Meeting documents

The Chairman welcomed Steven Lugg to the Committee and, in his absence, Fred

Drane, whom it was hoped would be able to participate at some future meeting.

As Mark Tewkesbury has now been replaced on the Committee, the Chairman, on

behalf of the Committee thanked him for the contribution he had made to the work of

the committee in the past and asked that he be written to that vein. Similarly Peter

Richardson had indicated that in recovering from a bout of poor health he would no

longer be attending any further council meetings up till the elections and a similar

letter of appreciation should be sent on behalf of the Committee to him for his

services in the past.

As this would be the final meeting for the Senior Solicitor, Sarah Meggs, before she left the County Council to take up another post, the Chairman took the opportunity , on behalf of the Committee, to thank her for all the valued advice she had provided the committee with in the past and wished her every success in the future.

Apologies for absence were received from Barrie Cooper, Fred Drane, Beryl Ezzard, Mervyn Jeffery, Mike Lovell and Peter Richardson.

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

Whilst he confirmed that he had no disclosable pecuniary interests under the Code of Conduct, David Jones, being a member of Christchurch Borough Council had taken no part in any debate on this matter so did not consider that this would preclude him taking part in the debate of minute 18 below, as he had not prejudged the matter. 

Whilst she confirmed that she had no disclosable pecuniary interests under the Code of Conduct, Margaret Phipps, being a member of  Christchurch Borough Council and Hurn Parish Council, where the matter had been discussed, had taken no part in any debate on this  so did not consider that this would preclude her taking part in the debate of minute 18 below, as she had not prejudged the matter. 

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 2 February 2017 (attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 2 February 2017 were confirmed and signed.

Public Speaking

To receive any public questions and/or public statements and requests to speak in accordance with Standing Orders 21 (1) and (2).

There were no public questions received at the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 21(1).

There were no public statements received at the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 21(2).

To consider a report by the Service Director – Highways and Emergency Planning (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Service Director – Highways and Emergency planning which detailed an application for a Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order to add a footpath/ bridleway from Footpath 3, Allington along the Route of Donkey Lane to Court Orchard Road, Bridport.

Officers confirmed that in response to an application by Allington Parish Council for a footpath/bridleway to be added to the Definitive Map and Statement, the Committee were being asked to consider the evidence relating to the status of the claimed route. It was similarly confirmed that during the investigation process, evidence was discovered relating to the public status of the whole of Donkey Lane and consequently it was now being recommended to add Donkey Lane - between points C-H - to the definitive map and statement.  An objection to the application had been received from an adjacent landowner of "Meadowside" who had applied to register part of Donkey Lane with the Land Registry. 

With the aid of a visual presentation, and in taking into account the provisions of the Update Sheet made available to members prior to the meeting and appended to these minutes, the basis for the application was explained and what it entailed. Photographs and plans were shown to the Committee by way of illustration. This showed the claimed route, its character and setting within the landscape, its relationship with neighbouring properties and the points between which it ran. Signage and gating were also shown. The documentary and user evidence contained in the report was referred to in detail and how this was applied in the officer’s reasoning for coming to the recommendation they had. The weight to be given to the user and documentary evidence was explained. The Committee’s attention was drawn to what they were being asked to take into consideration in coming to their decision.

In particular, the documentary evidence was considered to be strong and was supported by the user evidence, although the user evidence alone was considered to be insufficient to fulfil the requirement of 20 or more years use by the public to demonstrate a deemed dedication under Section 31 of the Highways Act 1980.

Officers reported that the available evidence showed that, on balance, a right of way subsisted or was reasonably alleged to subsist.  Consequently they were satisfied that the route of Donkey Lane, as shown, should be recorded as footpath as a restricted byway, as described in the report.

The Committee were reminded that what they were being asked to decide was  whether rights existed or whether it could it reasonably be alleged that the rights existed and, if it could be agreed that it was reasonable to argue that rights existed, given the documentary and user evidence submitted, then the Director’s recommendations should be accepted.

The Committee heard from Simon Mazzei-Scaglione who supported the application being made by the Parish Council but agreed that it should extend further, to point H, as evidenced in the officer’s investigations. He described what  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

To consider a report by the Service Director – Highways and Emergency Planning (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Service Director - Highways and Emergency Planning which proposed prohibiting certain turning movements at South Gate Junction, Dorchester as part of the traffic management improvements scheme being progressed from the Dorchester Transport and Environment Plan (DTEP).  Whist this was originally an overarching principle to successfully manage traffic improvements throughout Dorchester, this had since been scaled down to now meet specific needs on a piece meal basis, which could still deliver improvements in their own right and integrate with each other .

Consequently, in September 2014, Cabinet resolved that elements of DTEP should still be progressed which included the replacement and improvement of the existing pedestrian crossing signal equipment around South Gate Junction, linking of the individual crossings to reduce traffic delays.  It also included relocating the pedestrian crossing on South Walks Road to provide a more direct link between Brewery Square and South Street.  In order to relocate the pedestrian crossing on South Walks Road it was necessary to prohibit right-turns out of Prince of Wales Road and left-turns into it. 

With the aid of a visual presentation officers described the detail of 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 being 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 roads’ configuration and the junction’s relationship with the amenities in the area, including the relationship between Brewery Square and the town centre. Officers were satisfied that an acceptable, alternative diversionary route – via Culliford Road - was available to motorists wishing to gain access.

Advertisement of the proposals had resulted in an objection and two representations being received and the Committee was now being asked to give these due consideration and whether the proposed package of measures should be recommended for implementation as advertised. It was confirmed that both County Councillors for Dorchester, Trevor Jones and Richard Biggs supported the proposals, as did West Dorset District Council, Dorchester Town Council and Dorset Police.

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 for improved access as consequently 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 Chairman of the DTEP Project Working Group, who wholly supported the proposals being made to improve accessibility around the junction and between Brewery Square and the town.

The Committee understood the need for, and the reasoning behind, the proposals, what benefits they would bring to vulnerable road users at the junction and the improved access  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

To consider a report by the Service Director – Economy (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Service Director – Economy on planning application 6/2016/0587 for the proposed continued use of land and buildings for radioactive waste management and operational development, to include the modification to the B4 complex and associated infrastructure for waste storage/treatment, rain and foul water drainage and extension to building B48, at Tradebe Inutec B4 Complex at Winfrith Newburgh.

With the aid of a visual presentation, and taking into account the provisions of the Update Sheet circulated to members prior to the meeting and appended to these minutes, officers described the proposals and planning issues in detail, what these entailed and what they were designed to achieve. The application sought permission for the continued use of a radioactive waste management facility located within an existing licensed nuclear site that was currently being decommissioned and the means for the disposal of waste material.

The Committee was informed that the Tradebe Inutec waste management facility had been operational for some 30 years but, in 2013, the applicant was notified by the County Council that the existing planning consents for the site and licensed nuclear facility did not permit the commercial management of radioactive waste, from off-site sources, at the scale that was being undertaken. Clarification was provided by the County Council to the applicant why this application was necessary and, subsequently, the applicant agreed to submit a planning application to regularise the continued use of the waste management facility. Also included in that application was a new operational development that would enable the waste management facility to manage radioactive waste independently of the wider licensed nuclear site.

It was explained to members that the need for new operational development was linked to the continued use of the facility and was driven primarily by the decommissioning of the Magnox site at Winfrith. The application fully accorded with national policy for radioactive waste management and with national and local planning policy and there had been no objections received to it. Furthermore, members were informed that the County Councillor for Egdon Heath, Peter Wharf, had indicated that he was fully supportive of the proposals.

Plans and photographs were used to show the characteristics of the site, its location and to describe the means by the facility would operate. The site’s land form, the buildings and facilities proposed to be used for the operations and their context within the surrounding landscape were shown, with views taken from within and around the site. The activities and operations proposed to be undertaken were described in detail by officers, how the treatment of the waste material would be managed and the drainage systems associated with this. How the waste material would be transported, by vehicle, off site was described and the current arrangements this would replace. Access and security arrangements were also drawn to the Committee’s attention. Officers described what relationship the activities which were to take place on site had with the current operations; the site’s setting within the landscape; and the relationship  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

To consider a report by the Service Director – Economy (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Service Director – Economy in response to a statement submitted by Mr Nigel Hill to the Committee at its meeting on 5 January 2017 on a range of issues of concern to him in respect of the management of the restoration operations taking place at Redbridge Road Quarry, Crossways. Members were informed that subsequent to this, officers had since visited the quarry to assess progress being made and planning compliance. 

With the aid of a visual presentation, plans and photographs were used to show the characteristics of the site, and what the operations entailed and how they were progressing. The site’s land form, and its context within the surrounding landscape were shown, with views taken from within and around the site. The activities and operations being undertaken were described in detail by officers. The storage of vehicles that were unrelated to the operations of the site were one particular issue which was being addressed and officers considered that this could be resolved satisfactorily in time.

Each of the points Mr Hill had raised in his statement were investigated and addressed in their own right. Whilst some breaches of condition were evident, operations at the quarry were considered to be progressing generally in accordance with extant planning permissions. Critically no identified breaches were considered to have resulted in an unacceptable loss of amenity or environmental harm and therefore it was not considered expedient to take formal enforcement action at this time. Assurance was given that this was still an option that could be enacted though, if considered necessary and expedient. For now, this was not the case.

The Committee considered that the points raised in Mr Hill’s statement had been addressed satisfactorily by officers in their investigations and subsequent assessments, and the detail in the Service Director’s report confirmed this. Members thanked Mr Hill for drawing these to their attention. Members were confident however, that the issue was being taken seriously and were satisfied that arrangements were in hand to monitor the situation as practicable and address any significant issues which arose, as necessary.

Resolved

That the findings from the investigations made at Redbridge Road Quarry, Crossways in response to the statement by Mr Nigel Hill be noted, together with the options for enforcement action, if necessary.

Reason for Decision

Ongoing operations were generally in accordance with extant planning permissions and it was not considered expedient to take enforcement action against any identified breaches of planning control at this time.

To consider a report by the Service Director – Economy (attached).

The Committee considered a report by the Service Director – Economy on planning application 8/16/2910/DCC for the Variation of Conditions 2 and 3 of planning permission 8/14/0515 at ECO Sustainable Solutions, Chapel Lane, Hurn, Christchurch.

With the aid of a visual presentation, and having regard to the provisions of the Update Sheet appended to these minutes, officers explained in detail what the variation of conditions 2 and 3 were designed to achieve and how these revisions would be applied. Photographs and plans were shown to the Committee by way of illustration showing the characteristics of the site, its form and its context within the surrounding landscape. Views from within and around the site, what activities were being undertaken and would take place and what materials were being used were all described in detail by officers. The relationship between the site and other development in the vicinity was highlighted, including Bournemouth International Airport and the business park.

Officers explained that planning permission 8/14/0515 provided for the extension, reconfiguration and intensification of a pre-existing waste management and recycling facility at the site operated by ECO Solutions, including material changes to both operational and consented development and the introduction of new waste management processes, infrastructure and buildings. The relatively minor variations now being proposed allowed for the reconfiguration of an approved biomass boiler and drying plant, including design amendments and process modifications. Whilst no objections to the proposals had been received as a result of the consultation exercise, the application was being presented to Committee for its approval because the proposed development, in its entirety, constituted EIA development and the application was accompanied by an Environmental Statement.

As part of the application the opportunity was being taken to amend Condition 7, relating to the Environmental Management Plan so that there was provision to apply the best available techniques available in the process, as necessary.

Councillors were informed that the proposed variations were designed to make best use of the infrastructure currently in place to enable the efficient and effective running of the operation. The buildings to be used and their dimensions were described so that members had a meaningful understanding of what this entailed.

Alan Hannify, agent, explained that the application was designed to improve the efficient operations at the facility and provided for environmental improvements being made, which would be achieved by modern solutions. He advised that in reviewing how operations might be best managed, the bagging barn was seen to be a more suitable location for the equipment to be situated. In time it was anticipated that the operation would become self sufficient in energy consumption - which would be generated by the processes used on site - rendering the diesel plant redundant.

In answering satisfactorily questions raised, the County Councillor for Commons, Margaret Phipps, supported the proposals for the variation of conditions.

On the basis of the officer’s report and presentation, the Committee agreed that the application should be granted planning permission on the grounds described in the Service  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

To answer any questions received in writing by the Chief Executive by not later than 10.00am on 13 March 2017.

No questions were received from members under Standing Order 20(2).

Rights of Way matter

Minute 14

Application for a Definitive Map and Statement modification order to add a footpath / bridleway from Footpath 3, Allington along the route of ‘Donkey Lane’ to Court Orchard Road, Bridport

Update:

a)    A submission has been received from Councillor Ros Kayes, ward member for Bridport:

I have a very strong concern about land grabbing of public footpaths and it is becoming a growing practice [….] I believe that we as a council should be very strong in policing the issue and I therefore fully support the application to reinstate Donkey Lane (the entire length that has been used by the public) and a covenant being placed upon it to prevent further encroachment.

Route C to H on Map 16/17/4 is therefore as important as Grey Area route A to B Map 16/06.

This footpath (Donkey Lane) ?has been in use for over 60 years. When my brother in law (who is an ecologist) lived in North Allington in the 1980s he used it regularly. It is used by children, walkers and naturalists alike on a regular basis. The disputed section in particular has been used for dog walking by residents from Court orchard Road/ North Allington and Allington Mead on a daily basis.

One of the problems appears to have been that there has been a misunderstanding? among local people about whether Highways or Footpaths were responsible for it and therefore residents did not raise questions about what at first appeared to be a dutiful resident […] caring for a neglected path, when the annexation of the footpath began. This was first brought to my attention only last year  by Cllr Phil Lathey of Allington PC who was born and bred on the estate next to the footpath and has lived a stone’s throw away from it all his life.

The OS pathfinder map (attached) clearly shows this path as understood to exist by local people.

Apart from [the dutiful resident mentioned above], residents of 224 North Allington also made minor repairs to Donkey Lane and the bank when flood damaged. These residents actually paid their gardener to make repairs to it and to cut the hedge. It's therefore clear that both in terms of use by a wide range of people as a footpath and the role of members of the public in looking after it that the piece of land IS regarded as a footpath and I strongly urge the committee to re-establish it as a public right of way.

Officer comment:

Support is noted.

b)    Submissions have been received from two nearby residents since the publication of the meeting agenda:

Mr and Mrs Mazzei-Scaglione forwarded a copy of an Email they had sent to Mr Gillis, Allington Parish Council, Cllr Kayes, and J Budden on 24/04/2016. This can be summarised:

• In 1990, Donkey Lane extended at full width past the end of Court Orchard Rd.
• Mr Raymond later fenced the land restricting access to the lane to a narrow  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.