Agenda and minutes

To disclose any pecuniary, other registerable or non-registerable interests as set out in the adopted Code of Conduct. In making their disclosure councillors are asked to state the agenda item, the nature of the interest and any action they propose to take as part of their declaration.

If required, further advice should be sought from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.

No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made at the meeting.

To receive questions or statements on the business of the committee from town and parish councils and members of the public.

Public speaking has been suspended for virtual committee meetings during the Covid-19 crisis and public participation will be dealt with through written submissions only.

Members of the public who live, work, or represent an organisation within the Dorset Council area, may submit up to two questions or a statement of up to a maximum of 450 words.  All submissions must be sent electronically to elaine.tibble@dorsetcouncil.gov.uk  by the deadline set out below.

When submitting a question please indicate who the question is for and include your name, address and contact details.  Questions and statements received in line with the council’s rules for public participation will be published as a supplement to the agenda.

Questions will be read out by an officer of the council and a response given by the appropriate Portfolio Holder or officer at the meeting.  All questions, statements and responses will be published in full within the minutes of the meeting.

The deadline for speaking at this meeting is 8.30am on Friday, 20 August 2021.

Please refer to the Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee and specifically the "Covid-19 Pandemic – Addendum to the Guide to Public Speaking Protocol for Planning Committee meetings" included with this agenda.

Representations by the public to the Committee on individual planning applications are attached as an appendix to these minutes.

To consider any items of business which the Chairman 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 recorded in the minutes.

There were no urgent items.

To consider the applications listed below for planning permission.

Members considered written reports submitted on planning applications as set out below.

Develop land by the erection of up to 80 No. dwellings, form vehicular access, associated open space and infrastructure. (Outline application to determine access).

The Area Lead Gillingham presented the application which sought approval to develop land by the erection of up to 80 No. dwellings, form vehicular access, associated open space and infrastructure. This was an Outline application to determine access only at this stage.

The site lay outside but immediately adjacent to the settlement boundary approx. 1km walking distance to the town centre where there was a train station and other public amenities, which deemed the location to be sustainable.

The site access was proposed off Common Mead Lane.  The original illustrative master plan had proposed up to 85 dwelling but the number had been reduced to 80 following negotiations with the developer.  It was acknowledged that this was a substantial change of use which would have an impact on neighbouring amenity, but not enough to warrant refusal of the application.

Situated 200m from the conservation area,500m from listed buildings and adjacent to a non designated heritage asset, the Conservation Officer felt the site would have minimal impact on the significance of those assets.  Nevertheless the encroachment into the undeveloped hinterland of the CA/non designated asset would result in less than substantial harm.

The Area Lead Gillingham concluded that the positives of the development would outweigh the harm overall.   In summary the recommendation was to grant subject to S106 conditions and with agreement of the applicant that an application for reserved matters would be submitted within 2 years.

The Transport Development Liaison Manager advised that there were no concerns from Highways.

Representations were read by the Technical Support Officer and are attached as an appendix to these minutes.

Member questions focussed on the design of the junction and safety of cyclists, the ecological and diversity plan and the possibility of new tree planting going forward.

A question was raised as to whether the committee were able to protect an area of land (One Oak Field), although not relevant or appropriate to the application it could not be achieved, the Chairman suggested that if it were to be included within the draft Dorset Local Plan members would have the chance to make comments.

The committee had a number of concerns with regard to the density of the site, loss of open space for recreational use, the location not being sustainable and loss of biodiversity.

It was proposed by Cllr Val Pothecary and seconded by Cllr Tim Cook that the application be recommended for refusal.

On being put to the vote the committee was minded to refuse the application siting Policy 20, due to the less than substantial harm on the heritage assets and the potential for the site to be considered for amenity/recreation.

The Head of Planning, having considered the representation and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority:

Decision: That the application be refused for the reasons set out in the appendix to these minutes.

Develop land by the erection of up to 115 No. dwellings, form vehicular access from New Road and Lodden Lakes Phase 1, form public open space. (Outline application to determine access only).

The Area Lead Gillingham presented the application which sought approval to develop land by the erection of up to 115 No. dwellings, form vehicular access from New Road and Lodden Lakes Phase 1, form public open space. This was an Outline application to determine access only at this stage.

With the aid of a visual presentation members were shown various plans of the site, including an aerial view, the site location plan, site access, site photographs from various points, extracts from the Masterplan Framework detailing density on site and the Illustrative Masterplan.

There were no concerns regarding the proximity of the site to the designated heritage assets, the conservation officer was satisfied there would be no adverse effects on those assets.

Archaeological recording was ongoing but there had been no findings of any significance.  The area lead Gillingham detailed the infrastructure/obligations before reaching his conclusion and recommendation to approve.

There were no concerns from the Transport Development Liaison Manager

The Ward Member Cllr David Walsh read a statement to the committee in support of the application, this is attached as an appendix to these minutes and a statement was read on behalf of the agent for the application.

Member questions concentrated on the visibility splays and line of sight from the junction and current speed limits.

It was proposed by Cllr Val Pothecary and seconded by Belinda Ridout that the application be recommended for approval.

On being put to the vote the committee was minded to support the recommendation

The Head of Planning, having considered the representation and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority:

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions and the completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and County Planning Act 1990, as outlined in the appendix attached to these minutes.

To inform Members of notified appeals and appeal decisions and to take them into account as a material consideration in the Planning Committee’s future decisions.

Members received and noted an update from the Development Management Area Manager on three recent appeal decisions.

Erect 20 No. dwellings.

The Development Management Area Manager presented the report which sought planning permission for the erection of 20 dwellings on part of the site that has been previously consented to house 34no. dwellings (under Council reference 2/2015/1841/VARIA).

The application was part of a wider scheme, with a long history which already had planning permission for 34 dwellings.  This application sought to add an additional 4 dwellings There were no direct heritage impacts and the site was not within a conservation area.  A major constraint was the high-risk flood zone. The site lay within the setting of the AONB, but presented no unacceptable impact on the landscape.

The Development Management Area Manager gave an insight to the history of the site and the previous concerns resulting from asbestos and other contaminates on the site, the flood risk and how these had been dealt with and mitigated by the developer, together with an update on the site today including properties that had been completed and already occupied.

There were no concerns from the Transport Development Liaison Manager.

Representations were read by the Technical Support Officer and are attached as an appendix to these minutes.  The Development Management Area Manager responded to the comments raised in the representations

The Acting Enforcement Manager advised that he had provided information from the site to a contamination consultant who had also visited the site and the Development Management Area Manager added that there were two consultants who had been involved in the process.

Committee members were then invited to submit questions, which focussed on the soil contamination and risks, number of vehicles on site, availability of parking plus queries relating to the location of the spoil heap

Officers were confident that the developer was very aware of what was required on site and additionally all permitted development rights on the site had been removed.

It was proposed by Cllr Les Fry and seconded by Carole Jones that the application be recommended for approval.

On being put to the vote the committee was minded to support the recommendation

The Head of Planning, having considered the representation and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority:

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to conditions and the completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as outlined in the appendix to these minutes.

Change of use from offices (Class B1(a)) to 41 no. 1-bed, 2-bed and 3-bed apartments (Class C3)

The Chairman introduced the application and advised that the building was owned by Dorset Council and previously used by all councillors, therefore all members had an interest in the building but none that prevented them from partaking in the decision making, however if any of the committee members were pre-determined they must say so.

The application had come to the committee as permitted development because the building was council owned.  There were only 5 defined matters that the members were to consider.

The Lead Project Officer, Corporate Projects presented the report and confirmed the 5 subject matters of the prior approval and the relevant points that needed to be taken into consideration by the members.  He was content that the plans and elevation drawings were adequate for the application and he addressed the matter of vehicular access to the building.

The application was to change the use of the building to residential, and it was unlikely that any changes would require breaking ground.

The Lead Project Officer, Corporate Projects updated the recommendation within 12.1 of the report to “minded to grant approval subject to the conditions and that the Head of Planning determine the application accordingly”.

There were no concerns from the Transport Development Liaison Manager.  There would be 41 car parking spaces at ground level and visitors could park in the car park.

In addressing the public statements the Lead Project Officer, Corporate Projects advised that as permitted development the application was not subject to affordable housing.

Concerns were voiced over changing a modern office building into habital dwellings, there was no provision for amenities for families, ie nowhere to hang washing, store pushchairs or disability buggies.    The Chairman reminded members that these areas of concern were not in the committee’s remit for this application.   Other areas discussed was the impact of commercial premises in relation to residential areas, and some disappointment that alternative uses for the building had not come forward to maximise potential for council tax payers.

It was proposed by Cllr Carole Jones and seconded by Cllr Belinda Ridout that the application be recommended for approval with an additional condition relating to the approval of mitigation of noise from nearby commercial premises.

On being put to the vote the committee was minded to support the recommendation.

The Head of Planning, having considered the representation and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority:

Decision: That the application be granted subject to the conditions as set out in the appendix to these minutes.

Replace existing garden wall with new wall and gates. Form permeable drive and carry out landscaping.

The Development Management Area Manager introduced the report and gave an overview of the site which was within the Dorchester Conservation area and a recently made article 4 directive which took away Permitted Development rights to take away walls and enclosures.

In proposing off street parking for the dwelling, some of the boundary wall would be removed, but part retained with some planting of a tree and retention of shrubs.  There were no highway objections or safety issues and the Development Management Area Manager was happy there would be no adverse effect to the Conservation Area.

It was proposed by Cllr Stella Jones and seconded by Cllr Les Fry that the application be recommended for approval.

On being put to the vote the committee was minded to support the recommendation.

The Head of Planning, having considered the representation and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority:

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions as set out in the appendix to these minutes.

To move the exclusion of the press and the public for the following item in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information within the meaning of paragraph 3 of schedule 12 A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended)

The public and the press will be asked to leave the meeting whilst the item of business is considered.

There was no exempt business.