Agenda item

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

v Gerald Smith

v Kieran Perry – written statement read out

 

Applicant/Supporters

v Matt Holmes - Agent

 

Ward Councillors

v Cllr 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 also part of the Dorset Heaths SAC (Special Area of Conservation).  The proximity of these European sites (SPA and SAC) means that determination of the application should be undertaken with regard to the requirements of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.  The applicant has failed to demonstrate in accordance with the Habitat Regulations that the proposals will cause no harm to the SPA and SAC heathland.  It is clear, on the basis of advice from Natural England that, notwithstanding the CIL contribution, no avoidance or mitigation of adverse effects through Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) has been secured. In the absence of any form of acceptable mitigation it is likely to have an adverse effect on the heathland special features including those which are SPA and SAC features.  Having regard to the Waddenzee judgement (ECJ case C-127/02) the Council is not in a position to be convinced that there is no reasonable scientific doubt to the contrary.  For these reasons, and without needing to conclude the appropriate assessment, the proposal is considered contrary to the recommendations of the Berne Convention Standing Committee on urban development adjacent to the Dorset Heathlands, Dorset Heathlands SPD and Policy PP32 and PP39 of the Poole Local Plan (November 2018).

 

• The application site is within close proximity to Poole Harbour which is a Special Protection Area (SPA), Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Ramsar site and the determination of the application should be undertaken with regard to these European designations and the requirements of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.  The applicant has failed to demonstrate in accordance with the Habitat Regulations that the proposals will cause no harm to the SPA.  It is clear, on the basis of advice from Natural England that, notwithstanding the CIL contribution, no avoidance or mitigation of adverse effects through Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) has been secured. In the absence of any form of acceptable mitigation it is likely to have an adverse effect on the special features of Poole Harbour including those which are SPA features.  Having regard to the Waddenzee judgement (ECJ case C-127/02) the Council is not in a position to be convinced that there is no reasonable scientific doubt to the contrary.  For these reasons, and without needing to conclude the appropriate assessment, the proposal is considered contrary to the recommendations of the Berne Convention Standing Committee on urban development adjacent to Poole Harbour, and Policy PP32 and PP39 of the Poole Local Plan (November 2018).

 

• In the absence of a completed S106 planning agreement, no affordable housing has been secured as part of this development. Therefore, the proposal would not accord with Policy PP11 of the Poole Local Plan, Affordable Housing SPD and the NPPF 2024.

 

Voting:  For 4, Against 2, Abstain 1

 

Notes: Cllr Chaillnor left the meeting before this item