Borough of Poole. Planning Committee. List of Planning Applications

Transcription

1 Borough of Poole Planning Committee List of Planning Applications 19 April,

2 BOROUGH OF POOLE Planning Committee DATE: 19 April 2018 at NOTES: 1. Items may be taken out of order and therefore no certain advice can be provided about the time at which any item may be considered. 2. Applications can be determined in any manner notwithstanding the recommendation being made. 3. Councillors who are not members of the Planning Committee but who wish to attend to make comments on any application on this list or accompanying agenda are required to give notice by informing the chairman or Planning and Regeneration Manager before the meeting. 4. Councillors who are interested in the detail of any matter to be considered should consult the files with the relevant officers to avoid queries at the meeting. 5. Any members of the public wishing to make late additional representations should do so in writing or by contacting their Ward Councillors prior to the meeting. 6. Letters of representation referred to in these reports together with any other background papers may be inspected at any time prior to the Meeting and these papers will be available at the Meeting. 7. For the purposes of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, unless otherwise stated against a particular report, background papers in accordance with section 100D will always include the case officer s written report and any letters or memoranda of representation received (including correspondence from all internal Borough Council Service Units). 8. Councillors are advised that if they wish to refer to specific drawings/plans which are not part of these papers to contact the relevant case officer at least 24 hours before the meeting to ensure these can be made available. 9. Members are advised that, in order to reduce the size of the agenda, where conditions are marked on the plans list as Standard these will no longer be reported in full. The full wording of the condition can be found either in hard copy in the Members rooms, or via the following link on the Loop 2

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Planning Committee 19 April 2018 at Not before 13: Abbotsbury Road, Broadstone, BH18 9DD APP/17/01948/F 4 02 Mansfield Road Water Tower, Mansfield Road, APP/17/01637/F 16 Poole, BH14 0DJ 03 Mansfield Road Water Tower, Mansfield Road, APP/17/01638/L 27 Poole, BH14 0DJ 04 R M Y C S Enchantress, 56 Panorama Road, Poole, BH13 7RE APP/18/00063/F 32 Not before 14: Lulworth Avenue, Poole, BH15 4DJ APP/18/00168/F Ashwood Drive, Broadstone, BH18 8LN APP/18/00216/F 44 3

4 ITEM NO 01 APPLICATION NO. APP/17/01948/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS 46 Abbotsbury Road, Broadstone, BH18 9DD PROPOSALS Sever land and erect 5 no 2 bedroom bungalows with parking. REGISTERED 21 December, 2017 APPLICANT CR Acquisitions Ltd AGENT Anders Roberts & Assoc WARD Broadstone CASE OFFICER Sarah Scannell INTRODUCTION This application is brought before committee at the request of Councillor Mrs Slade and Councillor Brooke because of neighbours' concerns. Recommendation for Grant With CIL Contribution THE PROPOSAL Sever land and erect five 2-bed bungalows with parking. MAIN ISSUES The principal issues for consideration in this case relate to: impact on the character and appearance of the area and residential amenity of future occupants; neighbouring amenity; highway safety and parking provision; waste; drainage/ flood risk; sustainability/ renewables; trees and biodiversity; and CIL/healthland mitigation. SITE DESCRIPTION The application site comprises land severed from the gardens of four residential properties (46, 52, 54 and 56) on the north of Abbotsbury Road. Properties on the north side of the street are predominantly 1950s and 60s' detached bungalows or chalet bungalows with hipped and pitched roofs and a render and brick palette. Some are split-level with storage or accommodation at a lower ground-floor leve as ground levels fall by some 3m to 4m from 4

5 the highway to the rear boundary and continue to fall beyond it. They have gardens and parking areas to the front bounded by low boundary walls. Ground levels also gradually rise from east to west. The rear gardens are 45m to 50m deep and are bounded by mesh and timber fencing; walls; and hedges of various heights. There are no Tree Preservation Orders on or adjoining the site and a number of trees that previously stood within the site have recently been felled, although several remain along the northern boundary. Part of the northern part of the site is site is poorly drained and a stream runs along the boundary. There are no on-street parking restrictions on Abbotsbury Road and occasional passing bays. Properties to the south of Abbotsbury Road comprise of detached bungalows; chalet bungalows; and 2 storey houses above the highway. Properties to the north of the application site on Anvil Crescent are bungalows and chalet bungalows. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY Abbotsbury Road Current application: Sever land and erect three 3-bed chalet bungalows with associated integrated garages and parking. Demolish existing garage to no. 35 to allow access (APP/18/00188/F) R/O 46, 52, 54 & 56 Abbotsbury Road July 2017: Sever land & erect 1 no.3 bed bungalow with garage and parking (APP/17/00550/F). Approved. This would result in 4 units in total if APP/16/01807/F below was also implemented. November 2017: Sever land and erect 6no. 2 bedroom bungalows with parking. Refused for the following reasons (APP/17/01534/F): 1. Owing to limited separation distance between the proposed dwellings and boundaries, other units and parking spaces; the projection of parking spaces into rear gardens; the position, scale and orientation of windows and doors; and the contrived nature of the proposed landscaping, the proposed development would result in a cramped, oppressive, gloomy and poor quality living environment for future occupants. The scheme would therefore fail to assemble sufficient land to accommodate a scale, density and layout of development which would preserve or enhance the area s evolving residential character, provide acceptable amenities for future residents. The aforementioned gloomy and oppressive living conditions would be likely to increase the reliance on artificial sources of light and heat. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies PCS5, PCS15, PCS23, PCS31 and PCS32 of the Core Strategy; DM1 of the Development Management DPD; and the NPPF. The social and economic benefits of two additional dwellings (beyond the four already approved) in this location are minor and would not outweigh the harm to the environment identified. 2. Lack of mitigation for potential harm to heathland (SAMM contribution). 5

6 52 Abbotsbury Road February 2017: Sever Land & Erect 3 No. 3 bed bungalows with garage and parking. Demolish existing garage to no 52. Approved (APP/16/01807/F) July 2017: Non-material amendment following approval of APP/16/01807/F to relocate garage for Unit 1. Approved (APP/17/00955/F) 44 Abbotsbury Road 2014: Extension to rear of property, erection of double garage in rear garden (APP/14/00259/F). Approved 46 Abbotsbury Road 2014: Extend the rear of the building to create an open plan living area on the ground floor and two bedrooms on the first floor. Dismantle and rebuild existing garage. (APP/14/00898/F). Approved. 1 Abbotsbury Road 2015: Sever land and erect 3 chalet bungalows with garages. Approved (APP/15/01131/F) 27 Abbotsbury Road 2006: Demolish existing dwelling and erect two detached chalet bungalows with attached garages Approved (06/06544/006/F) PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE None. COMMUNITY CONSULTATION None CONSULTATIONS None. The application previously refused for 6 units under APP/17/01534/F received no objections from the Transporttation Policy Manager or Waste Services. REPRESENTATIONS Representations have been received from local residents, Poole Society and Purbeck and 6

7 Poole CPRE which raise the following concerns: Insufficient onsite parking and turning; substandard access and construction traffic and deliveries will result in further congestion; highway safety issues and access difficulties for emergency services; garages likely to be used for storage and cannot be counted as parking spaces. Highway infrastructure cannot accommodate more dwellings. Backland; overdevelopment.; and unsustainable Out of keeping with character and pattern of area contrary to PCS5. Cumulative impact of 8 additional dwellings ( including 3 proposed to rear of Abbotsbury Road). Insufficient garden space. Cramped, dark and oppressive for future occupants and reliant on artificial sources of heat and light. No provision for refuse collection. Clutter and obstruction from bins. Surface and foul water drainage unviable and together with climate change; loss of trees; and hard surfacing, would exacerbate drainage issues. No flood risk assessment. Adverse implications for wildlife. No mitigation contrary to Natural England's advice. Loss of privacy, light, outlook and peaceful enjoyment to neighbouring properties. Permitted development rights should be removed for first floor windows. Noise pollution, dust and disturbance including from construction traffic. Devaluation of neighbouring properties. Potential subsidence. No affordable housing contribution. Sequence and timing of planning applications. Insufficient demand for such dwellings evidenced by similar, empty properties on the street. Failure to commence approved schemes. Incorrect information on application form and plans. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS POLICY AND GUIDANCE STRATEGIC CONTEXT National Planning Policy Framework (Adopted March 2012) LOCAL CONTEXT The following policies are listed as applying to this application. Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS05 Broad Locations for Residential Development PCS08 Lifetime Homes PCS15 Access and Movement PCS23 Local Distinctiveness PCS24 Design and Access Statements PCS26 Delivering Locally Distinctive, Self-Reliant Places PCS31 Sustainable Energy - General PCS32 Sustainable Homes 7

8 PCS34 Flood Risk PCS37 The Role of Developer Contributions in Shaping Places Poole Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies DPD (Adopted April 2012) Development Management Policies: DM1 Design DM7 Accessibility and Safety DM8 Demand Management DM9 Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Broadstone Neighbourhood Plan Post-Examination Draft February 2018 The post-examination draft plan was accepted by the Council on the 27th February and is due to proceed to referendum in July. If the referendum returns a majority vote in favour, the Council will formally adopt it and bring it into legal force as part of the local development plan. Government guidance states in respect of the weight to be attached to an emerging neighbourhood plan that: Planning applications are decided in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. It is for the decision maker in each case to determine what is a material consideration and what weight to give to it. An emerging neighbourhood plan may be a material consideration. Paragraph 216 of the National Planning Policy Framework sets out the weight that may be given to relevant policies in emerging plans in decision taking. Factors to consider include the stage of preparation of the plan and the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies. Whilst a referendum ensures that the community has the final say on whether the neighbourhood plan comes into force, as part of the development plan, decision makers should respect evidence of local support prior to the referendum when seeking to apply weight to an emerging neighbourhood plan. The consultation statement submitted with the draft neighbourhood plan should reveal the quality and effectiveness of the consultation that has informed the plan proposals. And all representations on the proposals should have been submitted to the local planning authority by the close of the local planning authority s publicity period. Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) provides that a local planning authority must have regard to a post-examination draft neighbourhood development plan, so far as material to the application.' As the plan has not yet been subject to a referendum, the following policies apply but carry limited weight at this time: BP3 Enhancing Biodiversity BP4 Securing High Quality Sustainable Design BP5 Balancing the Housing Stock 8

9 Supplementary Planning Document Parking and Highway Layout in Development (Adopted 2011) The Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework (Adopted 2015) PLANNING JUDGEMENT Impact on the character and appearance of the area and residential amenity of future occupants Policy PCS 5 (iii) of the Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) states that residential proposals for plot severance will only be permitted where sufficient land can be assembled to accommodate a type, scale, density and layout of development which preserves or enhances the area s residential character and does not harm the amenities of local residents. This stance is reinforced by Policy PCS23 of the Core Strategy which also seeks to ensure that development exhibits a high standard of design that will complement or enhance Poole's character and local distinctiveness by respecting the setting and character of the site, surrounding area and adjoining buildings by virtue of function, siting, landscaping and amenity space, scale, density, massing, height, design details, materials and appearance. Policy DM1 of the Development Management Policies DPD states that the development should not result in overbearing or oppressive development, loss of light to habitable rooms or loss of privacy to the detriment of neighbouring amenity. The NPPF states that: Local Authorities should always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings; Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people; and Permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions. As set out above, the principle of severance of the rear gardens of nos 46, 52, 54 and 56 Abbotsbury Road to provide four detached 2 and 3-bed bungalows, each with a detached garage, has been accepted cumulatively under APP/16/01807/F and APP/17/00550/F on the grounds, inter alia, that the bungalows would not be prominent in the street scene due to their height; form; siting at a lower level; and distance from the highway. It was determined that sufficient land had been assembled to preserve the evolving residential character and appearance of the area. A proposal for 6 bungalows was refused under APP/17/01534/F on grounds including that it would be cramped, oppressive and create a poor living environment for future occupants: Units 1 and 5 would be approximately 900mm from the side boundaries and this narrow area would serve as the only route to the entrance and the rear garden. This area is likely to be flanked by a tall fence or similar boundary treatment to provide privacy to the neighbouring property (No.58). Units 4 and 5 would have a wall-to-wall separation distance of approximately 1.8m. Roof overhangs and the splayed gables of Units 2, 3 and 4 would further reduce the perceived space in this and tandem 9

10 parking areas. Although en-suite windows could reasonably be obscure glazed, their position flanking neighbouring parking areas and entrances would result in a mutually uncomfortable environment for residents. The outlook from the study windows would also be restricted as they would be close to boundaries, neighbouring dwellings and/or flanked by parked cars. As secondary rooms, this would not typically merit refusal in itself however further highlights the cramped nature of the scheme. Both bedrooms of all units would face south and benefit from large windows however these would be somewhat exposed to residents of the other dwellings. Although an attempt has been made to provide screening and soften the appearance of the scheme through the provision of small front gardens with tree planting, the proposed trees would be likely to result in a poor and gloomy outlook. Given the ultimate height, span and deciduous nature of the chosen species (small-leaved lime) in particular, the limited space around them and their close proximity to driveways and windows, it is highly likely that there would be future pressure to prune or fell them. These could be replaced with low level planting however it is likely that the occupants of Units 2 to 5 in particular would keep blinds/ curtains closed to maintain some privacy. For the reasons outlined, the proposed development would fail to assemble sufficient land to accommodate a scale, density and layout of development which would preserve or enhance the area s evolving residential character or provide acceptable amenities for future residents contrary to PCS5, PCS23, DM1 and the NPPF. This harm would not be outweighed by the social and economic benefits associated with two additional dwellings in this location. The current scheme would provide 5 no.2 bedroom bungalows, with detached garages for 2 of the units. The site area would be broadly the same as the cumulative area for the 4 approved bungalows. The form and appearance of the bungalows would be in keeping with surrounding development. As was the case previously, the bungalows would not be prominent in the street scene due to their scale, form and approximately 40m distance form the highway. The 6m wide access (including a visibility splay), in addition to the bin collection area just inside the front boundary, would make severance of the rear of the site more evident from Abbotsbury Road, however, this would not result in material harm given that the existing properties are of limited architectural merit; the intervening space; and the evolving character of the area as set out in the planning history. Bins would be in a prominent position to the front of the site however this would not result in sustained clutter in the street scene as it would be a temporary storage point for collection day and in owners' interests to return them to their own properties. There is an existing low front boundary wall at No.52 Abbotsbury Road. This is characteristic of the area however some properties have taller planting behind. If acceptable in all other respects, landscaping could be sought by condition to ensure the bin storage area would not be incongruous in the streetscene. The cumulative footprint of the proposed units would be less than the approved schemes for 4 units. The front and rear building lines would be broadly similar. The rear gardens would provide adequate external amenity space. The proposal would provide a sufficient number and size of parking spaces in accordance with the Council's guidelines. 10

11 The proposal incorporates some features similar to the refused scheme for 6 units including tandem car parking spaces between some of the units; limited gaps to boundary fences and between units; and the exposed nature of the south-facing bedroom windows. Notwithstanding this, the proposals would result in a more spacious and higher quality living environment due to the reduction in the number of units by one and the smaller footprint of the individual units; the reduction in the number of bedrooms to 2 per unit; the grouping of parking spaces between units 2 and 3 which would reduce the need for residents to manoeuvre outside neighbouring units' bedroom windows; that parking spaces would no longer encroach beyond rear building lines; that all units would be accessed by doors on the front elevations as opposed to the side; and the provision of more appropriate low-level planting to the front of each unit rather than trees. Given the reasonable internal and external amenity space; the fallback position of four approved units; and the social and economic benefits associated with one additional unit, the proposal would not result in material harm meriting refusal. Neighbouring amenity The planning permission for alterations and extensions over two floors and a new garage at no.46 appears to have expired without being implemented, but has nevertheless been taken into account. There would be no material harm to neighbouring amenity through further intensification of the site and overshadowing, loss of outlook or overlooking given the number of units proposed; their single storey form; the minimum separation distance of over 20m to houses to the north and south; the oblique angle of other neighbouring properties; the potential to secure close boarded fences and landscaping around the site by condition; the number and function of openings facing the access; and the existing mutual overlooking. Conditions removing permitted development rights for windows above ground-floor level should be attached to allow the impact of any potential overlooking of adjacent private amenity areas to be properly considered. Highway safety and parking provision There was previously no objection on highway grounds to six units on the application site with the same access arrangements and two parking spaces per unit as proposed. The scheme would provide sufficient on-site parking and access in accordance with the Council's adopted Parking and Highway Layout in Development SPD. The provision of the proposed parking; turning; splays; lighting; and a finish to adoptable standard can all be secured by condition. Waste There would be sufficient space in each rear garden for bins to be stored. The site would not be accessed by Council waste collection lorries and the residents of the proposed bungalows would have to present their bins close to the front of the site on collection days. The distance to the highway would exceed BS 5906 guidance of 30 metres, however, the driveway would be surfaced to an adoptable standard and the gradient would not compromise the ability of residents to wheel the bins to the bin collection area adjacent to 11

12 the highway. This would be relatively infrequent and, on balance, the inconvenience of this distance involved would be outweighed by the benefits associated with an additional residential unit. It would be left to the occupiers to manage this arrangement themselves. This position would require careful consideration for any schemes which would further increase the overall site area or number of units using this access however. Drainage Concerns regarding the exacerbation of existing surface and foul water drainage issues were raised by neighbouring residents in respect of both the current and previous applications. A drainage ditch runs along the northern boundary and part of the site is poorly drained. The gardens of properties on Anvil Crescent bounding the site have a lower ground level and also appear to be poorly drained. In accordance with the Technical Guidance to the NPPF, a flood risk assessment can not reasonably be requested for a development of this size outside Flood Zones 2 or 3. Previous schemes for the site were discussed with the Council's drainage department, Building Control and Wessex Water, all of which were satisfied that drainage issues were not insurmountable as attenuation and infiltration methods could be introduced which could deal with surface water drainage, while foul water could be pumped to sewers in Abbotsbury Road where there is available capacity. Adequate drainage would need to be provided to meet building regulations. Permeable surfacing and landscaping, including trees along the northern boundary, can be secured by condition. Sustainability/ renewable energy Policies PCS31 and PCS32 of the Core Strategy state that the orientation and design of development should minimise the need for artificial light and heat, maximise solar gain and make every effort to achieve a significant carbon reduction. The northern aspect of living and dining rooms, the use of blinds to mitigate overlooking of some south-facing bedroom windows and the lack of windows to some secondary rooms as outlined above would be likely to increase the reliance on artificial sources of light and heat. Notwithstanding this, considering the use of renewable energy technology such as heat pumps and solar technology as outlined in the Energy and Resource Statement could help mitigate this and this would not merit refusal. The use of renewable sources to generate 10% of estimated energy use can be secured by condition. Trees and biodiversity Part of the site has been cleared of trees however these were not protected. A number of trees were retained along the northern boundary and (unprotected) trees on adjoining sites would overhang the back gardens. The application is supported by an Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan. As was the case under previous approvals Laurel, Elder and Rhododendron shrubs are to be removed to facilitate the development. These are Category C shrubs of little public amenity value, whilst mature trees adjoining the site, a number of which are Category B, could be safeguarded by protective fencing during construction. The site plan and Tree Protection Plan show indicative tree planting along the northern 12

13 boundary which would enhance the character of the area. Further details can be secured by condition as part of a landscaping scheme along with an updated Tree Protection Plan. In relation to biodiversity, the case officer's report under the approved schemes states: The site is largely laid to lawn and planted with shrubs. It has potential to support certain species however as nesting birds and bats are protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1980, and the site is not within or adjoining a designated nature site, a habitat survey would not be reasonable or proportionate in this case. The Council's Biodiversity Officer has advised that enhancements such as bat slates and native tree planting along the northern boundary would be appropriate. The applicant has amended the plans accordingly and these elements are secured by condition. Further matters Congestion from construction traffic for a development of this scale would be relatively short lived and would not merit control by condition, whilst construction noise or dust resulting in disturbance to amenity is a matter for Environmental Health and would not merit refusal given the scale and nature of development. Subsidence would be a civil matter, with the expectation that any developer would undertake works in a manner that would not result in instability within or adjoining the application site, whilst concern about impact on property value is not in itself a consideration to which any weight can be attached. INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS Mitigation of the impact of the proposed development on recreational facilities; Dorset Heathlands and Poole Harbour Special Protection Areas; and strategic transport infrastructure is provided for by the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule adopted by the Council on 18th September In accordance with CIL Regulation 28 (1) this confirms that dwellings are CIL liable development and are required to pay CIL in accordance with the rates set out in the Council s Charging Schedule. The site is within 5km (but not within 400m) of Heathland SSSI and the proposed net increase in dwellings may be acceptable subject to appropriate mitigation of their impact upon the Heathland. As part of the Dorset Heathland Planning Framework a contribution will be taken from all qualifying residential development to fund Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) in respect of the internationally important Dorset Heathlands. The charge is based on the cost of delivering SAMM in Poole and is 375 per additional house (plus admin fee). This proposal requires such a contribution. The applicant has paid the relevant contribution through a Section 111 Agreement. The proposal therefore accords with the provisions of Core Strategy Policies PCS15, PCS28, PCS 36 and PCS37; DPD Policies DM9, IN1 and IN2; and the Dorset Heathlands SPD. 13

14 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS This application currently falls into CIL Zone C which has a base CIL chargeable rate of 75 per square metre of chargeable residential floorspace. The precise CIL liability in respect of these proposals will be confirmed in the CIL Regulation 65 Liability Notice which will be issued as soon as practicable after the day on which a planning permission first permits development. The CIL liability will be the product of the chargeable residential floorspace and the base CIL chargeable rate indexed against the BCIS All-in Tender Price Index for November If this development is granted permission and the dwellings built, the Council might also be eligible to receive government grant under the New Homes Bonus. Local financial considerations are material to the decision on this application. It is a matter for the decision maker to conclude how much weight should be attached to them. The planning merits of the scheme stand alone, and whilst these potential financial receipts are of obvious benefit to the Council, they would not outweigh the harm identified. CONCLUSION The proposal is recommended for approval. RECOMMENDATION It is therefore recommended that this application be Granted With CIL Contribution Conditions: 1. GN150 (Time Expiry 3 Years (Standard)) 2. PL01 (Plans Listing) 3. GN162 (Renewable Energy - Residential) (10%) 4. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Further details of the bat tiles/ slates to be installed in the positions shown on the approved elevation plans shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bat tiles/ slates and associated connectivity shall thereafter be installed in accordance with the approved detail and thereafter retained prior to first occupation of the dwellings hereby approved. Reason - In accordance with Policy DM9 of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012) and the NPPF (2012). 5. TR010 (Arb Method Statement-Submission Required) 6. LS020 (Landscaping Scheme to be Submitted) 14

15 7. AA01 (Non standard Condition) Details of bollard lighting for the access and parking areas shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved bollard lighting shall be installed on site and completed in all respects prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby approved and shall thereafter be retained. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and highway safety in accordance with Policies PCS15 and PCS23 of the Poole Core Strategy (adopted 2009); DM1, DM7 and DM8 of the Poole Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (adopted 2012) and the NPPF (2012). 8. HW230 (Permeable surfacing condition) 9. HW100 (Parking/Turning Provision) 10. HW200 (Provision of Visibility Splays) 11. GN100 (No Further Windows in Specified Elevation) 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 windows (including rooflights) or doors shall be constructed above ground floor level of the development hereby permitted. Reason - To avoid loss of privacy to adjoining properties and in accordance with Policy DM1 of the Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies (April 2012) and the NPPF (2012). 12. GN040 (Match Materials to the Existing Building) The external-facing materials of the development hereby permitted shall be as specified on the approved plans and the submitted application form. Reason - In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy PCS23 of the Core Strategy 2009 and the NPPF (2012). Informative Notes 1. IN72 (Working with applicants: Approval) 2. IN74 (Community Infrastructure Levy - Approval) 3. IN81 (SAMM Approval) 15

16 ITEM NO 02 APPLICATION NO. APP/17/01637/F APPLICATION TYPE Full SITE ADDRESS Mansfield Road Water Tower, Mansfield Road, Poole, BH14 0DJ PROPOSALS Conversion of existing Water Tower and new build extension joined via glazed link to form 17 residential apartments with associated access, car parking, cycle and bin storage REGISTERED 3 November, 2017 APPLICANT Nest Homes AGENT Pure Town Planning WARD Parkstone CASE OFFICER Clare Spiller INTRODUCTION This application is brought before committee at the request of Cllr. Challinor because of concerns about overdevelopmet and its negative impact on parking provision in the area. Recommendation for Grant With CIL Contribution THE PROPOSAL Conversion of existing Water Tower and new build extension joined via glazed link to form 17 residential apartments with associated access, car parking, cycle and bin storage. MAIN ISSUES The principal issues for consideration in this case relate to: Whether the reuse of the water tower and the scale, mass and design of the attached development preserves or enhances the heritage asset (the Grade II Listed Water Tower) and its setting. The principle of flats having regard to the character and appearance of the area Impact on amenity of existing and future occupants and on neighbouring properties Impact on protected trees and open space Bats and biodiversity enhancements Impact on highway safety and parking Provision of Affordable Housing SITE DESCRIPTION The area is characterised by commercial and retail development along Ashley Road. Terraced and semi-detached two-storey dwellings with long narrow plots predominate in the 16

17 streets south of Ashley Rd. A large three-storey building to the north of the application site is occupied as a Health Centre. The Water Tower is a Grade II Listed Building; is in a poor state of repair; and is no longer required for that purpose. The tower stands as an attractive structure which is a prominent local landmark. That the land around it has not been developed or otherwise enclosed and has instead been used as a car park has preserved the prominence of the tower. The tower nevertheless accommodates modern communications antennae and a metal platform that detract from its form and painted out window glazing that detracts from its architectural integrity to a minor degree. The water tower sits in the middle of the site which is surfaced with tarmac and used as a public pay-and-display car park. This is operated by Borough of Poole which leases the land from Wessex Water. There is a lime tree in the south west corner of the site. The car park slopes downwards from east to west such and the levels of the car park are slightly higher than the rear gardens of adjavent homes in Belmont Road. The properties in Weymouth Road to the west of the site are Victorian terraces which generally have kitchen windows on the rear elevation at ground floor level with dining/living room window within the rear recess. Their gardens are approximately 1m lower than the ground floor accommodation. There are bedroom windows at first floor level on the rear. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 2017: There is a current application for Listed Building Consent in respect of the works to the Water Tower required for its proposed conversion and new build extension joined via glazed link to form 17 residential apartments with associated access, car parking, cycle and bin storage. The application is reported separately on this agenda (APP/17/01638/L) PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE Options for the development of the site with additional housing or flats, together with the conversion of water tower to flats were the subject of pre-application engagement. Advice was given in March 2017 that (PREA/16/00215): Of the various housing and flatted schemes presented, a flatted scheme would be the most appropriate form of development; would make the best use of the land; and would in principle be more likely to comply with the provisions of Policy PCS5 (i) (d), subject to density. Care should be taken that the Water Tower tank element is retained as this gives the tower its historic character an function. The tank also protects the wall tops and give it a height and 'landmark' prominence on the skyline. There is probably adequate separation distance to homes in Weymouth Road such that a scheme could be designed that would not materially harm the outlook or privacy of their occupiers. Parking provision should accord to the Councils Parking and Highway Layout in Development SPD. COMMUNITY CONSULTATION None. 17

18 CONSULTATIONS Head of Environmental Services: Contaminated Land Officer: Support the proposal subject to ground contamination condition. Waste Operations: The location of the bin store is within the recommended 10m distance from the highway. Open space and Recreation: Support the proposal subject to condition to detail the design, specification and maintenance plan for the landscaping of the entire scheme to include the communal garden, trees and boundary treatments. Biodiversity Officer: Support the proposal subject to bat conditions. Lead Local Flood Risk: The application has a comprehensive drainage design plan and has demonstrated that there will be an increase in permeable area by some 300m2. The applicant has not, however, shown to have given consideration to SUDS in any other form. It should be possible in this location to include some form of soakaway and allow rainfall to infiltrate into the ground at source. There are known flood risk locations downstream from the site. The applicant should apply the 1:100 year storm event with climate change to the drainage design for the life of the development, ensuring the site has capacity to prevent/reduce runoff for that event on the site. Any reduction in the rate and volume of flow off site should be explored further. Head of Housing: Concurs with the DVS that the scheme cannot deliver any affordable housing contribution. Head of Transport Policy: Support the proposal subject to conditions. Wessex Water: The applicant should contact Wessex Water regarding connection points and be made aware of pipes which run across the site. REPRESENTATIONS Representation has been received in which the following concerns have been raised: Overbearing; overshadowing; and loss of light and privacy to 9 Belmont Rd Loss of light and privacy to properties on Belmont Rd and Weymouth Rd. Contrary to Article 1 and Article 8 of the Human Rights Act. Proposal doesn t respond to local context and street pattern and will be out of keeping Additional traffic. The area is already congested and access to Mansfield road is severely limited due to the width of the road, double yellow lines and residents parking Bin store will attract rats and foxes Two doctors surgeries have amalgamated and there is already insufficient parking for patients. The removal of car park will make the GP surgery less accessible to patients and patients will park illegally and unsafely. Harm to Listed Building from the disproportionate additions; building a glass link will 18

19 detract from the look of the original tower and possibley damage the existing structure where the abutment occurs, encouraging water damage to the existing tower. Lack of information on the restoration of the water tower. Removal of car park will also lead to a fall in trade in Ashley Rd which could lead to job losses and economic decline of the area. Noise and disturbance to existing residents The full height glass fronts will effect the privacy of patients in the GP surgery. No consideration of flood management and impact on houses down the hill Loss of value of homes in the area. Society for Poole: Objection to the loss of car park for the use of patients to the surgery and to visit Ashley Rd shops. The loss of parking for the surgery will affect the community use of the surgery. NHS Property Services: The building is sub leased to Parkstone Tower Practice; Dorset Healthcare University Foundation Trust; and Lloyds Pharmacy and they are concerned that the 'red line' incorporates land which will remain leased to NHS Property Services. The proposal will lead to a lack of privacy to patients due to overlooking from the full height north facing windows of the flats. The occupiers provide significant NHS services to the local community and a significant number of visitors to the medical centre are elderly or infirm and rely on the car park to be able to access the health centre. The loss of the car park would reduce the accessibility of the health centre and is likely to diminish its future viability since, whilst the health centre has a number of car spaces within its boundary, these are not sufficient to accommodate the number of patient visitors. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS POLICY AND GUIDANCE STRATEGIC CONTEXT National Planning Policy Framework (Adopted March 2012) LOCAL CONTEXT The following policies are listed as applying to this application. Poole Core Strategy (Adopted February 2009) PCS05 Broad Locations for Residential Development PCS06 Affordable Housing PCS15 Access and Movement PCS23 Local Distinctiveness PCS28 Dorset Heaths International Designations PCS31 Sustainable Energy - General Supplementary Planning Document SPD1 Parking & Highway Layout in Development SPD2 Heritage Assets 19

20 SPD4 Affordable Housing SPD (Adopted November 2011) SPD3 Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework ( ) Poole Site Specific Allocations & Development Management Policies DPD (Adopted April 2012) Development Management Policies: DM1 Design DM7 Accessibility and Safety DM8 Demand Management DM9 Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity PLANNING JUDGEMENT The proposal is to convert the redundant Grade II water tower to three 2-bed duplex flats and to erect a block of 14 flats at the rear of the water tower over 4 levels with a reduced top floor footprint. There would be a communal open space to the south west of the site and unallocated parking for 19 cars, secure covered cycle storage and visitor cycle parking. Conversion of the Water Tower The proposal is to make internal alterations to form 3 duplex flats. The water tower has very thick internal and external walls on each floor and the applicant has demonstrated that the internal walls can be removed without damaging the structural integrity of the building in its proposed new use. The removal of these walls is therefore potentially acceptable in principle. In recognition of the unique character of the thickness of the internal walls the applicant is proposing to denote where the internal walls once stood in the building by the use a different floor treatments. To avoid the need to form new openings in the external walls, two of the three duplex flats would rely on borrowed light from glazed floor/ceiling panels adjacent to an existing window in the floor above to light their bedrooms. Use would also be made of voids and internal glass walls to increase light penetration from the floor above into the bedrooms. Given the Listed Building status of the Water Tower, this is the only design solution which would retain the external fabric and character of the building whilst providing it with an alternative and viable use. On balance whilst there will be no outlook from the bedrooms in 2 of the duplexes proposed and natural light would be optimised by unusual means, in this case the future occupants of the building will have set these considerations against the overall amenity associated with living in a uniquely converted historic building. Parts of the existing tank will be removed and replaced with windows, retaining the integrity of the Listed Building and providing light and outlook to the top floor of living accommodation. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing external walkway which is in disrepair with a new walkway. There is no external access proposed to this walkway from the top floor, other than for maintenance. The external fabric of the building will be repaired and the windows will be replaced with stainless steel windows, details of which can be secured by condition. Proposed development In addition to the conversion of the water tower, the proposal would provide 14 flats. The site is close to the Ashley Road retail and commercial area where higher density development is acceptable. Whilst there is terraced housing to the east; south; and west of the site, there is 20

21 a substantial commercial building to the north accommodating the Health Centre. Given the sustainable location of the site adjacent to the Ashely Road Secondary Retail frontage area and the constraints of the site, including the Grade II Listed Water Tower sited in the middle of the plot, flatted development is the most appropriate form of development subject to scale, mass and design. The proposal is for a 4-storey building with a central corridor such that flats would have either a northerly or southerly aspect. The upper storey would have a reduced footprint to accommodate terraces to the top-floor flats, with the northern flat also having access to a roof terrace accessed by means of a fully glazed structure. The proposed stair well would abut the west elevation of the water tower and would incorporate full height glazing and a simple design which is in contrast to the water tower. The proposed palette of materials, including the use of white and red brick to echo the water tower, help to reduce the visual scale and mass and break up the proportions of the new build and integrate the old and contemporary elements of the building. Full details of the bricks can be secured by condition. The proposal is a large building compared to the terraced houses, but is an appropriate scale and interface with the commercial scale of the water tower. The proposed building reduces in height to respect the adjacent terraced houses to the west. The proposal would be visible from Mansfield Road and there would be glimpses of the new build element from Weymouth Road in the gaps between houses. The height of the link on the west elevation of the tower shrouds its silhouette but views of this are limited. The proposal includes a communal garden and structural landscaping around the building, which would enhance the setting of the Water Tower relative to the existing hard standing around its base. Whilst this is a large building it will preserve the existing Grade II Listed Water Tower and its setting and the proposal will be in keeping with the general character of the streetscene and area The public benefit of retaining and re-using an unusual Grade II listed, industrial structure is sufficient justification for the proposed alterations to it. The materials to be used would reflect the cues of the historic building and the introduction of soft landscaping will improve the setting of the Water tower. The applicant has demonstrated their intention of also restoring the historic fabric of the Water tower, which can be secured by condition. Impact on Amenity The proposed new building would be sited to the east of the properties in Weymouth Road which back onto the site with a separation distance of approximately 18m at the closest point. The 'tunnel back' rear elevations of these properties are typically laid out with kitchen windows in the protruding rear elevation and dining / living room window in the recess, which would have a greater separation distance. Both elements include first-floor bedroom windows. The gardens are at a lower level than the ground floor of the houses. The building would be visible from the rear of these properties and from the gardens and the outlook from these homes would change. There would be some shading and loss of sunlight to adjacent homes during the early morning and also some loss of privacy to the rear parts of gardens of some homes in Weymouth Road as a result of the full height windows of those flats closest to the western boundary of the site. This could be mitigated in part by incorporating obscure glazed balcony screens. This would also prevent reciprocal overlooking to the future occupants. Windows proposed on the west elevation would be obscured and restricted opening and this should be secured by condition. 21

22 The 4th floor includes 1.8m high privacy screens to the side of the terraces on the west elevation as well as 1.1m high obscured balustrading to the front of the terraces. These measures would adequately mitigate overlooking to properties in Belmont Road and Weymouth Road. The building will be in excess of 29m from the rear of properties in Belmont Road, which are sat at a slightly lower level than the application site. Given that the new building will be sited to the north of the gardens of these dwellings there would be no shading or loss of sunlight and limited loss of light. The outlook from the rear of these properties and their gardens would change, but at approximately 29m this would not result in material harm to the occupants amenities. Given this separation distance there would not be any material loss of privacy to the occupants of homes in Belmont Road. Given the windows/doors to the new build are floor to ceiling with a balustrade which sits in front of the window/door it would be reasonable to condition the balustrading to these full height windows to be obscure glazed, at first floor and above, to prevent the perception of being overlooked and also to prevent reciprocal overlooking to the future occupants. The GP surgery has objected to the loss of privacy to patients. It would therefore be reasonable to help address this by requiring the balustrading to the terraces to be obscure glazed, but since it would also be possible for this concern to be mitigated by measures at the surgery, this would not in itself be a reason for refusal. Concern has been received about noise and disturbance from the proposed use. The use of the site as residential is an acceptable use especially given it is primarily adjacent to existing residential properties and the site is currently a car park. Also, the proposed location of the bin store is not directly adjacent to existing neighbours and concerns raised about smells and vermin are not planning issues but are covered by other legislation under Environmental and Consumer Protections remit. Comments have been received about devaluing property in the area, this is not in itself a matter to which weight can properly be attached in considering the application. Trees and Landscaping A Lime tree in the south west corner of the site is identified as a 'category B' tree and the proposals incorporate it within the communal garden with adequate separation from the proposed building. A multi stemmed Sycamore tree at the rear of the site is identified as 'Category C' and is proposed to be removed, to which there is no objection. A Rowan tree on the road frontage would be retained. The application is accompanied by an Arboricultural Method Statement and location for protective fencing locations for the retained trees. Through the NPPF (para 109), all developments are required to recognise the wider benefits of ecosystem services and provide net gains in biodiversity. It is recommended that this is achieved in this scheme through an appropriately designed landscaping scheme to include native species and features of interest for locally important species. The application states that there would be a communal garden including a retained tree, plus areas of hedge planting and tree planting. No detail has been provided on these and as such it is reasonable to request a condition to require the detail of the design, specification and maintenance plan for the landscaping of the entire scheme to include the communal garden, trees and boundary treatments to be submitted for approval. Bats The applicant has submitted a bat survey, but this is over 5 years old. A new bat survey should be secured by condition and this should be carried out in line with the Bat 22