ha2.boroughofpoole.comha2.boroughofpoole.com/akspoole/images/att25882.docx · Web viewCouncillor...

BOROUGH OF POOLE

PLANNING COMMITTEE

20 OCTOBER 2016

The Meeting commenced at 1pm and concluded at 3:20pm

Present:

Councillor Pawlowski (Chairman)Councillor Parker (Vice-Chairman)Councillors Burden, Mrs Butt, Garner-Watts, Le Poidevin and Williams

Also in attendance:

Councillor Gabriel

Members of the public present:

Approximately 14

PC43.16 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Bagwell

PC44.16 DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTEREST

There were no declarations of disclosable pecuniary interest

Other non-statutory interests Members wish to be recorded

Councillor Parker had been lobbied on Plans List Items Nos. 1 and 4

Councillor Le Poidevin had been lobbied on Plans List Items Nos. 1 and 8

Councillor Burden had been lobbied on Plans List Item No. 1

Councillor Garner-Watts had been lobbied on Plans List Item No. 8

Councillor Butt had been lobbied on Plans List Items No. 1, 5 and 8

Councillor Williams had been lobbied on Plans List Item Nos. 1 and 3

Councillor Pawlowski had been lobbied on Plans List Items Nos. 1, 4, and 5

Councillor Pawlowski also advised the Meeting that as Plans List Item No. 9 was in close proximity to his home, he would ask Councillor Parker to chair the Meeting for this item and would not take part in the discussion or the vote.

1

PC45.16 MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the previous Meeting of the Planning Committee, held on 22 September 2016, having been previously circulated, be taken as read, confirmed and signed by the chairman as a correct record.

PC46.16 POOLE PARTNERSHIP PATH PROJECT: OLD TOWN

Philip Elias, Senior Rights of Way Officer, introduced a report which detailed the intention to make an order which would record 27 Public Footpaths in the Old town area onto the Definitive Map and Statement. He explained that it was the legal duty for surveying authorities to ensure that this map was maintained.

In response to a Member query, the Officer explained that this Project was expected to last for 3-4 years and any paths that were contested would be put on hold and added to a list that would be revisited towards the end of the Project.

RESOLVED that the Order be made

Voting:

For - Unanimous

PC47.16 CARTER COMMUNITY SCHOOL PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY

Philip Elias, Senior Rights of Way Officer, introduced a report which detailed the intention to make an order which would record a Public Bridleway adjacent to Carter Community School in Hamworthy onto the Definitive Map and Statement.

In response to a Member query, the officer explained that there was currently a level of disconnectivity and it was intended to adopt any unadopted footways.

RESOLVED that the Order be made

Voting:

For – Unanimous

PC48.16 PLANNING APPLICATIONS

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

PC49.16 PLANNING APPEALS RECEIVED AND PLANNING APPEAL DECISIONS RECEIVED

The Information Report was noted.

2

PC50.16 SUCH OTHER BUSINESS, AS IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIRMAN, IS OF SUFFICIENT URGENCY TO WARRANT CONSIDERATION

There was no other business.

CHAIRMAN

3

SCHEDULE TO THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE20 OCTOBER 2016

ITEM NO 01APPLICATION NO. APP/16/00771/FAPPLICATION TYPE FullSITE ADDRESS Parrs Quality Confectionery, 26 Alder Road, Poole, BH12

2AQ

PROPOSALS Redevelopment to provide a 70 bed residential care home (use class c2 ) and 32 extra care apartments (use class c2), proposed access, parking, landscaping and other associated works.

REGISTERED 24 May, 2016APPLICANT Frontier Estates LtdAGENT Turley and Planning PotentialWARD Branksome WestCASE OFFICER Steve Llewellyn

The Application was before the Committee at the request of Councillor Eades due to neighbours’ concerns about the height and massing of the development.

The Application was the subject of a Members’ Site Visit on 20 October 2016, which commenced at 10:20am and concluded at 10:47am. Councillors Pawlowski, Burden, Garner-Watts, Le Poidevin and Parker 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.

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet and, in particular, the amended recommendation to delegate to the Head of Planning and Regeneration Services and additional conditions and recommendations.

The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, pre-application advice, consultations, representations, planning considerations and judgement.

Will Cobley, Applicant expressed his views, details included:

Was representing Frontier Estates The scheme would provide specialist accommodation Frontier had a strong track record Had undertaken an extensive consultation process Blocks had been re-sited Blocks had been reduced in mass Simple design Supported by technical reports Would redevelop a redundant site Would create jobs

5

Improved access to the Site

Officers responded to Members’ requests for clarification, details included:

There was a limitation for what could be done in terms of ensuring the access road was implemented at an early stage. This was due to what would need to be done for the excavation and construction of the Site but was something that Officers could explore.

Only the landowner of the Retail Park could determine whether or not an access route could be opened up to the east of the Site.

False windows were used in many developments to break up the massing of large buildings.

The parking arrangements were deemed acceptable for this type of development. As the Scheme was going to be of C2 Class, there was no requirement for

Affordable Housing to be included.

A Member commended the Applicant for having engaged with Planning Officers and the public from an early stage and for having taken on board the feedback that had been received. She added that she was pleased that there would be improved access to the Site and that it would provide both housing and employment and was therefore fully supportive of the Scheme.

A Member expressed his support and stated that the Scheme would be a improvement to what was currently at the Site. He added that he would prefer the new access to the Site implemented at an early stage of the Project.

It was Moved and Seconded that a further condition relating to the production of a Construction Management Plan be added

Voting:

For - Unanimous

A Member stated that she was supportive of the Scheme and had no concerns in relation to the parking provision for residents or care assistants.

The Chairman stated that the Scheme was well designed and commended the Applicant for having worked closely with neighbouring residents and Planning Officers in bringing it forward. He added that he had found the Site Visit to be very beneficial and that the Site was not currently meeting its full potential and this Scheme would be a major improvement.

RESOLVED that the Application be Delegated to the Head of Planning and Regeneration Services to approve, in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair of Planning Committee, upon completion of the Section 106 Agreement, securing the following:

1. Securing a range of measures, services and obligations on the owners to ensure that the scheme is operated and managed in a way that falls within the

6

C2 use class of the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order 2010 (as amended) or any subsequent re-enactment thereof to include:None of the Extra Care Apartments to be occupied other than as a place of residence for a person or persons of whom at least one must be a 'qualified person' at the date of his or her first occupation of the unit in question. Qualified person is to mean a person who has attained the age of 60 years and is in need of personal care by reason of their age or by any person by reason of disablement;Occupation of one of the units of residential accommodation who is not a 'qualified person' but who shares or previously shared the accommodation with a 'qualified person' (e.g. spouse or surviving spouse) and who must have attained the age of at least 60 years.No part of the accommodation to be occupied unless it is managed by an Estate Manager appointed by the Owner.To ensure that at least one Domiciliary Care Provider who is registered with the Care Quality Commission is available to 'qualified persons' within the development at all times to ensure that provision is made for each 'qualified person' to receive a minimum of 2 hours personal care each week to be provided by a Domiciliary Care Provider or under their control to meet the national standards of the Care Quality Commission and to include specified Care Services and Support Services.

2. A financial contribution of £7,744.00 (+ admin fee) towards Strategic Access Management and Maintenance of Dorset Heathlands SPA and SSSI in accordance with the Dorset Heathlands Framework 2015-2020 SPD, Policies PCS28, PCS36 and PCS37 of the Poole Core Strategy (February 2009) and Policy DM9 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (April 2012).

Conditions

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 and second floor windows to the internal corridors to the north elevation of the care home and the first and second floor windows to the staircase to the northernmost section of the north elevation of the extra care apartments, 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 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).

7

5. GN161 (BREEAM) (‘Excellent’)

6. GN163 (Renewable Energy - Non Residential) (‘20%’)

7. LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)

8. LS050 (Hard Landscaping)

9. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition)

10. AA01 (Non standard Condition)The boundary treatments to the site and means of enclosure within the site shall be erected in accordance with the details indicated on the approved Site Plan prior to the care home being first brought into use and prior to the first occupation of any of the extra care apartments, hereby permitted, and shall be retained and maintained as such at all times thereafter. The brickwork to be used in the construction of any boundary walls or walls within the site shall match the brickwork that is to be used in the construction of the care home and extra care apartments hereby permitted.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and neighbouring amenity and in accordance with Policy PCS23(A) of the Poole Core Strategy (February 2009) and Policy DM1 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (April 2012).

11. AA01 (Non standard Condition)The bin stores indicated on the approved plans shall be erected and made available for use prior to the care home being first brought into use and prior to the first occupation of any of the extra care apartments, hereby permitted, and shall be retained and maintained as such at all times thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities of the site and amenities of the future occupants and to secure a well planned development in accordance with Policy PCS23(A) of the Poole Core Strategy (February 2009) and Policy DM1 (iii) of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (April 2012).

12. AA01 (Non standard Condition)The care home shall not be first brought into use and the extra care apartment shall not be first occupied, until details of the external lighting of the site have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented in accordance with the approved details and made available for use. The external lighting shall thereafter be maintained and retained at all times.

Reason: To enhance the amenities of the site and to secure a well planned development and in the interests of neighbouring amenity in accordance with Policy PCS23(A) of the Poole Core Strategy (February 2009) and Policy DM1 (iii) of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management

8

Policies DPD (April 2012).

13. TR010 (Arb Method Statement-Submission Required)

14. TR040 (Pre-commencement Meeting)

15. TR090 (No Pruning Works)

16. TR110 (Arboricultural Supervision)

17. AA01 (Non standard Condition)A scheme to close the existing vehicular access from Alder Road (which is to be made redundant) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include provision to raise the existing lowered kerbs, and reinstate the footway to the existing access and shall comply with the standards adopted by the Local Highway Authority. All works shall be completed in their entirety in accordance with the approved scheme prior to the development hereby approved first being brought into use.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with Policy PCS15 of the Poole Core Strategy (February 2009) and Policies DM7 and DM8 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (2012).

18. HW080 (First 4.5 Metres Constructed)

19. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)

20. AA01 (Non standard Condition)Prior to the care home being first brought into use and prior to the first occupation of any of the extra care apartments, hereby permitted, details of the provision for and installation of bat and bird boxes in accordance with the recommended mitigation measures set out at Paragraph 6.19 of the Ecological Appraisal prepared by ACD Ecology and dated August 2015, together with a timetable for their installation, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The bat and bird boxes shall subsequently be installed and made available for use in accordance with the agreed details and timetable and shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: In the interests of supporting biodiversity and ecology and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy DM9 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (April 2012).

21. DR040 (Sustainable Urban Drainage)

Informative Notes

9

1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval)

2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval)

3. IN43 (Section 106 Agreement)

Voting:

For - Unanimous

ITEM NO 02APPLICATION NO. APP/16/00686/CAPPLICATION TYPE Change of UseSITE ADDRESS Avalon Nursing Home, 14 Pinewood Road, Poole, BH13

6JS

PROPOSALS Change of use from a care home to a house of multiple occupation

REGISTERED 12 May, 2016APPLICANT Bourne Homes LtdAGENT Chapman Lily Planning LtdWARD Canford CliffsCONSERVATION AREA The AvenueCASE OFFICER Steve Llewellyn

THE APPLICATION WAS WITHDRAWN PRIOR TO THE MEETING

ITEM NO 03APPLICATION NO. APP/16/00007/FAPPLICATION TYPE FullSITE ADDRESS 21 Springfield Road, Poole, BH14 0LG

PROPOSALS Demolition of existing dwelling and associated outbuildings, erection of five apartments together with associated outbuilding, landscaping, alterations to boundary treatment and alterations to existing vehicle / pedestrian access.

REGISTERED 20 January, 2016APPLICANT Mrs McGinleyAGENT Scott Worsfold Assocaites LtdWARD ParkstoneCASE OFFICER Laura Archer

The Application was before the committee because of the nature of the Proposals.

The Application was the subject of a Members’ Site Visit on 20 October 2016, which commenced at 10:53am and concluded at 11:06am. Councillors Pawlowski, Burden,

10

Garner-Watts, Le Poidevin, Parker and Williams were in attendance.

Laura Archer, Planning Officer, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report, and images of the Site and surrounding area.


Gary Worsfold, Applicant expressed his views, details included:

The Architect for the Scheme The Scheme complimented the area. No objections had been received Well designed inspired by local architecture Passed policy tests Subtle and sustained design Sat well within the streetscene Thanked officers for their input Requested that the Scheme be Approved

In response to a Member’s request for clarification Officers explained that the Scheme met policy requirements in regard to visitor parking as it was deemed that there was sufficient on-street parking nearby.

A Member explained that she supported the Application because she liked the design and did not feel it to be out of keeping with the area.

A Member stated that the Scheme was compliant with PCS05 and that there would be no reason to refuse.

The Chairman stated that he felt the design to be respectful to the area and was compliant with policy and was therefore supportive of the Scheme

Gary Worsfold declined the opportunity to sum up but thanked Members and Officers for their comments.

RESOLVED that Planning Permission be Granted With CIL Contribution




4. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, on the first floor side elevation (south) the windows serving the living room of flat 4, and the ensuite and dressing room of flat 3 shall be glazed with obscure glass in a form sufficient to prevent external views and shall either be a fixed light or

11

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. LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted)

6. TR010 (Arb Method Statement-Submission Required)

7. TR080 (Replanting of Specified Number of Trees) (2 trees)

8. GN162 (Renewable Energy - Residential) (10%)


10. HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays)


12. GN120 (Storage of Refuse)

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

Informative Notes



3. IN81 (SAMM Approval)

Voting:

For - Unanimous

ITEM NO 04APPLICATION NO. APP/16/00631/FAPPLICATION TYPE FullSITE ADDRESS Land adjacent to 8 Martello Road South, Poole, BH13

7HH

PROPOSALS Erection of a block of 8 apartments with basement parking accessed from Martello Road South.

REGISTERED 4 May, 2016APPLICANT Martello HomesAGENT David James Architects and Associates LTD

12

WARD Canford CliffsCASE OFFICER Doug Evans

The Application was before the Committee at the request of Cllr Mrs Haines.

The Application was the subject of a Members’ Site Visit on 20 October 2016, which commenced at 9:50am and concluded at 10:12am. Councillors Pawlowski, Burden, Garner-Watts, Le Poidevin and Parker were in attendance.

Doug Evans, Team Manager, gave a site description and referred to Site plans as appended to the Report and images of the Site and surrounding Area.


Martin Heath, Objector, expressed his views, details included:

Referred to PCS05 Referred to an inspector’s report Contrary to PCS05 All buildings in the road were houses The Case Officer had not considered part (iv) of PCS05 No plan for rainwater drainage

David James, Applicant, expressed his views, details included:

Not out of character Design reflected other buildings Well below hard-standing limit Acceptable proposal Was in keeping with other blocks Privacy would be preserved for neighbouring properties Understood concern over loss of trees Trees would be replanted No highway issues No amenity issues Requested the Scheme be approved

Councillor Iyengar, Ward Councillor, expressed his views, detail included:

Area was predominantly populated with houses Accepted that this was within a transitional area in the road

In response to a Member’s request for clarification Officers explained that the Scheme would be a minimum of 32 metres away from the neighbouring house and 27 metres away from the neighbouring flat.

A Member stated that the Site was on the cusp of the Branksome Park Conservation Area

13

but that the design was thoughtful and in keeping with the area. She added that she felt satisfied that PCS05 had been met and was therefore supportive of the Application.

A Member stated that the design had been well planned and was not concerned over the loss of trees as these would not be visible from the streetscene.

The Chairman stated that he felt that the scale, mass, design and layout was acceptable for the area and that the Site Visit had proved to be valuable. He added that PCS05 criteria had been met and he would be supporting the Scheme.

Martin Heath summed up his views, details included:

These homes wouldn’t be affordable for local people No surface car parking Concerns over loss of trees Planning inspector would refuse

David James, expressed his views, details included:

Arboricultural officers would assist with tree replacement Thanked Members

RESOLVED that this Planning Permission be Granted with CIL Contribution




4. GN020 (Screen Fencing/Walling)

5. AA01 (Non standard Condition)All works relating to the ground clearance, tree works, demolition and development with implications for trees shall be carried out as specified in the approved arboricultural method statement, and shall be supervised by an arboricultural consultant holding a nationally recognised arboricultural qualification. For clarification, consent is granted to ONLY FELL tree numbers T2, T17, T18, T24 & T25. No other tree work is permitted.

Reason -To prevent trees on site from being damaged during construction works and in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy Adopted February 2009 and Policy DM1 (iii) of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012).

6. TR080 (Replanting of Specified Number of Trees) (5 trees)


14

8. GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)



11. GN170 (Screening to Balcony - General)



Informative Notes



Voting:

For - Unanimous

ITEM NO 05APPLICATION NO. APP/16/01245/FAPPLICATION TYPE FullSITE ADDRESS 56 York Road, Broadstone, BH18 8ET

PROPOSALS Demolition of the existing building and construction of two detached houses with associated parking and access

REGISTERED 15 August, 2016APPLICANT Mr & Mrs MyersAGENT Chapman Lily Planning LtdWARD CreekmoorCASE OFFICER Eleanor Godesar

The Application was before the committee at the request of Councillor Brooke because of its impact on the immediate neighbour.

The Application was the subject of a Members’ Site Visit on 20 October 2016, which commenced at 11:45am and concluded at 11:58am. Councillors Pawlowski, Burden, Garner-Watts, Le Poidevin, Parker and Williams were in attendance.

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

Reference was made to the Addendum Sheet and, in particular, an amended site plan and an amendment to Condition 2.

The Presentation continued with a summary of the relevant planning history, pre-

15

application advice, consultations, representations, planning considerations and judgement.

Gary Dovey, Objector, expressed his views, details included:

Lived at 54 York Road Feared Scheme would cause a loss of sunlight Habitable rooms would become gloomy Was too close to the boundary Proposed ridge height would be 7.7m Overshadowing Harm to amenity Too oppressive Building could be moved southwards Requested that Planning Permission be refused If minded to approve, requested removal of Permitted Development Rights

Matt Holmes, Applicant expressed his views, details included:

Site was well located Streetscene would be preserved Scheme adopted traditional style of building Was aware of neighbours’ comments Plans had been amended Plans were acceptable There would be no PD rights Proposals made efficient use of the site Maintained highway safety Requested that Members approved the Scheme

Officers responded to Members’ requests for clarification, details included:

Permitted Development Rights would be removed as detailed in Condition 10 The proposed materials were brick and tiles and these would need to be of a

satisfactory standard The distance between the development and 54 York Road was 8.8m, before

narrowing to 7.4m

A Member explained that loss of light was not something that the Planning Committee could consider, however, on the Site Visit, she could see no evidence that any sunlight would be lost.

A Member stated that while he sympathised with the Objector he did not feel that there were any reasons to refuse Planning Permission.

A Member stated that she was concerned that the plot seemed to be rather cramped and that there would be very little amenity space.

16

The Chairman stated that he felt that the Site Visit had been very helpful and felt reassured about the Scheme. He added that as the Site was approximately 1.4m below 54 York Road, he did not expect that there would be a significant loss of light.

Gary Dovey summed up his views, details included:

There would be a loss of light Too oppressive

Matt Holmes summed up his views, details included:

The location had been chosen due to drainage on the site Plans had already been amended







6. AA01 (Non standard Condition)A scheme to close the existing access (which is to be made redundant) shall be submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include provision to raise the existing lowered kerbs, and reinstate the footway to the existing access and shall comply with the standards adopted by the Local Highway Authority. All works shall be completed in accordance with the approved scheme prior to first occupation of the development.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with PCS15 of the Poole Core Strategy adopted 2009 and DM7 and DM8 of the Site Specific Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD adopted 2012.




10. RC010 (Remove Residential Permitted Development)

Informative Notes


17



Voting:

For – 5 Against – 0 Abstained – 2

ITEM NO 06APPLICATION NO. APP/16/00814/FAPPLICATION TYPE FullSITE ADDRESS 101 Longfleet Road, Poole, BH15 2HP

PROPOSALS Sever land and erect 2 flats with undercroft parking. (Amended plans received 12/08/16)

REGISTERED 26 May, 2016APPLICANT Dorset Homes LtdAGENT Anders Roberts & AssocWARD Poole TownCONSERVATION AREA Heckford ParkCASE OFFICER Helen Harris

The Application was before the Committee at the request of Cllr Howell because of neighbour concerns and appropriateness to the Conservation Area.

The Application was the subject of a Site Visit which commenced at 11:18am and concluded at 11:27am. Councillors Pawlowski, Burden, Garner-Watts, Le Poidevin, Parker and Williams were in attendance.

Helen Harris, 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 relevant planning history, pre-applications advice, consultations, representations, planning considerations and judgement.

Seth Marshall, Objector, expressed his views, details included:

Speaking on behalf of residents of Heckford Park Area was made up of Victorian terraced properties Proposals would not improve the area Essential to sustain conservation area Proposals were unsympathetic to area Bulk Mass Privacy issues Out of keeping

18

Unacceptable design Too modern Private right of way wrongfully included Loss of boundary wall Parking issues

Steve Benyon, Applicant, expressed his views, details included:

Intended to start new sympathetic enhancements Referred to previously dismissed scheme Referred to inspector’s positive comments Had sought extensive pre-application advice Comments formed basis of the Application currently before Members Proposal was for two flats Would be a positive enhancement to the streetscene

Chris Harrod, Democratic Support Officer read out a statement on behalf of Ward Councillor Howell, details included:

This representation applied to this Application and the following application Objected to the proposals Would not preserve or enhance the character of the area Welcomed development into area Must be sympathetic Would set an unhelpful precedent Character of area defined by Victorian terraced houses Would take the form of coach houses, there were none in the area Off road parking was unsuitable for the area Zero parking provision was acceptable due to sustainable location Requested that Members refuse Planning Permission

In response to a Member’s request for clarification, Officers explained that parking in the area required the use of a permit, although this did not necessarily guarantee a space meaning that drivers were parking further afield.

A Member stated that the area was prime for development and was currently an eyesore and was therefore supportive of the Application.

A Member explained that he had valued the Site Visit and that this would be a positive improvement to the area.

A Member stated that she was keen to see an improvement to the area, liked the design of the Scheme and that it would not cause any harm to the area.

The Chairman stated that he was fully supportive of the Scheme and that it represented a positive change to the area. He added that he had no issue with the design and that it would provide additional housing.

Seth Marshall summed up his views, details included:

19

Proposal failed to comply with Policy Set precedent for poor planning in area 90 objections had been submitted

Steve Benyon summed up his views, details included:

Area had development potential Had overcome issues Would improve the area

RESOLVED that this Planning Permission be Granted With CIL Contribution




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



7. GN100 (No Further Windows in Specified Elevatio)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 windows (other then those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be constructed in the north east elevation (such expression to include the roof and wall) of the building hereby permitted.

Reason -To avoid loss of privacy to adjoining properties and in accordance with Policy DM1(v) of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012).

8. HW040 (Vehicular, Pedestrian and Cycling Access)The rear pedestrian access to the proposed cycle store and to the rear of 101 Longfleet Road, as shown on approved drawing no. 8313/500 (rev C), shall be made available prior to the first occupation of any of the flats hereby permitted and the access shall therafter be retained; remain unobstructed; and at all times be made available for use by residents of and visitors to no. 101 Longfleet Road.

Reason -In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policy PCS15 of the Poole Core Strategy (February 2009), and DM7 and DM8 of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management DPD Policies (April 2012) and guidance contained within Section 4 Promoting Sustainable Transport in the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012).

20

9. 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, the flat roof area of the building hereby permitted shall not be used as a balcony, roof garden or similar 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 (April 2012).


Informative Notes




Voting:

For – Unanimous

ITEM NO 07APPLICATION NO. APP/16/00813/FAPPLICATION TYPE FullSITE ADDRESS 95 Longfleet Road, Poole, BH15 2HP

PROPOSALS Sever land and erect 2 flats with undercroft parking. (Amended plans received 12/08/16)

REGISTERED 26 May, 2016APPLICANT Dorset Homes LtdAGENT Anders Roberts & AssocWARD Poole TownCONSERVATION AREA Heckford ParkCASE OFFICER Helen Harris

The Application was brought before Committee at the request of Cllr Howell because of neighbour concerns and appropriateness to the Conservation Area.

The Application was the subject of a Site Visit which commenced at 11:27am and concluded at 11:32am. Councillors Pawlowski, Burden, Garner-Watts, Le Poidevin, Parker and Williams were in attendance.

21

Helen Harris, 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.


Simon Caller, Objector, expressed his views, details included:

Heckford park resident Not characteristic of Conservation Area Created new and out of place frontage Should reflect area Should have zero parking provision Parking should come second to design Could be benchmark for future developments Should be sympathetic to the area Urged Members to refuse planning permission

Steve Benyon, Applicant, expressed his views, details included:

Similar to previous item Same build design Would make a positive impact on area Requested that Members approve Planning Permission

The Chairman noted that Councillor Howell’s earlier representation also applied to this Application and therefore did not need to be repeated.

A Member stated that whilst it was important to ensure that existing buildings in the conservation area were preserved, it was not always possible to build identical properties and this was the opportunity to bring additional character to the area.

Simon Caller summed up his views, details included:

Was not against well considered development, but this was not it. Urged Members to refuse Planning Permission

Steve Benyon summed up his views, details included:

Referred to National Planning Policy Framework





22



6. AA01 (Non standard Condition)The rear pedestrian access, as shown on approved drawing no. 8313/400 (rev B) shall be laid out; surfaced; and completed prior to the first occupation of any of the flats hereby permitted and the completed access made available for use by residents of and visitors to no. 95 Longfleet Road . This access shall thereafter be unobstructed and retained at all times for that purpose

Reason -In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Policies PCS15 and PCS26 of the Poole Core Strategy (February 2009), and DM7 and DM8 of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012).

7. 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, the flat roof area of the building hereby permitted shall not be used as a balcony, roof garden or similar 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 (April 2012).


Informative Notes




Voting:

For - Unanimous

ITEM NO 08APPLICATION NO. APP/16/01139/FAPPLICATION TYPE HouseholderSITE ADDRESS 4 Chiswell Road, Poole, BH17 9FBPROPOSALS Convert integral garage to living accommodation.REGISTERED 20 July, 2016APPLICANT Mr & Mrs Doe

23

WARD Canford Heath WestCASE OFFICER Chloe Harrod

The Application was before the committee at the request of Councillor Gabriel because of residents' concerns about the use of the property and parking.

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


Robin Henderson, Applicant, expressed his views, details included:

House in Multiple Occupation (HMO)’s were common within the area Application was only before committee due to the removal of permitted

development rights Compliant with parking policy Not applying for change of use

Ward Councillor Gabriel expressed his views, details included:

Concerned that this would be the first of many HMO’s Could be of detrimental impact to other residents

In response to a Member’s request for clarification, Officers explained that there would not be a lot of light entering the conversion due to the window facing a wall of the adjacent property but this was not a planning consideration.

A Member stated that the change to an HMO would usually be granted under Permitted Development Rights and the Application was only before the Committee due to the removal of such rights. She added that she had no objections and supported the Scheme.

A Member stated that he felt that the Scheme could have been of a better design but this was not a reason for him to refuse.

The Chairman stated that he supported the Scheme.

RESOLVED that Planning Permission be Granted with Conditions subject to the following:

Conditions


2. GN050 (Matching Materials)

24



Informative Notes


Voting:

For - Unanimous

NOTE: Councillor Pawlowski explained that for transparency, as his property was adjacent to the Application, he would ask Councillor Parker to chair the Meeting for the next Item.

ITEM NO 09APPLICATION NO. APP/16/01369/FAPPLICATION TYPE FullSITE ADDRESS 24 Ormonde Road, Poole, BH13 6DF

PROPOSALS Loft conversion to first floor flat to form additional habitable space. New dormer front and rear.

REGISTERED 6 September, 2016APPLICANT Mrs TrillAGENT Design & Development AssociatesWARD Canford CliffsCONSERVATION AREA Chester RoadCASE OFFICER Chloe Harrod

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

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


A Member stated that he had no objection to the Scheme.

RESOLVED that that Planning Permission be Granted with Conditions subject to the following:

Conditions


25

2. GN050 (Matching Materials)


4. GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))Both in the first instance and upon all subsequent occasions, the bathroom dormer window hereby approved on the 2nd. floor north 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).

Informative Notes


Voting:

For – 6 Against – 0 Abstained – 1

26

ha2.boroughofpoole.comha2.boroughofpoole.com/akspoole/images/att25882.docx · Web viewCouncillor...

Documents

Transcript of ha2.boroughofpoole.comha2.boroughofpoole.com/akspoole/images/att25882.docx · Web viewCouncillor...