AGENDA ITEM 2
BOROUGH OF POOLE
PLANNING COMMITTEE
15 JUNE 2006
The Meeting commenced at 9:30am and concluded at 1:30pm.
Present:
Councillor Smith (Chairman)
Councillor Mrs Stribley (Vice-Chairman)
Councillors Allen, Eades, Gillard, Mrs Hillman, Leverett (substituting for Councillor Parker), Trent, White and Wilson.
Members of the public present: 40 approximately.
1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Belcham and Parker.
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Allen declared a personal interest in Item 1 because he was a member of the Fire Authority.
Councillor Smith declared a personal interest in Items 1, 2, 5, 6 and 10 as having been lobbied.
Councillor Mrs Stribley declared personal interests in Items 3, 4, 6 and 8 as having received written and verbal representations.
Councillor Mrs Hillman declared a personal interest in Item 6 as having received written representations.
Councillor Gillard declared personal interests in Items 1 and 2 as having received written representations and also in Item 10 as being an acquaintance of the applicant.
Councillors Leverett and White declared personal interests in Item 6 as having received written representations.
Councillor Eades declared a personal interest in Item 7 because he lived in the same street.
Mr R Genge, Team Manager - Development, declared a personal interest in Item 5 because he was previously a relation to the applicant.
3. MINUTES
The Minutes of the Meeting held on 18 May 2006 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to the following amendment:
Plans List Schedule 1 Item 6 – 254 Ashley Road, Poole, condition 5 should read “Prior to the use commencing the external door to the storeroom at the rear of the unit shall be fitted with a self-closing mechanism to ensure that the door remains shut at all times, other than being used for access”.
4. PLANNING APPLICATIONS
The Committee considered the Planning Applications, as set out in Schedule One of the Minutes and dealt with them as indicated therein.
5. REAR OF CORNELIA LODGE, 12 SEA VIEW ROAD, NEWTOWN – AMENDED PLANS
This Item was withdrawn at the request of the applicant.
6. OBJECTION TO TPO 2/2006 – 4 FLAGHEAD ROAD, CANFORD CLIFFS
The Committee considered the Report of the Head of Planning Design and Control Services on two objections received in respect of Tree Preservation Order 2/2006 relating to inclusion of T3 and T4 Thujas, T6 Beech and T7 Sweet Chestnut.
Mr K Kasiewicz, Agent for the owner of the land, suggested that T6 be repositioned to replace T3 and T4 and that T4 be relocated elsewhere on the site with the agreement with the Council’s Arboricultural Officer and not confirmed on the Order. T3 to be relocated to the south-eastern corner of the site and protected by this Tree Preservation Order.
Members were in favour of the amendments to the Tree Preservation Order provided that discussions take place between the Arboricultural Officer and the Chairman to ensure that the modifications to the Tree Preservation Order make the best use of the trees on the site.
RESOLVED that Tree Preservation Order 2/2006 be confirmed with T6 to be repositioned to replace T3 and T4 and that T3 or T4 to be relocated elsewhere within the site in consultation with the Head of Planning Design and Control Services and the Chairman.
7. MATTERS FOR INFORMATION
The Committee noted the following Reports by the Head of Planning Design and Control Services:-
(i) Appeals Lodged; and
(ii) Appeal Decisions.
CHAIRMAN
7
SCHEDULE 1
BOROUGH OF POOLE
PLANNING APPLICATIONS – 15 JUNE 2006
Item No: 1
Case Officer: Mrs H E Harris
Site: Plot 69 Delph Gardens, Broadstone, Dorset.
Application No: 06/35891/002/F
Date Received: 21st March 2006
Agent: Savills Wessex House Priors Walk East Borough Wimborne Dorset BH21 1PB
Applicant: Harry J Palmer (Broadstone) Ltd
Development: Erect a detached house with detached garage (Revised Scheme).
Ward: O 150 Broadstone
The Committee visited the site on Wednesday, 14th June 2006.
Members noted that one of the objectors was the brother of Councillor Newell.
Mr P Newell and Mr P Talbot spoke on behalf of owners of premises in Portman Close. The objectors stated that although accepting that the new application was not as bulky as the previous application the house was slightly higher than previously submitted and they considered that the new application did not overcome the previous reasons for refusal and therefore it should also be refused.
Mr P Holdcroft, applicant’s agent, explained that the proposed position of the fire access to the Heath had been changed with the agreement of Dorset Fire and Rescue Service and that the proposed house would be over 20 metres from neighbours to the north. The main windows would be to the front and the rear, with secondary windows in the flank elevation. In his opinion, the significant design changes overcome the previous objections by the Committee.
Councillor Brooke, a Ward Councillor, supported the objector’s concerns and considered that the application had been contrived to fit on a very odd shape plot resulting in the house being close to neighbouring properties in an area of low density. He considered the plot would be more suitable for a bungalow.
Some Members considered that the application should be deferred to negotiate the resiting of the fire access to the rear of the plot thereby overcoming the opinion of some Members that the development was backland development.
The Motion to defer the application was lost.
Members considered that the bungalow would be out of keeping with the area and that with the additional conditions referred to in the late items list the application should be granted.
AGREED
GRANT subject to a Legal Agreement for:
A financial contribution of £2,260.00 (plus administration fee) towards the provision of recreational facilities in accordance with Policy L17 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration (Adopted 2004).
and subject to the following conditions:
1 GN150 (Detailed Permission - Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))
2 GN030 (Sample of Materials - Submission of Details Required)
3 GN140 (Siting and Levels Approved on Site)
4 HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision)
5 GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
6 GN100 (No Further Windows in the Specified Elevation(s))
7 The top ridge height of the dwelling hereby approved shall not exceed 8.8 metres above the slab level which shall be set out in accordance with the approved drawings Nos: 0110.L.06 and 0110.6.SKS.03 prior to the commencement of development and works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans.
Informative Notes
1 IN620 (Summary of Reasons for Decision)
Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) Order 2003
The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of the Development Plan and, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in conflict with the following policies:
a) The proposal will not affect the character and amenities of the area - Policy BE1
b) Residential Amenity will not be affected adversely - Policy H4
c) No protected trees will be affected - Policy NE28
d) Recreation contribution agreed - Policy L17
2. The applicant is reminded of the need to retain both the fire access to the SSSI Heathland at the rear and the buffer strip at the rear of the site from the said Heathland.
3 IN440 (Subject to Recreational/Open Space Contribution)
______
Item No: 2
Case Officer: Ms C Milton
Site: 18 Buccleuch Road, Branksome Park, Poole, Dorset, BH13 6LF
Application No: 06/17220/002/F
Date Received: 28th April 2006
Applicant: Mr & Mrs A Cunniffe
Development: Erect a conservatory at side. Erect side extension to include dormer windows on the front and rear elevations and gable (Revised Scheme).
Ward: F 060 Canford Cliffs
The Committee visited the site on Wednesday, 14th June 2006.
Mr Beveridge, neighbouring property owner, spoke in opposition to the application on the grounds of overlooking and loss of amenity to his property. He also considered that in the Officer’s report the comment that the extension was modest was misleading.
Mr Cunnliffe and Mr Fairfax, the applicant and his agent, stated that measures had been taken to overcome neighbour’s objections including the use of obscure glass and moving forward the existing window that overlooked his property which would in future be non-opening.
Members noted that the neighbouring property (No. 16) was built right up to the boundary of the site.
Members also noted that the additional landscaping condition recommended by the Case Officer would help protect the amenity of No. 16 Buccleuch Road.
AGREED
(A) GRANT subject to the following conditions:
1 GN150 (Detailed Permission - Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))
2 GN040 (Match Materials to the Existing Building)
3 GN090 (Obscure Glazing of Window(s))
4 LS070 (Existing tree screen/hedgerow to be retained and reinforced)
Informative Note
IN620 (Summary of Reasons for Decision)
Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) Order 2003
The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of the Development Plan and, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in conflict with the following policies:
a) The proposal will not affect the character and amenities of the area - Policy BE1
b) Residential Amenity will not be affected adversely - Policy H12
(B) The Delegation Working Party to consider this application.
______
Item No: 3
Case Officer: Mr D Staniland
Site: 105 Orchard Avenue, Poole, Dorset, BH14 8AH
Application No: 06/25138/006/F
Date Received: 23rd March 2006
Agent: J Burgess & Associates Ltd 22a Parkstone Road Poole Dorset BH15 2PG
Applicant: Mr & Mrs A Beesley
Development: Demolish existing bungalow and erect a detached house as amended by plans received 26/05/06.
Ward: D 040 Parkstone
The Case Officer reported that the Environment Agency had withdrawn its objection.
Mr Buckingham, applicant’s agent, explained that the dwelling fits within the footprint of the existing dwelling and would be built with solar panels and the floor level had been raised to overcome the Environment Agency’s original objection.
Members considered that this application was an improvement on the existing application and would like, if possible, to see improvement to the boundary wall fronting Poole Park if the applicant was prepared to submit details of the wall to the Conservation Officer.
AGREED
1. GRANT subject to the following conditions:
(a) GN150 (Detailed Permission - Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard))
(b) GN030 (Sample of Materials - Submission of Details Required)
(c) GN100 (No Further Windows in the Specified Elevation(s))
(d) GN070 (Remove Use as Balcony)
(e) DR060 (Flood Protection - Finished Floor Level)
(f) The ridge height of the dwelling hereby permitted shall not exceed 8.2 metres above finished slab level, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Informative Note
IN620 (Summary of Reasons for Decision)
Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) Order 2003.
The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of the Development Plan and, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in conflict with the following policies:
a) The proposal will not affect the character and amenities of the area - Policy BE1
b) Residential Amenity will not be affected adversely - Policy H4
c) The character and appearance of the Conservation Area will not be harmfully affected - BE16
d) Flood protection issues have been satisfactorily resolved - Policy NE31
2. The applicant be requested to improve the boundary wall fronting Poole Park.
______
Item No: 4
Case Officer: Mr D Staniland
Site: 105 Orchard Avenue, Poole, Dorset, BH14 8AH
Application No: 06/25138/007/U
Date Received: 23rd March 2006
Agent: J Burgess & Associates Ltd 22a Parkstone Road Poole Dorset BH15 2PG
Applicant: Mr & Mrs A Beesley
Development: Conservation Area Application to demolish existing chalet bungalow and garage.
Ward: D 040 Parkstone
AGREED
GRANT subject to the following conditions:
1 HB150 (Detailed Permission - Time Expiry 3 Years (Listed Buildings))
2 HB110 (Demolition Delayed Until Contract Let for New Building)
Informative Note
IN620 (Summary of Reasons for Decision)
Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) Order 2003.
The proposed development has been tested against the following policies of the Development Plan and, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, is not in conflict with the following policies:
a) The proposal will not affect the character and amenities of the area - Policy BE1
b) Residential Amenity will not be affected adversely - Policy H12
c) The proposals will not harmfully affect the Conservation Area - Policy BE16.
______
Item No: 5
Case Officer: Ms J Barker
Site: 14 Gosling Close, Canford Heath, Poole, Dorset, BH17 8QR
Application No: 06/23637/005/F
Date Received: 4th April 2006
Agent: Keith Scowcroft 28 Benson Road The Nuffield Industrial Estate Poole Dorset BH17 OGB
Applicant: Mr J Layfield
Development: Erect a part single/part 2-storey side extension (Revised Scheme).
Ward: M 130 Canford Heath East
The Committee visited the site on Wednesday, 14th June 2006.
Mr J Layfield, the applicant, explained that the extension was needed to accommodate his family and that in his opinion would have less impact on the street scene when compared to the large Doctors Surgery that was built opposite his property.
Councillor Mrs S Moore, a Ward Councillor, spoke in support of the applicant stating that there were two similar extensions allowed in the area and that the applicant had taken into account the comments made by the Inspector when refusing the previous application. Also there were no objections from neighbours.
Members raised no objection to the application provided that matching materials were used and that a condition included restricting the use to one family only and not sub-divided.
AGREED
Grant subject to the following conditions:-
1. The development to which this permission relates shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
2. The materials and finishes to be employed on the external faces of the development hereby permitted shall match in every respect those of the existing building unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.