Southbourne Crossroads Car Park Southbourne Coast Road Bournemouth BH6 3NH

1. 6.The appeal scheme consists of a total of 27 Flats arranged in a series of 4 blocks, ranging in height from three storeys in Block A at the western end, through four storeys in Block B, three storeys in Block C and two storeys in Block D at the eastern end, the very end portion of Block D being single storey. The roof of the very eastern single storey ground floor flat (Flat D2) being a green roof.
2. 7.The appeal scheme’s front elevations face south onto Southbourne Coast Road and the sea front, whilst the rear elevations face north onto St Catherine’s Terrace, a narrow lane which separates it from the rear of properties on St Catherine’s Road. These properties are large three and four storey buildings which front onto St Catherine’s Road and with two storey offshoots to their rear which face onto St Catherine’s Terrace, which provides access to their rear and their parking facilities.
3. 8.The apartment blocks within the appeal development occupy most of the site area at ground level, with the upper floors following the curved line of Southbourne Coast Road. This results in comfortable separation distances between the rear of the properties on St Catherine’s Road and those of the appeal development in most cases. However, the property at No 35A occupies the end of the terrace, where St Catherine’s Terrace turns to join St Catherine’s Road.
4. 9.No 35A is a two-storey dwelling, formed from part of the rear of the main building, and fronting directly onto St Catherine’s Terrace. It has its primary living, kitchen and dining accommodation located at first floor level, set back by three metres or so from the lane, where a roof terrace provides external amenity space to the property. Its bedroom areas are located at ground floor level, whose windows are obscure glazed for privacy.
5. 10.The proposal seeks to introduce a roof terrace incorporating a 1.8-metre-high solid brick privacy screen wall to its northern end, and with glass balustrading to its eastern and southern sides. This would serve the first floor Flat in Block D, Flat D3, occupying a portion of the former green roof above Flat D2. The privacy screen wall and roof terrace would be located directly to the south of No 35A, separated by around six and a half metres. The terrace level of Flat D3 is slightly raised, relative to that of the terrace and first floor accommodation of No 35A.
6. 11.At my visit I examined the erected brick privacy screen and roof terrace from Flat D3, and its relationship to the primary accommodation and roof terrace of No 35A. I also visited No 35A and viewed the brick privacy screen and roof terrace of Flat D3 from the primary living accommodation and roof terrace of No 35A. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3 Appeal Decision 6005936
7. 12.Owing to the combination of the separation distance between the brick privacy wall and the primary accommodation at the first-floor level of No 35A, which is around 10 metres apart, the orientation and floor levels of the properties, relative to one another, I find that the erected brick privacy wall would not have any detrimental effect on the levels of light likely to be experienced by occupants of No 35A.
8. 13.However, in relation to the effect of the brick privacy wall on the outlook from the primary living accommodation of No 35A, it is clear from the evidence that the design of the appeal development, particularly to the north facing elevation of Block D, has been significantly simplified during the previous section 73 application process, from that originally permitted at appeal. As a result, the north elevation of Block D has become less articulated, becoming more planal and monotone in nature, with little relief in the mass of the façade, with only minor changes in the bond pattern of the brickwork for relief.
9. 14.The erection of the brick privacy wall, effectively created by the further extension of the brick façade wall, with no relief, detail or change in materials, further increases this overall mass, particularly when viewed from within the primary living spaces of No 35A. I therefore find that it would have a harmful overbearing impact on the outlook from the primary living spaces for occupiers of No 35A.
10. 15.The appellant states the design of the eastern elevation of Flat D3, which is substantially a glazed wall, would result in mutual overlooking between the southern portion of the eastern elevation of Flat D3 and the terrace and living accommodation of No 35A. They suggest that this was the reason for the erection of the privacy wall, which they state allows for the formation of a modest roof terrace to Flat D3.
11. 16.However, I find the suggested mutual overlooking would be at an extremely oblique angle, such that it would not occur other than for a small portion of the living area of Flat D3. The extent of the erected privacy wall would seem to significantly exceed that which would be required to remove any possible overlooking between adjacent properties. Further, I find the extent of roof terrace would far exceed that which could reasonably be described as modest, being almost three quarters the size of the combined kitchen, dining and lounge areas of Flat D3, which are spacious.
12. 17.Due to the size of the proposed roof terrace to Flat D3, notwithstanding the size of Flat D3 itself and its potential occupancy level, the terrace would have the potential for significant levels of occupancy for entertaining. As a result, due to this and its proximity to the existing roof terrace at No 35A, I find this could result in significant levels of noise and disturbance to the occupiers of No 35A, with consequent harmful effects on their living conditions. The close relationship would also result in mutual harmful effects on privacy, through overheard conversations.
13. 18.The appellant notes that close relationships between roof terrace areas are common and are present within the appeal development. However, purchasers of such Flats within the development would have the opportunity to assess this prior to making their decision to purchase. By contrast, the occupiers of the property at No 35A would not be in this position, and I find that the combination of the close proximity and size of the extensive roof terrace being introduced at Flat D3, could significantly harmfully affect their living conditions through noise and disturbance.
14. 19.For the above reasons, I find the erected brick privacy wall would have a harmful overbearing impact on the outlook from the primary living spaces of No 35A, and https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4 Appeal Decision 6005936 the size and proximity of the proposed roof terrace would result in noise and disturbance which would harmfully affect the living conditions of its occupiers.
15. 20.I therefore conclude that the appeal development would be contrary to saved policy 6.10 of the Bournemouth District Wide Local Plan 2002, Policies CS21 and CS41 of the Bournemouth Local Plan Core Strategy 2012 and with Part 3.7 of the Council’s Residential Development – A Design Guide SPD 2008. These require, among other things, development to be well designed and to be of high quality, and which respect the living conditions and amenity of occupiers of neighbouring buildings in the vicinity.
16. 21.Whilst the application was made under S73 which sought amendment to conditions 1 and 8 placed on Planning Permission Ref: 7-2025-28119-C, it has been established that the stated amended lighting plan (Drawing No. 1820-04A) was not submitted with the application. It has therefore been confirmed that the appellant did not now seek amendment to condition 8, as the referenced lighting drawing had not been submitted with the application. I have therefore determined the appeal accordingly.
17. 22.For the reasons set out above, I conclude that the appeal development would be contrary to the development plan, read as a whole, and that there are no material considerations that would justify determining other than in accordance with it. Therefore, the appeal should be dismissed. David Kay INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5 Planning Services BCP Council Civic Centre Bourne Avenue Bournemouth BH2 6DY Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Section 73) Section 73 of the Town & Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 Mr Chris Miell MRTPI Pure Town Planning Studio 2, The Focus Building

From the council's decision notice.

Postcode

BH6 3NH

Application type

Removal or Variation of Condition

Scale / size

Medium

Number of dwellings

27

Date validated

9 December 2025

Consultation expiry

30 January 2026

Consultation start

9 October 2025

Consultation end

30 January 2026

Committee meeting

19 February 2026

Agent address

Studio 2, The Focus Building 1 Crimea Rd Bournemouth BH9 1AP

Documents

15