Meeting documents

Apologies for absence were received from Mike Lovell, Mervyn Jeffery and Mark Tewkesbury.

There were no declarations by members of disclosable pecuniary interests under the Code of Conduct.

With reference to minute 39, Beryl Ezzard confirmed that she had no disclosable pecuniary interest to declare but she had previously worked in the Purbeck stone quarrying industry and knew the issues at hand but had not formed a view on this so would take part in the discussion and vote.

With reference to minutes 40 and 42, David Jones confirmed that he had no disclosable pecuniary interest to declare but was a member of Christchurch Borough Council and had been Chairman of their Planning Control Committee at which this matter had been discussed but had not formed a view on this so would take part in the discussion and vote.

With reference to minute 42, Margaret Phipps confirmed that she had no disclosable pecuniary interest to declare but had attended Hurn Parish Council meetings at which this matter had been discussed but had not formed a view on this so would take part in the discussion and vote.

With reference to minute 42, Peter Richardson confirmed that he had no disclosable pecuniary interest to declare but frequently used this junction and understood the issues but had not formed a view on this so would take part in the discussion and vote.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 28 April 2016 (attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 28 April 2016 were confirmed and signed.

To  consider a report by the Head of Economy (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Economy relating to planning application 6/2015/0198 for the modification of Conditions 1 and 5 of Planning Permission 6/1999/0804 to allow for continued winning and working of mineral, together with the removal of the previously imposed limitation on winter HGV movements, at Southard Quarry, Swanage.

With the aid of a visual presentation, and taking into account the provisions of the Update Sheet, officers described the proposals and planning issues in detail, the grounds on which the planning application was being made and what it was designed to achieve. The primary purpose of the application was to seek permission for an extension to the life of the site  to provide for the continued winning and working of Purbeck Stone. This would allow the continued extraction of stone within the original permission area, with an end date for the extraction of stone of 31 December 2024 now being proposed.

The application also sought an alteration to previously imposed limits on HGV traffic leaving the site, which had previously been limited to a maximum for five vehicles per full working day during May to September (inclusive) and one per full working day during October and April (inclusive). The proposed removal of their winter limitation would allow a maximum of five HGVs to leave the site on any working day.  

How the extraction and restoration had been phased and progressed to date, and the relationship between each, was described in the report. Photographs and plans were shown to the Committee by way of illustration showing the characteristics of the quarry site, its land form and its context within the surrounding landscape. Views from within and around the site, what activities were being undertaken and how these were being managed were shown to the Committee and described in detail by officers. The site’s relationship with other local development, including residential properties and caravan holiday parks; and its setting within the landscape – being within the Dorset AONB and adjacent to the Durlston SSSI and near the Jurassic Coast World Heritage Site -; the local rights of way network; and the topography of the area were all drawn to the Committee’s attention.

Officers explained the importance of Purbeck stone, in ensuring that supply was available to maintain the character of local settlements and for use in building and restoration projects of national and historic merit. There were economic, social and environmental benefits to be gained from the continued operation of the site.

Officers explained that the extraction would be undertaken in short campaigns, generally at times of dry weather during the summer period. Officers reported that the applicant was in the process of making improvements to the way in which the site was managed, particularly in relation to the stockpiling of stone.

How lorry movements to and from the quarry were to be managed was explained. Officers explained how an apparent anomaly had arisen which meant that the applicant was limited to a single HGV movement leaving the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

To consider a report by the Head of Economy (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Economy relating to planning application 8/16/0138, proposing the retention of a modular building for use as a pre-school at Highcliffe St Mark Primary School, Greenways, Highcliffe, Christchurch. In providing this building, the capacity in the main school buildings was able to increase for school use, and this need remained applicable.

The Committee was informed that temporary planning permission had been granted in April 2013 so that the impact of the use could be monitored and reassessed.  Objections had been received from the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties, whilst Christchurch Borough Council had requested imposition of a further temporary period restriction so that any impact might continue to be monitored.  However, officers considered that the pre-school did not unduly detract from residential amenity and that retention of the building for continued use as a pre-school was in accordance with the Development Plan and was considered to be acceptable.  Accordingly a permanent grant of planning permission was now being recommended.

With the aid of a visual presentation officers described the proposal, what it was designed to achieve and set out the planning issues in detail.  Photographs and plans illustrated the dimensions of the development and its characteristics; its setting within the character of the townscape and its relationship with other development in the area and the highway network.

Officers described the basis on which temporary planning permission should be used and why a permanent permission was now being proposed. The terms of previous permissions were explained, these conditions being designed to enable the impact of the building and its use to be monitored and reassessed.

The Committee were informed that Lesley Dedman, County Councillor for Mudeford and Highcliffe, fully supported the application.

On the basis of the presentation received, what the report contained and the local member’s views, the Committee agreed that planning permission should be granted.

Resolved

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 8.2 of the Head of Economy’s report.

Reason for Decision

The reasons for granting planning permission were summarised in paragraph 6.19 of the report.

To consider a report by the Head of Economy (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Economy on planning application 2/2016/0260/DCC proposing a temporary gypsy caravan site to coincide with the dates of the Great Dorset Steam Fair (GDSF) being held in a field at Tarrant Hinton, on the south - eastern side of the A354, south-west of Turnpike Cottage, Tarrant Hinton.

With the aid of a visual presentation, officers described the proposals and planning issues in detail, the grounds on which the planning application was being made and what it was designed to achieve: in providing a facility to accommodate those gypsies and travellers visiting the Great Dorset Steam Fair. Photographs and plans were shown to the Committee by way of illustration showing the characteristics of the site; its location and relationship with views from the surrounding Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB); its land form and its context within the surrounding landscape and against the GDSF site itself. Access arrangements and how the site would be managed were outlined.

Whilst the development was seen to have a negative impact on the AONB, it was for a temporary period of 3 weeks only.  Officers explained that by means of this permission, the site would be controlled and managed,  and would enable the Police to use their powers to direct travellers to the designated site rather than there being the potential for indiscriminate unauthorised encampments at other vulnerable, unmanaged sites within the AONB or, indeed, across the county. The proposed development was in general accordance with the Development Plan, with the public benefits of a well-managed site weighing heavily in favour of granting planning permission.

The report set out responses to consultations in respect of this application, with neither North Dorset District Council nor Tarrant Hinton Parish Council raising any objections, subject to appropriate conditions, and Deborah Croney, County Councillor for Hambledon, supporting the application.

The Committee recognised the need for a managed site to which travellers and gypsies could be directed throughout the event period and that, on the basis that arrangements had worked well over preceding years, planning permission should be granted.

Resolved

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 8 of the Head of Economy’s report.

Reason for Decision

The reasons for granting planning permission were summarised in paragraph 6.20 of the report.

To consider a report by the Head of Economy (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Economy on planning application 8/16/0126 proposing the relocation of Hurn Roundabout, siting it to the east of its current position, together with a realignment of Parley Lane and Avon Causeway, Christchurch. As part of this proposal, a new signal controlled Toucan crossing would be provided on Avon Causeway, east of the roundabout. Officers reported that part of the site fell within the Hurn Conservation Area and the construction works would require the loss of a significant number of trees. However, the proposed development was considered to be in general accordance with the Development Plan.

With the aid of a visual presentation, and taking into account the provisions of the Update Sheet, officers described the proposals and planning issues in detail, the grounds on which the planning application was being made and what it was designed to achieve. The purpose of the application was to contribute towards the reduction of congestion on the strategic road network through the northern part of Christchurch as a consequence of the volume of traffic using the A338. It included improvements to B`lackwater Junction, Hurn Bridge and Chapel Gate roundabouts. Photographs and plans were shown to the Committee by way of illustration showing the characteristics of scheme; its design; and its context within the surrounding area. The scheme’s relationship with Blackwater Junction, Bournemouth International Airport and the Business Park, the local road network, local amenities and neighbouring development in Hurn village, including Riverside Cottages (Grade 2 Listed Buildings), the Post Office and with other properties in the area, were described in detail by officers.

Officers drew to the Committee’s attention the fact that the improvements to the route network were set out in the Local Transport Plan and the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan, with these improvements playing a key role in the expansion of Bournemouth International Airport and the Aviation Business Park. The scheme was part of a package of measures designed to improve overall the strategic road network and was considered to be beneficial in its own right, in enabling economic growth for the south eastern conurbation.

The Committee were informed that the roundabout construction works would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the Hurn Village Conservation Area in the short term, with the loss of some woodland and scrub, the value of which was described by the Senior Aboricultural Officer as being of poor quality. However substantial woodland remained along the roundabouts eastern edge and would serve to fringe the new roundabout and maintain its visual appearance, with extensive landscaping and tree planting mitigating against this impact and enhancing the Conservation A rea as it matured.

Benefits of the scheme were that the new roundabout would be sited further from the village centre and the listed Riverside Cottages and would reduce the congestion which was currently being experienced at that point in the village. The installation of a Toucan crossing was considered to be beneficial on road  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

To consider a report by the Head of Highways (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Highways which explained the proposals to prohibit certain turning movements at Great Western Cross, Dorchester in contributing towards traffic management improvements as part of the Dorchester Transport and Environment Plan (DTEP). Following Cabinet’s decision to pare back the original DTEP scheme, certain key elements of DTEP, such as these improvement works, continued to be progressed.  In order to improve the accessibility of the junction for vulnerable road users, enhancements were proposed to be made to pedestrian crossing provision on all major arms of the junction.  However, in order that this could be achieved without adversely affecting the traffic capacity of the junction, it was necessary to prohibit certain traffic movements. 

With the aid of a visual presentation, officers described the proposal, what it was designed to achieve and set out the practicalities of delivering this, including  providing an understanding  of those traffic flows and manoeuvres undertaken. . From this it could be determined which manoeuvres were undertaken most frequently, and those which were less well used. Photographs and plans illustrated the scheme’s setting within the character of the townscape and the local road network, the junction’s  and the road’s configuration and the junction’s relationship with the amenities in the area. Officers were satisfied that acceptable alternative  diversionary routes  were available to motorists wishing to gain access.

Advertisement of the proposed prohibition of turns had resulted in objections and representations being received and the Committee was now being asked to give these due consideration and whether the proposed prohibition of turns should be recommended for implementation as advertised.

In response to the representations received, a separate traffic regulation order (TRO) to restrict all motor vehicles from Victoria Road, Westover Road, Albert Road (west of Cornwall Road) and St Helen’s Road, except for access, was being progressed which would mitigate the main concerns raised to the proposed order at Great Western Cross, in that the turning bans might well cause inappropriate journeys to be made along those roads.

Officers confirmed that the proposed measures were necessary in order to realise the scheme’s objective of improving access for pedestrians, cyclists, the elderly and the disabled.  The scheme would achieve this by providing controlled pedestrian crossing facilities on all arms of Great Western Cross and, as such, the recommendation was that the Cabinet be asked to approve implementation of the Order as advertised.

The Committee heard from Andy Canning, County Councillor for Linden Lea, in his capacity as the local District Council ward member and as a member of the DTEP Project Working Group, who wholly supported the proposals being made to improve accessibility around the junction.

David Sharman, local resident, appreciated the response made by officers to the concerns of local residents about the inappropriate journeys likely to be caused as a result of these bans being implemented in providing for the "access only" TRO. However he felt that this in itself was not enough and would need physical measures, like traffic calming,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

No questions were asked by members under Standing Order 20(2).