies in the Core Strategy and the site-specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (adopted April 2012). Carol Evans, Applicant, expressed her views, details included: Thanked Members for the opportunity to speak Summarised the planning history It was clear that the plot was larger than nearby plots Low density development Quoted PCS05 and PCS23 Policy-compliant Mixed property types in the area Not at odds with the surrounding area Carefully designed No overlooking Not dominant Distinctive materials No highway issues Ward Councillor Brown, expressed his views, details included: Referred to the planning history Repeated previous reasons for refusal 10

11 Significant concerns expressed by neighbours There were issues regarding the street scene Did not fit in with the character of the area Highway safety concerns Referred to dangerous layout of roads Busy pedestrian route Used by children walking to and from school and by mobility scooter users Gradient of drive too steep Width of drive meant cars could not turn on Site Driveway dangerously close to the junction There were no requests for clarification. Ward Councillor Pope expressed concern regarding the size of the driveway and the inability of a motor vehicle to turn around on the plot. A Member stated that the steep banking would result in access issues to the Site. The Chairman stated that he would be reluctant to deny Planning Permission due to the poor parking of other neighbours. Carol Evans summed up her views, details included: The three trees to be removed consisted of an old Christmas tree, a large rhododendron and a fruit tree Would be happy for condition to be added to relocate the driveway Councillor Wilson proposed an Amendment adding a new condition regarding the width and positioning of the driveway. The Amendment was seconded and approved. RESOLVED that Planning Permission be Granted With CIL Contribution 1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard)) 2. GN030 (Sample of Materials) 3. AA01 (Non standard Condition) The curtilage of the proposed house as detailed on the approved plans shall be provided, laid out as indicated on the approved plans, and thereafter retained at all times as garden amenity space for the benefit of the occupiers of the proposed house. Reason: In order to provide an appropriate balance of built form and amenity space for the proposed house and to maintain amenity separation to the properties at the rear and in accordance with PCS05 of the Poole Core Strategy 2009 and DM1 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management policies GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s)) 11

12 Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the Velux window on the east 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 DM1(v) of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012). 5. GN160 (Sustainable Homes - Code Level 3) The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a verification report has been issued to the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that equivalent to level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes has been achieved for the water and energy efficiency of the development. Reason: In order to ensure the delivery of a sustainable and energy efficient scheme and in accordance with Policies PCS31, PCS32(ii) and (iii) and PCS35 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted Feb 2009 and guidance contained within Section 10 - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change of the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012). 6. GN162 (Renewable Energy - Residential) 7. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) 8. 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 further garage, extensions, dormers or windows other than those authorised by this permission shall be erected without express planning permission first being obtained from the Local Planning Authority. Reason - To preserve the character of the area and protect the amenities of neighbouring properties and in accordance with Policy PCS5 (v) and PCS23(A) of the Poole Core Strategy (February 2009) and Policy DM1(v) of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012). 9. TR080 (Replanting of Specified Number of Trees) (3 trees) 10. TR010 (Arb Method Statement-Submission Required) 11. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition) 12. PL01 (Plans Listing) 13. Additional Condition Prior to the commencement of development and notwithstanding the approved plans, details of a revised driveway width, extending to the south shall be submitted to and approved in 12

13 writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall then be implemented prior to occupation and thereafter retained. Reason- In the interests of highway and pedestrian safety and in accordance with DM07 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management policies Informative Notes 1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval) 2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval) 3. IN13 (Kerb Crossing to be Lowered) 4. IN43 (Section 106 Agreement) Voting: For Unanimous 13

14 ITEM NO 04 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00623/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 35 Harbour View Road, Poole, BH14 0PD PROPOSALS Sever land and demolish garage; erect detached house with parking and garden (Revised Scheme) REGISTERED 8 May, 2015 APPLICANT Dorset Homes Ltd AGENT Ken Parke Planning Consultants WARD Parkstone CASE OFFICER Claire Moir The Application was before Committee due to the history of the Site. Claire Moir, Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding area. Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet, and, in particular, an amended condition Number 8 regarding Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Planning Officer stated, that the Proposals were similar to those previously dismissed at Appeal. The Inspector dismissed the Appeal based on its impact on the privacy of 33 Harbour View Road with overlooking from the rear second floor, and harm to the amenities of future occupiers of the Site, by virtue of high-level windows to Bedroom 3 resulting in a poor outlook. She added that it was considered that the alterations to windows and internal layout of the proposed dwelling, now proposed, adequately addressed the Inspector s previous concerns and would preserve the privacy and amenities of neighbouring and future occupiers of the development. The Proposals were therefore considered acceptable. Robin Henderson, Applicant, expressed his views, details included: Outlined the previously-refused Scheme Summarised reasons for refusal Summarised Inspector s comments As a result, a modified scheme had been devised No overlooking from windows at the rear A Member stated that it appeared that the previous reasons for refusal had been overcome. Robin Henderson did not take up his opportunity to sum up. RESOLVED that Planning Permission be Granted with Conditions subject to the following: 1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard)) 14

15 2. GN030 (Sample of Materials) 3. GN162 (Renewable Energy - Residential) 4. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) 5. HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays) 6. TR030 (Implementation of Details of Arb M Stmt) 7. DR040 (Sustainable Urban Drainage) 8. GN160 (Sustainable Homes - Code Level 3) The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a verification report has been issued to the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that equivalent to level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes has been achieved for the water and energy efficiency of the development. Reason: In order to ensure the delivery of a sustainable and energy efficient scheme and in accordance with Policies PCS31, PCS32(ii) and (iii) and PCS35 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted Feb 2009 and guidance contained within Section 10 - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change of the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012). 9. PL01 (Plans Listing) Informative Notes 1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval) 2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval) Voting: For Unanimous 15

16 ITEM NO 05 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00435/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 52 Sheringham Road, Poole, BH12 1NS PROPOSALS Alterations to the existing dwelling and the creation of a new semi-detached dwelling to the side. REGISTERED 10 April, 2015 APPLICANT Neon Developments AGENT David James Architects and Associates LTD WARD Branksome West CASE OFFICER Steve Llewellyn The Application was before Committee at the request of Councillor Eades due to concerns regarding over-development, traffic and car-parking. The Application was the subject of a Members Site Visit on 16 July 2015, which commenced at 11.40am. Councillors Pawlowski, Pope, Bagwell, Burden, Challinor, le Poidevin, Parker and Wilson were in attendance. Steve Llewellyn, Senior Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding area. The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Senior Planning Officer stated that the plots of the existing and proposed dwellings would be of a similar size to other plots within the immediate vicinity, and would not be out-of-keeping with the prevailing pattern of development within the surrounding area. The Proposal had therefore assembled sufficient land to accommodate a type, scale, density and layout of development which preserved or enhanced the residential character of the area. The proposed house and Site layout had also been designed in such a manner that, together with the existing house, would appear as a single, detached property in the street scene, which would preserve the existing street scene and character of Sheringham Road. The proposed development would not materially harm the amenities of the occupants of any neighbouring property, whilst adequate vehicular access arrangements and on-site parking would be provided to meet the needs of the development, and therefore the Application was recommended for Approval. Laurie Marlow, Applicant, expressed his views, details included: Thanked Members for the opportunity to speak Large-sized plot Very easy to accommodate an extra dwelling Summarised the planning history A very well-designed solution Nearby large properties had set a precedent Design resembled a single, detached property New entrance to the side of the property 16

17 Vehicular access to rear of Site Legal right to use the road at the rear of the plot No overlooking or overshadowing Not overbearing Not over-development Sustainable development Ward Councillor Eades, expressed his views, details included: An untidy frontage was no excuse for unsuitable development Poor quality materials were not an excuse for unsuitable development Property across the road had a smaller extension Proposal would be out-of-character Would not affect the uniform pattern of development Double-fronted property out of character Large properties in the area were the subject of poor planning decisions Referred to the objections raised by members of the public Access to the rear of the property was not a planning consideration Ward Councillor Le Poidevin expressed her views, details include: Proposal crammed in next to a blank wall Other extensions were not so substantial as the Proposal Over-development A Member stated that the Proposal was ingenious, with adequate provisions for parking. A Member added that it was a good use of the land, which provided much needed family accommodation. The Chairman stated that he did have concerns regarding the parking proposals, however, the majority of the houses in the road had parking on the front of their plots. He added that the plot was large enough, and he liked the proposed design. Laurie Marlow, summed up his views, details included: Other similar-sized properties in the road The gap between the properties was not a problem RESOLVED that Planning Permission 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 17

18 north-west (side) elevations of the proposed dwelling, hereby permitted, 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 DM1(v) of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies (April 2012). 5. GN100 (No Further Windows in Specified Elevation) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 or any subsequent re-enactments thereof, no further windows/dormer windows (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be constructed in the south east (side) elevation (such expression to include the roof and wall) of the new dwelling hereby permitted. Reason: To avoid loss of privacy to adjoining properties and in accordance with Policy DM1(v) of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies (April 2012). 6. GN170 (Screening to Balcony - General) An obscure glazed screen of a form sufficient to prevent external views of at least 1.8 metres in height, shall be erected along the south eastern sides of the rear terraces to the existing and proposed dwellings. The screen shall be erected prior to the commencement of use of the terrace areas, 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 DM1(v) of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012). 7. GN160 (Sustainable Homes - Code Level 3) The dwelling, hereby permitted, shall not be occupied until a verification report has been issued to the Local Planning Authority demonstrating that equivalent to Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes has been achieved for the water and energy efficiency of the development. Reason: In order to ensure the delivery of a sustainable and energy efficient scheme and in accordance with Policies PCS31, PCS32(ii) and (iii) and PCS35 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted Feb 2009 and guidance contained within Section 10 - Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change of the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012). 8. GN162 (Renewable Energy - Residential) 9. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) 10. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition) 18

19 Informative Notes 1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval) 2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval) 3. IN13 (Kerb Crossing to be Lowered) Voting: For 7 Against 1 Abstentions 1 ITEM NO 06 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00608/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 41 Green Road, Poole, BH15 1QH PROPOSALS Alterations and extensions to form a flat unit REGISTERED 13 May, 2015 APPLICANT DWP Housing Partnership AGENT Ken Parke Planning Consultants WARD Poole Town CASE OFFICER Caroline Palmer The Application was before Committee at the request of Councillor Howell, due to concerns of residents. James Gilfillan, Senior Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding area. The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, representations, planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Senior Planning Officer stated that, for the reasons given in the Planning Judgement Section of the Report, the Proposal would comply with the provisions of the relevant policies in the site-specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DBD and Poole Core Strategy. K Hillman, Objector, expressed her views, details included: Over-development Loss of amenity Size of unit was well below the National Space Standards requirements 19

20 35% reduction in car parking Car parking problems exasperated by the local school The local school had expanded by 43% Devastating impact on amenity Proposal would block out daylight to the garden and the rear rooms All residents would suffer including those in the new flat Had tried to convince the Case Officer that it was over-development Robin Henderson, Applicant, expressed his views, details included: Referred to the planning history Refused, at appeal, due to the lack of a compensation payment regarding car parking Since Inspector s decision, however, the Flood Risk Assessment for the area had also been upgraded As a result, the accommodation proposed was now above ground floor level Parking met Borough of Poole Town Centre requirements Proposal would fill in the gap in the street scene All other issues had been addressed Officers responded to Members requests for clarification, details included: Parking area should not have a garage door, and this would be conditioned if Members were minded to Approve The National Space Standards mentioned by the Objector, were purely for guidance, however, may be formally adopted as part of the Core Strategy Review A Member stated that, in his opinion, the Proposal would represent over-development, as the area was already very dense. The Chairman stated that the plot was in the Town Centre and was surrounded by car parks, and therefore could not agree that it was over-development. He welcomed the idea of an additional condition being added that ensured that the unallocated parking remained open for all to use. In his opinion, the Proposal was sympathetically designed and would be minded to support the Application. Robin Henderson, Applicant, summed up his views, details included: One-bedroomed flats were in short supply 56.3 metres was, by any standards, extremely generous Many similar developments had been approved K Hillman, summed up her views, details included: Keen to protect her garden Four windows at the rear of the property suffered from loss of light No one had considered her amenity 20

21 Councillor Parker proposed an Amendment that the Application be deferred pending a Members Site Visit. The Amendment was seconded and on being put to the vote it was: RESOLVED that the Application be deferred, depending a Members Site Visit. Voting: For Unanimous ITEM NO 07 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00544/F APPLICATION TYPE Householder SITE ADDRESS 47 Twemlow Avenue, Poole, BH14 8AL PROPOSALS Addition of first floor to form living space. Alterations to driveway. REGISTERED 5 May, 2015 APPLICANT Mr James WARD Parkstone CASE OFFICER Monika Kwiatkowska The Application was before Committee because a Councillor had indicated that she had a pecuniary interest. James Gilfillan, Senior Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report, and images of the Site and surrounding area. The Presentation continued with a summary of the planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Senior Planning Officer stated that the Proposals would preserve the existing character of the area and the amenity of near-by residents and was therefore recommended for Approval. RESOLVED that Planning Permission be Granted with Conditions subject to the following: 1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard)) 2. GN030 (Sample of Materials) 3. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) 4. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s)) Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the windows serving the staircase and en-suite bathroom on the first floor on the approved plan (drawing no. P-03, received on 22/06/15) on the south eastern elevation shall be glazed with obscure glass in a 21

22 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 DM1(v) of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012). 5. PL01 (Plans Listing) Informative Notes 1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval) 2. IN12 (Kerb Crossing to be Raised) 3. IN52 (Works Affecting Adjoining Land) Voting: For Unanimous ITEM NO 08 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00660/F APPLICATION TYPE Householder SITE ADDRESS 34 Mayfield Avenue, Poole, BH14 9NY PROPOSALS Remodel of existing bungalow REGISTERED 14 May, 2015 APPLICANT Ms Cripps AGENT The Design Board WARD Penn Hill CASE OFFICER Chloe Harrod The Application was before Committee at the request of Councillor Ms Atkinson due to residents concerns. Chloe Harrod, Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding area. Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet and, in particular, details of amended plans and an amended reason for Refusal. The Presentation continued with a summary of the representations, planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Planning Officer stated that the Proposal would be over-bearing and 22

23 would give rise to a harmful loss of privacy to Number 36, and would therefore be contrary to the provisions of Policy DM1 of the Site-Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies adopted 2012, therefore this Proposal was recommended for Refusal. Mary Cripps, Applicant, expressed her views, details included: Applicant/Owner Had moved back to the area and needed more space for family Could not see any harm with her Application Carefully designed All neighbours had remodelled their properties Proposals were an improvement Matt Annan, Applicant, expressed his views, details included: Very well designed proposal No detrimental impact No over-shadowing issues No over-looking The two windows in the north elevation were obscured Would be prepared to obscure the lower panes to the bedroom windows on the south elevation No possible over-looking from these windows Urged Members to visit the Site Small increase in height not visible No loss of sunlight Removal of balcony was a net gain Ward Councillor Ms Atkinson, expressed her views, details included: Not for or against the Application Red-carded the Application in order that it could be considered at Committee A local resident in Boulnois Avenue had stated that they had not received notification from Planning and Regeneration Services regarding the proposed Application Present bungalow was tired in appearance In the next 20 years, more than likely that all of the bungalows would either be replaced or re-modelled Councillor Burden proposed an Amendment that the Application be deferred, pending a Site Visit. The Amendment was Seconded, on being put to the vote it was: RESOLVED that the Application be deferred pending a Members Site Visit. Voting: For 5 Against 4 Abstentions 0 23

24 ITEM NO 09 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00620/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 14 Marina Drive, Poole, BH14 8HB PROPOSALS Variation of condition 1-5 of APP 14/00864/F to change conservatory to orangery and to add 3 roof windows to the SW elevation and 1 to the NE elevation. Replace the following: Dwg No /02 with Dwg No /02 C. Dwg No /06 A with Dwg No /06 C. Dwg No /07 A with Dwg No /07 C. Dwg No /08 A with Dwg No /08 C REGISTERED 14 May, 2015 APPLICANT Mr Stockdill WARD Penn Hill CASE OFFICER Caroline Palmer The Application was before the Committee at the request of Councillor Parker because of neighbour s concerns. The Application was the subject of a Members Site Visit on 16 July 2015, which commenced at 11.15am. Councillors Pawlowski, Pope, Bagwell, Burden, Challinor, Le Poidevin, Parker and Wilson were in attendance. James Gilfillan, Senior Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to the Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding area. Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet, and, in particular, details of an additional representation received. The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, planning considerations and judgement. In conclusion, the Senior Planning Officer stated that the Proposal would preserve the character of the area and would not cause harm to the amenity of the neighbours. Mr Culpan, Objector, expressed his views, details included: Main concern was loss of sunlight and daylight Had experienced light problems with the works carried out at Number 10 Marina Drive Proposed roof to the orangery would cause harm Impact on daylight/sunlight would be significant Original glazed roof proposal would have allowed sunlight to pass through Tiles on the roof would have caused severe problems Development not designed to cater for flooding in the area Referred to the Area Tree Preservation Order and, in particular, concerned for the large conifer tree in the garden Mr Stockdill, Applicant, expressed his views, details included: 24

25 The Development had full Planning Permission, was just asking for a couple of variations Summarised the proposed Amendments Always had a good relationship with Mr Culpan, and tried to change the position of the orangery to alleviate some of his concerns, however that was not possible Decided to change plans from a conservatory to an orangery as it was feared that, in the summer, the sun would be too hot penetrating the glass A more substantial roof was appropriate No change in size to the conservatory/orangery Well screened by trees and shrubs Large conifer tree might be diseased, and was awaiting the Borough of Poole s Tree Officer s Report Ward Councillor Parker stated that it was up to the Committee to decide whether the revisions impacted upon the neighbour s light. The Chairman stated that he could not see any impact on light and privacy and would be minded to approve. Mr Culpan, summed up his views, details included: Sunlight issues were very important His elderly relative could only read by natural daylight Roof would block sunlight Would be sad to lose the only remaining sunlight he had Mr Stockdill did not take up his opportunity to sum up. RESOLVED that Planning Permission be Granted with Conditions subject to the following: 1. GN151 (Variation link to previous condition) Planning permission is granted for the erection of a proposed two storey infill extensions to front and rear, single storey rear extension, proposed conservatory, roof conversion with 3 dormer windows, roof window to shower room and glazed gable windows at 14 Marina Drive in accordance with the terms of the application ref APP 14/00864/F, dated 17/10/2014, without compliance with Condition nos. 3 and 5 previously imposed on planning permission ref: APP 14/00864/F but subject to the other conditions imposed therein, so far as the same are still subsisting and capable of taking effect and subject to the following new condition: 3. Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the windows on the south west and north west elevations of the proposed conservatory on the approved plan (drawing no /06 C) shall be glazed with obscure glass below 1.8m 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. The roof lights proposed on the north east and south west elevations on the approved plan shall also 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

26 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. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Drawing No /02 C received 07/05/2015 Drawing No /06 C received 07/05/2015 Drawing No /07 C received 07/05/2015 Drawing No /08 C received 07/05/2015 Reason - For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. Informative Notes 1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval) Voting: For 8 Against 0 Abstentions 1 ITEM NO 10 APPLICATION NO. APP/15/00540/F APPLICATION TYPE SITE ADDRESS 45a Cockerell Close, Wimborne, BH21 1XR PROPOSALS Retrospective application to vary Condition 6 of planning permission APP/14/00214/F to alter elevations per submitted drawing No. 629r1-101 REGISTERED 6 May, 2015 APPLICANT Mr Atherton AGENT DOT Architecture WARD Merley & Bearwood CASE OFFICER Shelley Edwards The Application was before Committee at the request of Councillor J Newell because of residents concerns. James Gilfillan, Senior Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and photographs of the Site and surrounding area. The Presentation continued with a summary of the representations, planning considerations 26

27 and judgement. In conclusion, the Senior Planning Officer stated that the proposed alteration to the elevation would respect the appearance of the Site, and preserve the privacy and amenity of neighbouring properties. Robin Henderson, Applicant, expressed his views, details included: As the project evolved, it became apparent the roof shape could be formed in a better way A sensible, more logical solution Looked better from the road Better solution for the neighbours Choice/types of material not before Committee for consideration Proposal enhanced the area Ward Councillor J Newell expressed her views, details included: Had been approached by residents who objected to the materials being used Outlined the materials that were being used Originally told by Case Officer that the materials did form part of the retrospective Application Quoted from an from the Case Officer which stated the boarding was included in the Application Page 68 of the Case Officer Report now stated that materials were approved as part of the previous application and did not form part of the current application Had found the whole sequence of events extremely confusing Ward Councillor Pope concurred with the views of Councillor J Newell. A Member stated that she viewed the revised roof as a distinct improvement. A Member stated that the cut back in the roof would allow more light into the neighbouring property. Robin Henderson did not take up his opportunity to sum up. RESOLVED that Planning Permission be Granted with Conditions subject to the following: 1. AA01 (Non standard Condition) This permission is granted for the amendments to the roof design of the house without compliance with condition 9 previously imposed on planning permission APP/14/00214/F to replace approved drawings as listed below, but subject to the other conditions imposed therein, so far as the same are still subsisting and capable of taking effect; and subject to the following revised conditions; 6. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following 27

28 approved plans: Dwg No. 102 rev a received Dwg No. 100 rev d (Proposed Site Plan) received Dwg No. 101 (Proposed Plans and Elevations) received Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. Informative Notes 1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval) Voting: For 8 Against 1 Abstentions 0 28