Agenda and draft minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 17^th October.

Councillor David Northam requested an amendment to page 6 regarding the comments made by the Local Ward member. 

To disclose any pecuniary, other registrable or non-registrable 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.

Members of the public wishing to speak to the Committee on a planning application should notify the Democratic Services Officer listed on the front of this agenda. This must be done no later than two clear working days before the meeting. Please refer to the Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee.  Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee

The deadline for notifying a request to speak is 8.30am on Thursday 14^th November 2024.

Representations by the public to the Committee on individual planning applications are detailed below. There were no questions, petitions or deputations received on other items on this occasion.

To consider a Traffic Regulation Order for the prevention of the use of the road by vehicular traffic of a kind which, or the use thereof by such traffic in a manner which, is unsuitable having regard to the existing character of the road or adjoining property.

With the aid of a visual presentation including plans and aerial photographs, the Case Officer identified the site and explained the proposal and relevant planning policies to members. Members were informed that the proposal was to secure that at all times, the bus route at the junction with Mampitts Lane, could only be used by buses, coaches, bicycles and pedestrians. Photographs of the location of the proposed Vehicle Restriction Facility were shown with the Case Officer detailing that the existing carriageway did not satisfy modern design standards. Images to demonstrate the location of the proposed footway to the north were also shown. The officer’s presentation highlighted the map of the alternative route which would be used by road users and is accessed by a signal-controlled junction which had previously been designed to accommodate the expected amount of traffic.

Primary and secondary consultation had been carried out and no objections had been received from Local Members, Emergency Services, Waste Services, Bus Operators, Utility Companies or Road and Freight Haulage Associations. However, upon secondary consultation, it was evident that there were 78 against the Traffic Regulation Order whilst 43 members of the public remained either in support or neutral. Objections had been received in relation to the impacts on Allen Road, the northern link/spine road, an overall increase in speeding vehicles, climate change and journey times and the request for a 20mph speed restriction. Photographs of Allen Road were shown to illustrate the signalised traffic junction onto the A30 and to visually demonstrate the alternative route and the Northern link which would've provided access to Wincombe Lane.

Members were also provided with details of the number of collisions which had been caused due to highway user error and not due to the design of the road. The Case Officer’s recommendation was to support the Traffic Regulation Order for the following reasons:

• For preventing the use of the road by vehicular traffic of a kind which is unsuitable having regard to the character of the road.
• To prevent the use of the road by through traffic for the purposes of road safety.

Public Participation

Mr Peter Yeo spoke in his own capacity as a resident who lived on Mampitts Lane, who like many others, objected to the bus gate. He referred to the narrow roads near the Town Council allotments and cemetery. Over the last 8 years, the access had worked well with the Town Council conducting surveys to demonstrate suitability and no speeding problems. Mr Yeo felt that if approved, the proposal would stop residents accessing the estate by the most logical route and there was no real justification for cutting off and segregating the east of Shaftesbury. The local resident also highlighted an accident which had occurred the week prior to the meeting, highlighting that if the access point couldn't have been used, there would have been even more severe traffic jams in all directions. Looking at figures, 75% of residents do not want the bus gate. Mr Yeo did  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

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 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 are no exempt items scheduled for this meeting.  

There was no exempt business.