Privacy wall and roof terrace at Southbourne Crossroads Car Park, Bournemouth

What was proposed

The application sought changes to Block D to create a privacy wall and roof terrace for Flat D3, without increasing the approved number of homes.

“The application is a Section 73 Variation of Condition (“minor material amendment”) application to vary conditions 1 and 8 associated with an approved scheme ref. 7-2025-28119-C to allow changes to the approved Block D to form a privacy wall and roof terrace serving Flat D3 (part retrospective).”

“It should be noted this application would not amend the originally approved number of residential units on site. The proposed changes to the planning conditions would be as follows:”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a former cliff-top car park under construction, surrounded mainly by residential development of three to four storeys.

“The application relates to the former Southbourne Crossroads Car Park site which is situated on the cliff top adjacent to the roundabout linking Southbourne Overcliff Drive with Southbourne Coast Road and St Catherine’s Road. The site is currently under construction following the allowed planning appeal dated 3 rd…”

“March 2023, and a follow-up approval ref. ref. 7-2025-28119-C. The site is bound to the north by St Catherine’s Terrace which forms a vehicular access to properties fronting St Catherine’s Road, to the south by Southbourne Overcliff Drive and to the west the by the roundabout. 4. Development around the site is generally 3-4 storeys in height and is predominantly in residential use with some commercial uses at ground floor level around St Catherine’s Road and Belle Vue Road.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier applications included approvals for four blocks and 27 flats, while two amendments concerning terraces and a Block D screen wall were refused.

“P/25/04139/NMA: Non-Material Amendment following the approval of 7-2025- 28119-C for amendments to Penthouse Terraces and Balcony Block B – Refused.”

“P/25/03243/NMA: Non-Material amendment following approval of 7-2025-28119- C for additional screen wall to terrace on Block D – Refused.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended conditional permission because the changes were minor and would not materially harm the area, neighbouring residents, traffic safety or future occupiers.

“The site lies within the 13.8km zone of influence of the New Forest National Park and will be required to secure appropriate mitigation. Such appropriate mitigation must enable the conclusion that development coming forwards will not lead to an adverse impact on the Integrity of the New Forest Designated sites. 50.”

“The scheme would not be harmful to the character and appearance of the area and it will not have a materially harmful impact on neighbouring residents. The proposals will be in keeping with other recent developments in the area, as well as with the original permission’s condition requirements. 53.”

Officer report

Main planning issues

The assessment considered the works’ principle, appearance, future occupiers’ amenities, neighbouring properties, highways, parking, housing delivery and mitigation.

“The key issue(s) involved with this proposal are: • Housing Delivery Test • Principle of the proposed works • Impact on character and appearance of the area • Amenities for future occupiers • Impact on neighbouring properties…”

Officer report

What consultees said

Ecology, drainage, highways and waste officers raised no objection, while the urban design officer considered the appearance less successful than the approved scheme.

“Ecologist - No objection. 18. Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA) – The proposed alterations will have no impact on the drainage strategy for Block D or the development as a whole and as such we offer no objection to these proposals. 19. Local Highway Authority (LHA) Officer – No objection 20. Urban Design Officer – Concerns raised.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two objectors, the agent on behalf of the applicant, and a ward councillor speaking against the application addressed the committee.

The committee vote

The committee voted by eight votes to one, with no abstentions, to refuse permission against the officer recommendation.

“RESOLVED to REFUSE permission contrary to the recommendation set out in the officer’s report for the following summary reasons with delegated authority to the Head of Planning Operations to agree the final detailed wording of the reasons for refusal:”

Minutes

What was decided

Permission was refused because of adverse effects on neighbouring residential amenity and failure to secure Heathlands and New Forest mitigation contributions.

“Adverse impact on neighbouring residential amenity…”

“Failure to secure financial contributions towards Heathlands mitigation and New Forest mitigation…”

Minutes