Agenda item

Demolition of existing single storey dwelling and erection of new single storey dwelling.

With the aid of a visual presentation including plans and aerial photographs, the Case Officer identified the site and explained the proposal and relevant planning considerations to members. Photographs of the proposed elevation and garage with the provision of solar panels, street scenes and indicative 3D visuals to address neighbours’ concerns were presented. Members were informed that the site was within the settlement boundary and within the Ballard Down Area of Distinctive Local Character. A distinction was made between the army barracks on the eastern part of the Ballard Estate which have informed the more regimented character of that area and subsequent development of the western area in which the application site is located. A historic plan was included in the presentation showing the site’s southern garden as an open area prior to its incorporation into the curtilage. The officer provided comparisons of the existing and proposed block plan and elevations and comparisons with the previously refused plans. Visuals were provided to inform Members of the impact on views of the wider landscape and on neighbouring amenity. It wa noted that the proposal would be more visually prominent than the existing bungalow, however, no harm had been identified regarding neighbouring amenity. The officer’s recommendation was to grant planning permission subject to conditions set out in the officer’s report.

Public Participation

K Beech -  Ken Parke Planning

Ms K Beech, speaking on behalf of  Ballard Estate residents, explained that the application site is located on a prominent corner of the access road into the estate.  Due to its larger footprint, mass,  full height glazing,  and the projection of the building line south into an existing open area, the proposal would appear visually intrusive and overbearing and, negatively impact views of Ballard Down resulting in significant harm to the character of the area. She expressed concern that the extended property could become two storey in the future. Harm to residential amenity to neighbouring properties was expressed and that the the proposal didn’t comply with planning policies such as Purbeck, and Swanage Local Plan or guidance within the NPPF.

Mr P Collis of the Ballard Estate explained that he considered this to be an important application. He informed members that over recent years the estate had welcomed well designed and integrated homes, however, was disappointed with the proposal before him as he didn’t feel as though it complied with policies. Mr P Collis provided comparison figures to illustrate that  amendments to the scale of the building compared with an earlier refusal remained out of keeping with other properties  on the estate in terms of footprint and that the extensions proposed are disproportionate to the existing dwelling. He expressed his disappointment with the amended scheme due to the limited changes in terms of height, location, and scale expressing the view that this would be the largest property on the estate, 25% larger than any other. He felt as though the site would be highly visible and would negatively impact the landscape.

A statement on behalf of Ms B Livingstone, a neighbour, was read out on her behalf by Mr Simon Grays. Mrs Livingstone objected to the application for several reasons. In particular, she did not feel as though it would contribute to the character of the area and was disappointed with the increase in footprint ( 250sq m), scale, roof form and high internal ceilings which would result in a huge, monolithic, barn like building , eroding the existing character and blocking views into Ballard Estate and towards Ballard Down. Reference was made to meetings with the applicants to discuss residents concerns. Ms B Livingstone  referenced the earlier application currently  at appeal, she raised concerns regarding the erosion of the established character of the area and therefore hoped members would refuse.

The agent spoke in favour of the application. He commended the officer’s report and informed members that architects had attended town council meetings to understand concerns. Mr A Davies noted the improvements which had beenmade and responded to statements made against the roof height and building form with reference to dwellings elsewhere on the estate at no’s 1, 1a,3 and 11. He confirmed that the building would have an internal height of just over 4m and that the overall height had been reduced by 1m compared with the previous refusal. With regard tovisibility he stated that the  proposal maintained the character ofthe existing estate, that the dwelling would benefit from boundary screening and  that distant views are not protected.. He did not consider that the proposal went against policies and highlighted the inclusion of a chimney as a characteristic feature of dwellings on the estate. The agent contended that the proposal had been carefully designed with neighbours in mind. He hoped members would support the officer’s recommendation for approval.

The Local Ward member. Cllr Suttle was not present at the meeting, his comments and objection to the application were relayed to the meeting. He does not feel that the proposal complies with the NPPF as it neither maintains the area’s character nor adds overall quality to the area, its size and bulk in comparison to the surrounding buildings make it out of character. The design policy of the Purbeck Plan was highlightedin his representation as was the Swanage Local Plan requirement to protect and enhance the distinctive local characteristics of the Ballard Down Area of Distinctive Local Character. However, he consideres the proposal does the opposite and that the development by virtue of its scale, mass and form does not relate to the neighbouring properties or spaces and was not harmonious and as such would damage to the landscape setting of the Ballard Estate. Cllr Suttle hoped that members would acknowledge the area of Swanage and adhere to the NPPF, Purbeck Local plan and Swanage Local Plan whose relevance was to protect and enhance the Town.

Members questions and comments

·       Members queried whether an additional condition was required to prevent future development in the loft space.

·       Clarification regarding policy requirements for restrictions on scale of proposal.

·       Retention of hedging.

·       Some members felt that screening would prevent the site being visible.

·       Clarification regarding public access and open green space.

·       Concerns regarding the scale of the proposal and the impact on the character of the area.

·       The Local Ward member questioned communication between planning officers and the Ballard Estate. Cllr Trite was also concerned that the proposal was not a continuation of local informal arrangements which meant that residents sought only modest extensions.

·       Members drew attention to comments and concerns raised by residents.

·       Concerns regarding the proposal design contrasting with the area.

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application and an understanding of all this entailed; having considered the officer’s report and presentation; the written representatives; and what they had heard at the meeting, a motion to refuse the officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission as recommended, was proposed by Cllr Bill Trite, and seconded by Cllr David Morgan.

Reason for refusal:

The proposal by reason of its scale, form, mass, and positioning near the site side boundaries, results in a proposal that would appear visually dominant and overbearing in the street scene to the detriment of the local townscape character. The proposal is considered to result in a form and layout of development that fails to positively integrate with its surroundings, historic quality, and townscape character of the Ballard Estate. The proposal is contrary to the objectives of Section 12 of the NPPF including paragraphs 130 and 134 and section 11 paragraph 124(d); Policies D and LHH of the Purbeck Local Plan 2012; Policy STCD of the Swanage Local Plan 2017; the Purbeck District Design Guide 2014 paragraphs 20, 21, and 39; and the Swanage Townscape Character Appraisal Section 04.8 Ballard Down.

Decision: To refuse the officer’s recommendation for approval.