Decisions

Reason for Decision

The lease requires us to give permission as the requirements are met.

 

Alternative options considered and rejected

The Delegated Powers clearly gives the authority, the delegated powers the obvious way forward

 

Decision

A Licence to assign the 60 year lease at 98 The Esplanade, Weymouth.

Reason for Decision

The appointment of an independent examiner is a legal requirement of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Localism Act 2011 once a neighbourhood plan has been submitted to the Council.

 

Alternative options considered and rejected

There are no alternative options to the appointment of an examiner, as the appointment of an independent examiner is a legal requirement.  Four potential examiners have been considered, and the choice was made jointly with the neighbourhood qualifying body.

 

Decision

The appointment of an independent examiner for the examination of the Chickerell neighbourhood development plan.

 

 

Reason for the Decision

 

To progress the Milton Abbas Neighbourhood Plan to

referendum so that pending a favourable vote, the plan can

be ‘made’. (Current Regulations linked to the Coronavirus

Act 2020 mean that no neighbourhood plan referendums

can take place until 6 May 2021. However, the

Government’s Planning Practice Guidance has been

updated and sets out that neighbourhood plans that have

been subject to a decision statement, stating that they can

proceed to referendum, can be given significant weight in

decision-making.)

 

Alternative Options considered and rejected

 

The Council can decide not to follow the recommendations

of the Examiner, but it must set out its reasons for doing so.

Regarding the examiner’s recommendations, in paragraph

90 of his report (see Appendix A) he states “I nevertheless

recommend that consideration be given to the identification

of a reserve site, which could potentially be released in the

event that there is a shortfall in meeting the housing

requirement over the Plan period as a result of the decisions

reached on applications for any of the allocated sites. The

Plan should make it clear that this site should only be

considered for release if evidence exists that, without it, the

Plan would not be able to meet the identified need for

housing.”

The neighbourhood plan group and Milton Abbas parish

council (as the qualifying body) have both considered

whether to include a reserve site. The minutes from the

parish council meeting held on 13 August 2020 (see

Appendix B) show that both the neighbourhood plan group

and the parish council agreed that the draft neighbourhood

plan meets the needs of the parish and therefore can

proceed without a reserve site.

Dorset Council has separately considered the matter of

whether a reserve site should be included in the plan. There

is no suggestion by the examiner that a reserve site is

necessary in order for the plan to meet ‘basic conditions’ or

any other legal requirement. Dorset Council notes that the

parish council has given the matter due consideration and

taken a vote. Since production of a neighbourhood plan

should be led by the qualifying body (in this case, the parish

council), Dorset Council sees no reason on this occasion to

amend the plan to include a reserve site.

Aside from the matter of a reserve site, the Council has

agreed to accept all of the Examiners recommendations

made within his report (see Appendix A).

 

Budget Implications

 

Once a referendum date has been set, the Council becomes

eligible for a grant of £20,000. This grant is intended to

cover the costs associated with the Council’s input into the

production of the neighbourhood plan including the

examination and referendum. The grant of £20,000 will be

sufficient to cover the costs associated with the examination

and referendum.

 

Legal Implications

 

A legal challenge could theoretically be made against a

decision to proceed to referendum. Such a challenge could

be made on the basis that the neighbourhood plan, as

modified, does not meet the basic conditions, is not

compatible with the Convention rights or because it does not

comply with the definition of a neighbourhood development

plan. However, the independent Examiner has considered

these matters in light of all of the objections that have been

made to the plan. Given the evidence before them officers

consider that there is no basis for reaching a different view

to the Examiner.

Decision

 

a) The Milton Abbas Neighbourhood Plan 2019 - 2031,

as modified (please see Appendix C), can proceed to

referendum.

 

 

b) A recommendation to ‘make’ the Milton Abbas

Neighbourhood Plan 2019 - 2031 be made to a

Cabinet meeting after the referendum if the result of

the referendum is in support of making the plan and

there are no other issues identified that would go

against such a decision.

Reasons for Decision

·         The proposed extinguishment meets the legal criteria set out in the Highways Act 1980.

·         The inclusion of these provisions in a public path order means that there is no need for a separate legal event order to modify the definitive map and statement as a result of the extinguishment.

·         Accordingly, the absence of objections may be taken as acceptance that the proposed new route is expedient and therefore Dorset Council can itself confirm the order.

Decision

Application to extinguish Bridleway 2, Loders at Church Farm Cottage

 

·         The application to extinguish Bridleway 2, Loders from A – B – C – D as shown on Drawing P206/20/1 be accepted and an order made;

·         The Order include provisions to modify the definitive map and statement to record the changes made as a consequence of the extinguishment; and

·         If the Order is unopposed, it be confirmed by the Council

Reasons for Decision

(a) The proposed diversion meets the legal criteria set out in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

(b) The inclusion of these provisions in a public path order means that there is no need for a separate legal event order to modify the definitive map and statement as a result of the diversion / stopping up.

(c) Accordingly, the absence of objections may be taken as acceptance that the proposed new routes are expedient and therefore Dorset Council can itself confirm the order.

Decision

Application for an order under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to divert Footpath 69, (part), Swanage,

 

(a) The application to divert Footpath 69, (part), Swanage, be accepted and an order made;

(b) The order includes provisions to modify the definitive map and statement to record the changes made as a consequence of the diversion; and

(c) If the Order is unopposed, or if any objections are withdrawn, it be confirmed by Dorset Council without further reference to the Executive Director for Place

Reason for Decision

Housing the homeless under

 

Alternative options considered and rejected

Not to lease this particular property.

Decision

To lease 13 Roundhayes Close Weymouth DT4 0RN under the direct leasing scheme for homeless households.

 

Decision

 

(a)       That the continuation of Dorset Council’s membership of the Western Gateway Sub-National Transport Body, be approved;

 

(b)       That the submission of an expression of interest from Dorset Council with BCP Council to join the Western Gateway Powerhouse be approved and that authority be delegated to the Executive Director of Place to negotiate detailed terms.

 

Decision

 

(a)       That the procurement process be completed;

 

(b)       That the making of any contract award be delegated to the Portfolio Holder for Corporate Development and Change, in consultation with the Executive Director for Corporate Development.

 

Decision

 

That an extension of the Low Carbon Dorset programme using European Regional Development Funding, pending contract, be approved.

 

Decision

 

(a)       It be noted that following Screening of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 for Review, a full or partial Review of the Minerals Strategy will not be undertaken this year. Officers would continue monitoring the Minerals Strategy 2014 and it would be screened again in 2021.

(b)       That the Dorset Council Local Development Scheme be updated accordingly to reflect these actions.

(c)        That the 2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 , as set out in the Appendix to this report,  be made publicly available.

 

Decision

 

That the revised Local Development Scheme, as set out in the Appendix to the report, be agreed for publication.

 

Decision

 

That the Corporate Procurement Strategy (set out in Appendix 1 to the report) be adopted.

(a)       That the allocation of £3.13m in the 20/21 capital programme and a further £1.65m in the 21/22 capital programme for the purchase and refurbishment of accommodation to support homeless and rough sleeper households, be approved;

 

(b)       That authority be delegated to the Corporate Director of Housing, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Safety and the Section 151 Officer, the ability to purchase 1-bedroom properties for use as temporary accommodation;

 

(c)        That authority be delegated  to the Corporate Director for Property and Assets, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Safety, the Section 151 Officer, and Corporate Director of Housing the ability to purchase properties for use as hostel accommodation.

 

Decision

 

That the progress against the Council’s Plan be received and noted.

Reason for Decision

To secure provision of affordable housing.

 

Alternative options considered and rejected

N/A

 

Decision

To enter into a Section 106 agreement relating to application WD/D/19/001388 (Former Garage Court, rear of St Aldhelms Road, Sherborne). The S106 agreement secures 100% affordable housing.

 

This decision is taken under delegated authority, under paragraph 134 of the Officer Scheme of Delegation, which includes the power to determine “whether to require /  impose any condition, obligation, limitation and/or any other restriction and/or any other requirement in respect  thereof” in relation to any planning application, providing that certain triggers have not been met. The triggers have not been met in this case.