Meeting documents

Members are required to comply with the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 and the Council’s Code of Conduct regarding disclosable pecuniary and other interests.

Check if there is an item of business on this agenda in which the member or other relevant person has a disclosable pecuniary or other disclosable interest.

Check that the interest has been notified to the Monitoring Officer (in writing) and entered in the Register (if not this must be done within 28 days).

Disclose the interest at the meeting (in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct) and in the absence of dispensation to speak and/or vote, withdraw from any consideration of the item where appropriate.  If the interest is non-pecuniary you may be able to stay in the room, take part and vote.

For further advice please contact Rob Firth, Monitoring Officer, in advance of the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the committee (previously circulated) as a correct record.

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 26 February 2019 were agreed and signed as a correct record.

Demolish existing buildings and develop land by the erection of up to 45 No. dwellings with associated infrastructure, including the widening of Shillingstone Lane and provision of school drop off car park. (Outline application to determine access).

The Area Lead, Major Projects – Eastern, advised the committee that he had received an amended drawing from the applicant the day before the meeting.  The officer recommendation had been to refuse the application however the revised drawing appeared to overcome the concerns regarding heritage.  The officer therefore asked members of the committee to consider deferral of the application so that officers could give further consideration to the amended drawing.   Cllr B Batty-Smith, Chairman,  proposed deferral of the application, seconded by Cllr V Fox.

Decision: That the application be deferred for consideration of the revised drawing.

Develop land by the erection of up to 61 No. dwellings, form vehicular and pedestrian access, public open space and attenuation basins. (Outline application to determine access).

The Area Lead, Major Projects – Eastern, presented a report on an application to develop land by the erection of up to 61 no. dwellings, form vehicular and pedestrian access, public open space and attenuation basins.  The application was outline only to determine access, all other matters would be reserved for later consideration.

The application site was outside of the village development boundary of the village but due to the strong degree of sustainability consideration would be given to such sites.  In respect of access and road issues the application proposed modifications to Burton Street to improve visibility splays and pedestrian access along the eastern boundary of the site. The main issues for consideration related to the principle of development, highway safety, flood risk and drainage and visual impact.  Members had attended a site visit and it was considered that the scale of development would be in keeping with the rest of the village.  The committee was also advised that the NHS Trust had requested that a financial contribution be made for the County Hospital and added as an additional element to the S106 Agreement.

The DCC Highways Officer reported the application proposed an access road from Burton Street 6 metres in width so that large service vehicles could access the development.  In order to improve the visibility Burton Street would be subject to a minor realignment which would widen the bend and improve visibility for vehicles as they travelled the bend in the road.  The application had also been supported by a Transport Assessment and the applicant had also carried out traffic surveys.  The traffic generation modelling had concluded that the additional trips would not have a severe impact on the operation of the local road network.  It was the opinion of the Highway Authority that the road realignment would provide a highway safety benefit and that the impact of the extra vehicular movements was  not detrimental to object to the development.  

Public Participation

Mr T Vaughan, Chairman of Marnhull Parish Council made representations to the committee stating that Marnhull was a rural village and a large development would destroy the nature of the village.  If all of the developments took place in the village the population of the village would increase by 50%.  The Parish Council felt that the residents were in a better position to make a decision on development in the village and a survey had been undertaken.  The results of the survey showed that a large proportion of residents felt that the sites were highly unsuitable for development.  The Parish Council asked that if the development was approved any future planning applications should be severely restricted and that any future planning committee, together with housing officers work with the parish council and residents to help develop a sensible way forward.      

Oral representations were received from Mr I Pentland who highlighted that the roads of Marnhull had reached capacity and were not safe, accidents had happened on the narrow roads and there was risk of a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

Develop land by the erection of 9 No. dwellings and 3 No. letting rooms, form vehicular access, car parking and landscape improvements associated with the Chartlon Inn. (Outline planning application to determine access).

The Area Manager (Eastern) presented the application highlighting that it was an outline application to determine access.  The Charlton Inn was in the conservation area but the rest of the site was outside of the conservation area.  All of the site was in the low risk flood zone 1, however the Environment Agency and Dorset County Council had confirmed that, subject to conditions on levels, there would be no issues with the policies regarding flooding.  The development provided potential for an enhanced gateway to the village, with landscaping and attractive dwellings.  Screening would need to be provided for the bungalow adjacent to the car park.  The main issues for consideration were the principle of development, access, flooding, heritage and amenity.  In balance officers considered that the benefits of the development outweighed any harm to the open countryside.            

Mr S Savage (DCC Highways) reported that the access was considered to be safe  and appropriate and that highways had no objections subject conditions.

Public Participation

Oral representations were received from Cllr Barrie Cooper speaking on behalf of the Parish Council.  Cllr Cooper highlighted to members that there were other significant building developments going ahead in the locality and that the site to be developed was the only area which livestock could access in the event of a flood.  The development was therefore detrimental to the use of the 60 acres of farmland.  The whole site was in flood risk zone 1 and the development would completely change the character of the village.  In addition nothing had changed on the site since the Planning Inspector had refused the last planning application.  Residents were overwhelmingly against the application and Cllr Cooper asked the committee to refuse the application which was in the flood zone and provided good agricultural land.       

Mr P Harrington, the agent for the applicant addressed the committee.  He advised the committee that Hall and Woodhouse Ltd were a success story and were continuing to invest in their public houses and this application would provide for additional letting rooms as well as houses.  In response to the concerns raised regarding flooding and highways he advised the committee that the entire application site was in flood zone 1, the same as the rest of the village. The applicant had worked with Environment Agency to work out how to manage surface water drainage and how to future proof the houses.  No objections to the application had been received from the Environment  Agency.  In addition there was adequate visibility on the road access.

Member questions and debate:

In response to a question from Cllr S Pritchard the planning officer reported that the Planning Inspector had refused an application in the 1990’s, the application was refused on the basis of a different policy context and in respect of a larger site which represented a materially different application.   

Proposed by Cllr N Lacey-Clarke seconded by Cllr P Williams MBE

Decision: Approve with conditions

Erect 1 No. replacement dwelling and create additional parking space (demolish existing dwelling).

The Area Manager (Eastern) presented an application to demolish an existing dwelling and erect a new dwelling and create an additional parking space.  The application site was within the Dorset AONB and within the setting of Listed Buildings.  The new dwelling had been carefully designed, was largely on the same footprint and the materials had been carefully considered to look traditional in appearance.  The use of levels had been considered to minimize the impact on the AONB, there were no highways issues and no harm in respect of heritage matters.          

It was proposed by Cllr P Williams MBE seconded by Cllr C Dowden

Decision: Approve subject to conditions

To note the report (attached) of Head of Planning Development Management and Building Control on Planning Appeals.

The Area Manager (Eastern) updated the committee with recent appeals.

To consider any items of business which the Chair has had prior notification and considers to be urgent pursuant to Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972.  The reason for the urgency shall be specified in the minutes.

There were no items of urgent business.