Venue: A link to the meeting can be found on the front page of the agenda.. View directions
Contact: Elaine Tibble 01305 224202 - Email: elaine.tibble@dorsetcouncil.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Declarations of Interest 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. Minutes: Cllr John Worth declared that he was the interim Chairman of
Winterborne Whitechurch Parish Council.
He had had no involvement with the previous discussions relating to
application P/FUL/2021/02622 and had come to the committee meeting with an open
mind and no pre-determination. |
|
Public Participation PDF 49 KB 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 officer at the meeting. All questions, statements and
responses will be published in full within the minutes of the meeting. The
deadline for submission of the full text of a question or statement is 8.30am
on Wednesday 19 January 2022. Minutes: Representations by the public to the Committee on individual planning applications are attached as an appendix to these minutes. |
|
Application for the registration of a town or village green at Happy Island, Bridport PDF 2 MB Minutes: The Definitive Map Team Manager presented the application
which had been made on behalf of ‘King Charles Estate Residents Association’
for the registration of land at Happy Island, Bridport as a town or village
green. The application was initially received in February 2013.
Stating that the land should be registered as a town or village green because
it been used by residents for over 20 years with no objection from the land owner. The application was accompanied by 14 forms of evidence
which detailed use of the Land such as walking, picnicking, kite flying and
other activities which could support the registration of land as a town or
village green. The application was made under Section 15(2) of the Commons
Act 2006 which required that: - a significant number of the inhabitants of any locality,
or of any neighbourhood in a locality, have indulged as of right in lawful
sports and pastimes on the Land for a period of at least 20 years; and - they continued to do so at the time of the application. In accordance with the Regulations, adverts on site and in
the local press had invited objections to the application. The objection period
expired on 8 May 2015. The following objections had been received from a local
resident and by the landowners, these and the Applicant’s responses were:- a) The field may have been previously regarded as a
recreational area, but this was no longer the case since the island in the
river had changed. b) The top eastern portion of the field had never been
regarded as a public recreational area. c) If the top eastern part of the field was developed, the
landowner could allow the bottom western portion to go into local government
ownership as a public area. The applicant had responded to these comments by saying,
that the river was not part of the application, the field was not included in
the Local Plan and therefore could not be developed, the objection was merely
and no evidence had been provided to support it. The landowner had also raised the following points a) The user evidence was insufficient – in that it was not
significant, it does not go up to the date of the application in 2014 and it
was predominantly linear use. Also, there was no evidence of user Parish wide. b) Use for lawful sports and pastimes was wholly anecdotal.
No photographic evidence had been produced, and the land had been in
agricultural use since at least 1997 which would have interrupted public use of
the land. c) Signs had been erected on site in 2008 stating that there
was no public access to the land other than along the footpath. The landowners had included paperwork supporting their objection this related to a deposit under S31(6) of the Highways Act 1980 and their lack of intention to dedicate any further public rights of way across the Land. They had also enclosed a copy of the West Dorset Weymouth ... view the full minutes text for item 41. |
|
Application No: P/FUL/2021/02046 - Land at Park Farm, Access to Park Farm, Gillingham PDF 558 KB Construct solar photovoltaic farm, battery storage and associated infrastructure, including inverters, batteries, substations, security cameras, fencing, access tracks and landscaping. Minutes: The Lead Project
Officer presented the report which sought construction of a solar photovoltaic
farm, battery storage and associated infrastructure, including inverters,
batteries, substations, security cameras, fencing, access tracks and
landscaping. He drew the
committee’s attention to an update sheet which is attached as an appendix to
these minutes. The Lead Project
Officer presented the proposed site plan, the access route
and photographs of the existing access point, which was considered sufficient
for the construction traffic, together with proposed elevations, examples of
proposed fencing and CCTV. The site was within the setting of several Scheduled
Monuments, two areas of Ancient Woodland, and a dwelling identified as a
non-designated heritage asset. It was also within Gillingham Forest Royal Deer
Park, which was recorded as a non-designated heritage asset (monument). The
visual and landscape impact pages 51-54 were highlighted. In his summary the
Lead Project Officer weighed up the planning balance, he concluded that the
development would offer significant environmental benefits. However, the
location and large expanse of the site meant that the harmful impacts on the
significance of designated and non-designated heritage assets, their setting
within a valued rural landscape, and on associated public enjoyment of these
heritage and landscape features as part of the Gillingham Royal Forest Project
Area, were sufficiently adverse and significant to outweigh the public benefits
of the proposal. The application was recommended for refusal. The public
representations were read and are attached as an appendix to these minutes. Cllr Ridout as Ward
Member for the area elected to take part in the debate as a committee member
and not as Ward Member. The committee were
given the opportunity to ask questions of the Lead Project Officer. These
focussed on the balancing act of the benefits against the harm of the
application and the weight given to Dorset Council’s Ecological and
Environmental Emergency Declaration. The Head of Planning advised that great
weight had to be given to heritage and conservation, less than substantial harm
still had great weight which needed to be considered. The NPPF clearly stated
that valued landscape should be valued and enhanced. Members were keen
to stress that this was valued landscape with a number of
scheduled monuments which had to be given great weight, residents were trying
to conserve and develop the area. Housing had been approved nearby due to
housing need, but it was felt that was where the development should end. The
committee did not feel this was an appropriate site for a solar farm. It was felt by some
of the committee members that a site visit would have been appropriate and
helpful. Proposed by Cllr
Clayton, seconded by Cllr Bartlett. On being put to the
vote, the proposal for a site visit was lost on the Chairman’s casting vote. Proposed by Cllr Jespersen, seconded by Cllr Ridout. On being put
to the vote the members were minded to approve the
Officer’s recommendation to refuse the application. Decision: The Head of Planning confirmed that he had been present during the ... view the full minutes text for item 42. |
|
Lunch Break The meeting will resume at 14.00hrs |
|
Construct solar farm and erect electric vehicle charging station, form vehicular access, parking, landscaping, and carry out associated works including installation of equipment, batteries and necessary infrastructure. Minutes: The Senior Planning Officer presented the report for the construction of a solar farm and erection of an electric vehicle charging station, form vehicular access, parking, landscaping, and carry out associated works including installation of equipment, batteries and necessary infrastructure. He updated the committee with the recommendation of an additional condition 35, which had been agreed by the applicant. The application comprised a solar farm, An
Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Station, a covered walkway and canopy for 6x
ultra-rapid and 6x rapid charging points; and public rest facilities including
public conveniences, a small café, shop and seating area for a duration of 40
years. The committee were presented with
various site plans and photographs of the landscape and views from varying view-points. The
Highways Authority had confirmed they were happy with the access point subject
to a Grampian condition. There would
also be additional parking areas for HGVs. The Senior Planning Officer highlighted the relevant
constraints, key planning considerations and principle of development. Historic England had been consulted with regard to designated heritage assets. The Senior Planning Officer completed his presentation with
a summary of the application and his recommendation. The public
representations were read and are attached as an appendix to these minutes. The committee members were invited to put their questions
forward. These focussed on charging
points for motor homes, the maintenance of the dog walking area, the volume of
traffic and highway impact, the footpath from the village to the proposed site,
lighting and facilities for HGVs. Additional conditions were also
suggested to cover the questions, as well as an
informative note could be added relating to the provision of shower facilities
depending on the level of demand. Proposed by Cllr Worth, seconded by Cllr Jespersen. On being put to the vote, the committee were minded to
approve the application as per the Officer recommendation, with the additional
conditions to submit details of the proposed surface, confirm and maintain the
permissive path between the village and the site, maintain the dog walking area
and the addition of an informative note relating to the possible provision of
shower facilities. Decision: The Head of Planning confirmed that he had been present
throughout the meeting, listened to the debate and
would make the decision in accordance with the committee’s minded to vote. |
|
Urgent items 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. Minutes: There were no urgent items. |
|
Exempt Business 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. Minutes: There was no exempt business. |
|