Agenda and minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 19 June 2023.

Update on decision list from November 2022.

The minutes of the meeting held on 19 June 2023 were confirmed and signed.

The Development Management Area Manager (N) presented an update for a slight variation to conditions agreed at the meeting of 4 November which were omitted on the published decision sheet attached to the minutes of that meeting.  A copy is attached to these minutes for information.

Decision: that the amendment be approved.

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.

Install ground-mounted solar panel photovoltaic solar arrays, substation, inverter stations, transformer stations, security fencing, gates and CCTV; form vehicular access, internal access track, landscaping and other ancillary infrastructure.

The Development Management Area Manager (N) presented the report for an application to install ground-mounted solar panel photovoltaic solar arrays, substation, inverter stations, transformer stations, security fencing, gates and CCTV; form vehicular access, internal access track, landscaping and other ancillary infrastructure.

The application had been brought to the Strategic and Technical Planning Committee at the request of the Service Manager due to the scale of the proposed development and the judgement required in considering whether the public benefits of the scheme outweighed the harm to the setting of the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).  The application had  been the subject of a committee site visit on 14 June 2023.

Cllr Tooke elected not to participate in the application as he had been unable to attend the site visit on 14 June 23.

The context and plan of the site was detailed with the aid of a visual presentation, together with ancillary structures.

With the aid of a visual presentation, the Development Management Area Manager (N) highlighted the relevant restraints of the application, including heritage assets, the key planning considerations, the principle of development and the significant public benefits.  The development, if approved would power 11,745 homes over a 35 year lifespan.

The main planning considerations were flood risks, a flood risk sequential test had been applied and having checked alternative potential sites in the Dorset Council area, officers were satisfied that the sequential test had been passed.

Members were advised that the solar arrays would not impede flood plain storage and following construction there would be no staff working permanently on the site. No objections had been raised by the Lead Local Flood Authority.

Historic England had made no comments, or given further advice regarding the Scheduled Monuments, officers considered that there was no harm to the designated assets and scheduled monuments.

Comments the Senior Conservation Officer indicated no objection and no harm to the settings of listed buildings, Hazelbury Bryan Conservation Area and Dungeon Hill Scheduled Monument. And less than substantial harm to the setting of Rawlsbury Camp

I relation to the landscape impact and character, there would be some residual harm, which when mitigated would be outweighed by the scheme in terms of new energy regeneration.

Although some impacts remained, these had been mitigated by amendments to scheme and the reduction in the number of arrays which made the impacts more acceptable.

Officers detailed the impacts of the loss of agricultural land, highways and transport implications, residential amenity, biodiversity and tree protection, if approved the scheme would result in 75% biodiversity net gain and decommissioning of the site and restoration after 35 years.

In summarising the Development Management Area Manager (N) reiterated that the site would power 13000 homes each year and offer a significant number of jobs during construction, there was no harm to heritage assets, the sequential and exception test was approved and the mitigation acceptable,

The site avoided the best agricultural land and would after 35 years be returned to agricultural use.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8a

This report considers an application to extinguish part of Footpath 79 and divert part of Bridleway 80, Beaminster in the light of objections received and recommends that extinguishment and diversion orders are made on the basis that the relevant legal tests have been met.

The Senior Definitive Map Technical Officer presented the report which considered an application to extinguish part of Footpath 79 and divert part of Bridleway 80, Beaminster in the light of objections received and recommended that extinguishment and diversion orders were made on the basis that the relevant legal tests had been met.

The application had come to committee as objections had been received by the Council.

With the aid of a visual presentation the Senior Definitive Map Technical Officer highlighted the current route of the footpath and bridleway from point to point on the route including views to the south and north from various points of the bridleway.

The proposed new route was highlighted and would be upgraded at certain points along the route.

Two consultations had been carried out and the results of the consultations were presented to the committee members.

Legal tests had been met for each order had to be considered separately and Officers considered that the application to extinguish footpath 79 Beaminster met the tests under section 118 of the Highways Act 1980.  Officers also considered the application to divert bridleway 80 also met the legal tests under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980. 

Oral representation in objection to the application was received from M Oppe.  His main concerns were that 7 out of 10 of the supporting comments were received after the deadline for representations and the report had given more weight to the supporters than the objectors, he drew the committee’s attention to the Ecological Survey Summary.

Oral representation in support of the application was received from D Hazelhurst, the applicant, highlighting the benefits and improvements of the application.

Officers responded to speaker comments and advised that the pre-order consultation was not statutory so late representations could be considered.

Members expressed some concern that the footpaths and bridleways had not been maintained by the Council.  In response to a question regarding fencing of the new route, officers advised that no fencing was planned, but could not say whether the fields would be used for livestock at any stage.

Proposed by Cllr Toni Coombes, seconded by Cllr John Worth

Decision: That:

(a)      The application to extinguish part of Footpath 79 and divert part of Bridleway 80, Beaminster as shown on Drawing P226/23/2 attached as Appendix 1, be accepted and extinguishment and diversion orders made;

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

(c)      If the Orders are unopposed, and are considered to meet the legal tests they be confirmed by the Council.

(d)      If the Orders are opposed, and the objections to the Orders are of a similar nature to those already considered by the Committee, they be submitted to the Secretary of State without further reference to the Committee.

(e)      The Orders are to be made concurrently. The Extinguishment Order shall be confirmed only upon confirmation of the Diversion Order. If objections are  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8b

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 is no scheduled exempt business to report.

There was no exempt business.