Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Sherry Jespersen.

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 confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 22^nd April 2025.

The minutes of the meeting held on 22^nd April 2025 were confirmed and signed.

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 22^nd May 2025.

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.

Masonry repairs and scour protection works.

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. Benville Bridge was a grade II listed structure, built in the early 19th century and contributes to the local historical landscape. The proposal sought to repair the bridge's structure through repointing, brick repair, crack stitching and a scour/relay of the road surface over the span. There would be little change to the existing character and appearance of the bridge and the repairs would help to preserve and protect the listed structure and ensure it is fit for purpose. There would be no change to the appearance of the listed asset.

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application and an understanding of all this entailed; having considered the officer’s report and presentation; the written representatives; and what they had heard at the meeting,

a motion to APPROVE the officer’s recommendation to GRANT planning permission as recommended, was proposed by Cllr Les Fry, and seconded by Cllr David Taylor.

Decision: To grant planning permission with conditions for the reasons set out in the officer’s report and in the appendix of these minutes.

Erect 48 No. dwellings, form vehicular access, public open space and carry out ancillary works. (Reserved Matters application following the grant of Outline Planning Permission No. P/OUT/2021/02316 to determine appearance, landscaping, layout and scale).

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. Photographs of constraints in the area, the proposed site and road layout were shown. There would be a robust planting scheme, retaining most of the hedge rows and a mix of larger and smaller trees. The application was for reserved matters following the grant of Outline Planning Permission, and the committee would only consider appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. There would be 40% affordable housing and 13% of which affordable rent. The materials on the site reflect the local area with a mix of slate tiles.

Public Participation

Mr Mason spoke against the application and explained that residents of Sturminster Newton did not hold any animosity towards the applicants. He said there was a lack of due process, transparency and the decision was controversial and there were multiple reasons why the outline application could be challenged at this late stage. He added that there were clear breaches to process and procedure and there was a failure to recognise the scale and impact on the hamlet of Sturminster Newton. He informed that there was a lack of proactive and inclusive engagement with the community. There was disregard for the policies and protections and a significant level of local objections that the local people should have been aware of in the first place.

Ms Lewis spoke against the application and raised concerns about the Council’s neglect of professional and statutory duty to not have its local plan in place. She urged members to hasten their pace of work on this and to put it in place much sooner than the present target date of May 2027. She questioned the validity and integrity of work of the officer decision to approve the outline planning permission as the decision for members to delegate the decision was made out of the blue and with no explanation. She asked members to revisit the outline planning permission decision and afford it a proper democratic process. She added that the layout was inappropriate and notably the spacing of the proposed housing estate and the external appearance of the properties.

Ms Wardell spoke against the application and was a part of the Ramblers Dorset Area Footpath Secretary. She spoke about what the Ramblers do, which is to help everyone enjoy the pleasures and benefits of walking and to enhance and protect the places where people walk. She referenced DEFRA Circular 1/09 section 7 advice to local authorities on recording, managing and maintaining, protecting and changing public rights of way. She raised concerns about the diversion of footpath N53/46 and that the proposed route of the diverted path is predominately along

estate roads/footways. She submitted that there was an alternative option which would run north from the access point in the south of the development, then head west between dwellings 23 and 27, to the perimeter green buffer zone shown on the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

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.

There are no exempt items scheduled for this meeting.  

There was no exempt business.