Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed23 March 20233291687

1 Bridge Place, Bournemouth, BH10 7EA

erection of a 2 bed house, using the existing parking and drive access for both the proposal and the parent property

Authority
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector
Davies N

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Appeal A: (a) The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area; (b) The effect of the development on the living conditions of the occupants of adjacent dwellings, with regard to light and outlook; (c) Whether the dwelling would provide suitable living conditions for future occupants; (d) The impact of the development on the integrity of the Dorset Heathlands Special Protection Area (the SPA) and the Dorset Heaths Special Area of Conservation (the SAC); (e) The effect of the development on protected species; (f) Whether occupants of the dwelling would be safe from flooding; (g) Whether the submitted drawings provide an accurate basis on which to assess the effect of the development.
  • Appeal B: (a) The effect that varying the condition would have on the character and appearance of the area; (b) The living conditions of the occupants of 1 Bridge Place; (c) The integrity of the SPA and the SAC.

What decided it

The failure to secure planning obligations to mitigate impacts on the Dorset Heathlands SPA and SAC, combined with the significant harm to character and appearance and living conditions of neighbours and future occupants, meant the proposals conflicted with the development plan and could not be justified.

The modest benefits of providing one additional dwelling and supporting housing supply were outweighed by the significant harm to character and appearance, living conditions of neighbours and future occupants, and the inability to safely conclude that the integrity of the SPA and SAC would be protected; the tilted balance did not apply due to the likely significant effect on the habitats site.

Framework references: 11, 12, 60, 69, 74, 182

Plan policies cited: Policy CS6, Policy CS21, Policy CS30, Policy CS33, Policy CS41, Policy 6.8

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.