Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence from Members.

Apologies receive from Cllr Kate Salmon and Cllr Cameron Adams.

To receive information on any changes in the membership of the Committee.

Note – When a member of a Committee is unable to attend a meeting of a Committee or Sub-Committee, the relevant Political Group Leader (or their nominated representative) may, by notice to the Monitoring Officer (or their nominated representative) prior to the meeting, appoint a substitute member from within the same Political Group. The contact details on the front of this agenda should be used for notifications. 

Cllr Joe Salmon is substituting for Cllr Kate Salmon.

Councillors are requested to declare any interests on items included in this agenda. Please refer to the workflow on the preceding page for guidance.

Declarations received will be reported at the meeting.

Cllr Gillian Martin declared a personal interest in item 6c and would leave the meeting for that item.

To confirm and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meetings held on 12, 19 and 30 June 2025.

The minutes of the meetings held on 12,19 and 30 June 2025 were confirmed as accurate records to be signed by the Chair.

To receive any requests to speak on planning applications which the Planning Committee is considering at this meeting.

The deadline for the submission of requests to speak is 10.00am on Wednesday 16 July 2025 [10.00am of the working day before the meeting]. Requests should be submitted to Democratic Services using the contact details on the front of this agenda.

Further information about how public speaking is managed at meetings is contained in the Planning Committee Protocol for Public Speaking and Statements, a copy of which is included with this agenda sheet and is also published on the website on the following page:

https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=614

Summary of speaking arrangements as follows:

Speaking at Planning Committee (in person or virtually):

·       There will be a maximum combined time of five minutes to speak in objection and up to two persons may speak within the five minutes.

·       There will be a further maximum combined time of five minutes to speak in support and up to two persons may speak within the five minutes.

·       No speaker may speak for more than half this time (two and a half minutes) UNLESS there are no other requests to speak received by the deadline OR it is with the agreement of the other speaker.

Anyone who has registered to speak by the deadline may, as an alternative to speaking/for use in default, submit a written statement to be read out on their behalf. This must be provided to Democratic Services by 10.00am of the working day before the meeting, must not exceed 450 words and will be treated as amounting to two and a half minutes of speaking time.

Please refer to the full Protocol document for further guidance.

Note: The public speaking procedure is separate from and is not intended to replicate or replace the procedure for submitting a written representation on a planning application to the Planning Offices during the consultation period.

There were a number of requests to speak on planning applications on the agenda as detailed below.

To consider the planning applications as listed below.

See planning application reports circulated with the agenda, as updated by the agenda addendum sheet to be published one working day before the meeting.

Councillors are requested where possible to submit any technical questions on planning applications to the Case Officer at least 48 hours before the meeting to ensure this information can be provided at the meeting.

The running order in which planning applications will be considered will be as listed on this agenda sheet.

The Chair retains discretion to propose an amendment to the running order at the meeting if it is considered expedient to do so.

Members will appreciate that the copy drawings attached to planning application reports are reduced from the applicants’ original and detail, in some cases, may be difficult to read. To search for planning applications, please use the following link:

https://www.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/search-and-comment-on-planning-applications

Councillors are advised that if they wish to refer to specific drawings or plans which are not included in these papers, they should contact the Case Officer at least 48 hours before the meeting to ensure that these can be made available.

To view Local Plans, again, the following link will take you to the main webpage where you can click on a tile to view the local plan for that area. The link is:

https://www.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/Planning-and-building-control/Planning-policy/Current-Local-Plans/Current-Local-Plan.aspx

The Committee considered planning application reports, a copy of which had been circulated and which appear as Appendices A,B and C of these minutes in the Minute Book. A Committee Addendum Sheet was published on 16 July 2025 and appears as Appendix E to these minutes.

Canford Cliffs ward

APP/24/00640/F

Demolition of existing property and erection of a replacement property. Improvement works to the sea wall.

Canford Cliffs ward

APP/24/00640/F

Demolition of existing property and erection of a replacement property. Improvement works to the sea wall.

Public Representations

Objectors

vNone registered

Applicant/Supporters

vTom Glanfield – Applicant

vClare Spiller - Agent

Ward Councillors

vNone registered

Resolved to GRANT permission contrary to the recommendation set out in the officer’s report for the following reasons:

• The existing building is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset with a significance to the lower end of moderate and its loss would result in heritage harm.
• The existing building is considered to have a neutral benefit to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and the loss of the existing building would have a neutral impact upon it.
• The proposed building, along with the sea wall, would have a positive impact upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
• Taking the above into account, members considered that the harm resulting from the proposal would be less than substantial. Such less than substantial harm would be overcome by the benefits of the proposal. Such benefits comprise climate change benefits through energy efficiency improvements and also improvement of the sea wall.
• Overall, members considered that the proposal accorded with Policy PP30, the Poole Local Plan and the NPPF

The following conditions and obligation were also agreed in principle, subject to power being delegated to the Head of Planning Operations to determine the final wording in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair:

Conditions;

• Deadline for implementation. (3 years)
• List of approved plans (for clarity)
• Materials (to match those on the plans)
• Biodiversity enhancements (we need to state a timescale
• Demolition and Construction and Environmental Management Plan – Prior to commencement.
• Vegetation clearance outside bird breeding season.
• Construction of sea wall outside seasons of April and May
• Construction of Sea Wall prior to occupation
• Recording of historic fabric (method statement and scope pre-commencement, and post completion statement before occupation)

Obligation

• Securing BNG self-build

Voting:  For 7, Against 1, Abstain 0

Talbot and Branksome Woods ward

APP/23/01051/F 

Alteration and upward extension of the buildings to create second and third floors of accommodation on each building to create 10 additional apartments in each block (20 in total)

Talbot and Branksome Woods ward

APP/23/01051/F

Alteration and upward extension of the buildings to create second and third floors of accommodation on each building to create 10 additional apartments in each block (20 in total)

Public Representations

Objectors

vGerald Smith

vKieran Perry – written statement read out

Applicant/Supporters

vMatt Holmes - Agent

Ward Councillors

vCllr Matthew Gillett in objection

The following are two of the most usual resolutions:

Resolved to REFUSE permission contrary to the recommendation set out in the officer’s report for the following reasons:

• The proposal, by reason of its cumulative height, scale, bulk, massing and position in relation to the adjoining building Eaglehurst, would result in an unacceptable level of overshadowing and a reduction in the quality of the outlook from the top floor balconies, resulting in adverse harm to residential amenity, contrary to Policy PP27 of the Poole Local Plan, and the NPPF 2024.

• The proposal does not include the provision of 20% adaptable and accessible homes and therefore would not provide specialist homes that meet the needs of an aging population, contrary to Policy PP12 of the Poole Local Plan and the NPPF 2024.  

• The proposal, by reason of its excessive cumulative scale, mass, bulk, height and detailed design, would increase the residential density of the site, resulting in overdevelopment. The unsympathetic extensions and alterations would not reflect the high-quality Art Deco style of the original building, resulting in harm to the character and appearance of the host building and character of the area, contrary to Policy PP27 of the Poole Local Plan, and the NPPF 2024.

• The proposal would not provide a satisfactory quantum of amenity space that would meet the needs of the future occupiers. The proposed bin stores will be located at an inconvenient distance for the future occupants of the southern block, resulting in a substandard form of accommodation, contrary to Policy PP27 of the Poole Local Plan, and the NPPF 2024.

• The site lies within 13.8km of New Forest SAC, New Forest SPA and New Forest Ramsar,  which are protected under European legislation for their wildlife importance, where it has been demonstrated in conjunction with New Forest Strategic Access Management and Monitoring Strategy 2023, prepared by Footprint Ecology and in agreement with Natural England that additional recreational pressure from additional bedroom numbers have the potential to harm their integrity. No mitigation or compensation measures have come forward to address such harms, and it cannot be ruled out beyond all reasonable scientific doubt that the proposal would not have a likely significant effect on the sensitive interest features of the habitat sites, from human pressures, either alone or in combination with other proposals. Therefore, the proposal would be contrary to Policy PP33 of the Poole Local Plan and Paragraph 193 of the NPPF 2024.

• The application site is within 5Km of a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).  This SSSI is also part of the designated Dorset Heathlands SPA (Special Protection Area) and Ramsar site, and is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

Parkstone ward

P/25/01014/PNHAS 

Prior Approval for the Removal of the existing roof and associated dormers. Construction of new first floor and roof with pitch and form to match existing (no dormers)

Parkstone ward

P/25/01014/PNHAS 

Prior Approval for the Removal of the existing roof and associated dormers. Construction of new first floor and roof with pitch and form to match existing (no dormers)

Public Representations

Objectors

vJames Cain

vDavid Alderson

Applicant/Supporters

vNone registered

Ward Councillors

vCllr Emily Harman

Resolved to REFUSE permission contrary to the recommendation set out in the officer’s report for the following reasons:

• The proposed scheme, as a result of its significant massing and height fails to respect and relate to the existing building and local patterns of development, and does not preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the street scene of Springfield Crescent, by virtue of its overall design and appearance, and as such it fails to comply with the provisions of Policy PP27 of the Poole Local Plan and it also fails to comply with the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA.2, 3a(ii) of the General Permitted Development Order (2015) (as amended). 

• The proposed scheme has a materially harmful impact upon the privacy and amenities of the occupants of the neighbouring properties by means of overbearing, due to the height and proximity to the neighbouring property, No 33 Springfield Crescent, and therefore it is contrary to the provisions of Policy PP27 of the Poole Local Plan and it also fails to comply with the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 1, Class AA.2, 3a(i) of the General Permitted Development Order (2015) (as amended).

Resolution: prior approval is required and refused.

Voting:  Unanimous

Notes: Cllrs Martin, Dower and McCormack left before this item. Cllr Martin declared an interest in this item at the start of the meeting.

This report updates members of the planning committee on the Local Planning Authority’s appeal performance over the stated period and is for information purposes only.

The Development Management Manager presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'D' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Public Report 

This report updates members of the planning committee on the Local Planning Authorities Appeal performance over the stated period.  The committee were informed that the Council are meeting national targets.

RESOLVED that the planning committee notes the contents of this report.