# 15 Stanfield Road, Bournemouth

- **Decision:** dismissed, 3 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: S Leonard
- **Authority:** Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole (South West)
- **Appeal reference:** 6009149
- **Application reference:** P/25/05300/FUL
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Change of use from C4 HMO to 8-bed sui generis HMO with side dormers, rear roof extension and rear extension
- **Site context:** inside-settlement
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** Bournemouth CS41, BNG statutory condition
- **Development plan policies:** Bournemouth Core Strategy 2012 CS30, CS41, Bournemouth District Wide Local Plan 2002 saved 6.17
- **Main issues:** character and appearance, BNG, neighbour amenity
- **Tags:** tier-2, hmo, bng-exemption-not-shown, roof-dormers, transitional-no-consultation, costs-application

## Summary
An eight-bed HMO scheme was dismissed. Its large flat-roofed side dormers would overwhelm a prominent period corner house, and the claimed BNG de minimis exemption was not demonstrated. Intensification from six to eight occupants caused no neighbour harm. The Inspector found the new Framework "does not differ significantly from the 2024 version in respect of the substance" (DL ¶3).

## What made the difference
The extensions were treated as part of the development, despite the appellant's PD claim (DL ¶¶7–13). That brought in both the design harm and the BNG baseline. The Inspector held BNG failure "a fundamental flaw" that could not be cured by condition (DL ¶38).

## Policy findings
- **DP3: fail.** full-length flat-roofed side dormers top-heavy on prominent corner period house; erode hipped roofscape (DL 22-27), decided under CS41
- **BNG (Sch 7A TCPA): fail.** de minimis exemption doubtful (>25 sq m of garden habitat); no Article 7 statement or metric; cannot be left to condition (DL 28-39)
- **P3: pass.** intensification from 6 to 8 occupants not harmful to No 17 (DL 45-48)

## Key facts
- CLU for C4 HMO granted May 2026; CLP for the PD extensions refused and under appeal (6012438)
- Extensions essential to scheme so included in description despite PD claim
- Dorset Heathlands / New Forest SPA SAMM obligation — AA not needed given dismissal

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/3f4387c1-2c9a-4cf0-ad5e-4e93ce1b050d
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6009149

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6009149.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.