Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence

An apology for absence was received from Cllr Ridout for the afternoon session only.

To receive any declarations of interest

No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made at the meeting.

With regards to Item 5a, Cllr Fry declared an interest in respect of predetermination as his wife works at Dorset County Hospital.  Cllr Fry undertook to not take part in the debate and agreed to speak only as a Local Member for this item.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 30 July 2020.

The minutes of the meeting held on 30 July 2020 were confirmed and signed.

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 fiona.king@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 Portfolio Holder or 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 Friday 11 September 2020.

Please refer to the Guide to Public Speaking at Planning Committee and specifically the "Covid-19 Pandemic – Addendum to the Guide to Public Speaking Protocol for Planning Committee meetings" included with this agenda.

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 the applications listed below for planning permission

Members considered written reports submitted on planning applications as set out below.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

Cllr Fry spoke as the Local Member only and then removed himself from the meeting for this item.

The Lead Project Officer introduced the application for the erection of a multi storey car park and improvements to internal site roads and temporary change of use of former school field to car parking and Dorset County Hospital.

The officer identified the whole hospital campus and drew members’ attention to the main access point s on the site. The location and extent of the Dorchester conservation area was highlighted and it was noted that no development was planned in the designated conservation area. The nearby Listed Buildings were also highlighted. The proposed site plans and the proposed elevation and section drawings were highlighted to members.

There was no in principle land use objection  and the main considerations in the determination of the application were set out int the application report.

The officer highlighted a number of updates for members since the publication of the report which included:-

• A review of screening under the EIA Regulations, environment impact was not considered necessary and the original screening opinion considered to be sound.
• Further consultation responses from the Council’s Transport Planning Manager and Flood Risk Management Team:
•  The Travel Plan was now acceptable. 
• Surface water discharge element objection was still not resolved and this was explained to members.
• Representations in support of the proposed development had been received from Richard Drax MP and Simon Hoare MP. 6 further representations supporting the proposed development had also been received including previous county councillor and representative on the Hospital Board, Ian Gardner.
• Further representations objecting to the proposed development included a petition from the residents of Damers Road. Further representations had also been received expressing concern about air quality impact and damage to properties during the construction period.

The Conservation Officer had no further comments to make.

The Transport Development Liaison Manager highlighted that on-site parking provision would be increased to 1064 spaces once the works were completed.  The view from the Highways Authority was that the proposed development was satisfactory and robust and had no objection in principle to the proposal.

A number of written submissions supporting and objecting to the recommendation and a statement by the applicant were read out at the meeting and are attached to these minutes.

Cllr Tony Alford who was the Dorset Council representative on the hospital Board addressed the committee. He focussed on the concept of heritage significance and noted that it was not clear from the report that Historic England had set any guidance about how heritage should be discussed. He felt this was missing from the Planning Officer’s report. He concluded from the report there would be a very low level of harm arising from the proposed development.  There was a high level of compliance with other areas of the application.  Sustainable development was mentioned in the report, and this application would help to deliver all three elements.   He highlighted that approval of this application would ensure the funding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

The Area Lead Planning Officer introduced the application for the construction of a principal street, associated access, landscaping and infrastructure works in Gillingham.

The officer highlighted the holding objection by the Environment Agency to members and explained why this featured in the recommendation.

He advised that the road had been designed as a tree-line road which would be 6.75m wide, widened at the bends, where necessary. There would be shared use footway/cycleways provided and therefore the Highways Authority fully supported the proposal.

Local Members for Gillingham

Cllr Walsh

Cllr Walsh addressed the committee and advised that he had been involved in the scheme for the past 8 years.  He had seen this evolve over the years and noted that it was being led by the community.   Previously, he had spoken in Parliament regarding this issue and highlighted that the funding was time limited. The residents of Gillingham designed and supported this development.

Cllr Pothecary

Gillingham Town Council resolved to recommend approval of this application subject to pedestrian islands, to make crossing the road safer. Highways have stated that given the number of people wanting to cross the street there would only be a need to include dropped kerb crossing points and asked for their location with regards to footpaths. The officer highlighted them in his presentation.  The Transport Development Liaison Manager noted that Dorset Council had advised that there was no need for any controlled crossings along the principle street.  It was felt to be safe to cross a 30mph road at that width and anyone using the Rights of Way footpaths should be safe to cross the road.

Cllr Ridout

Gillingham was fortunate to have received funding at the outset of the development and she felt that any impacts had been addressed and mitigated.  The application had gone through a rigorous public consultation.  She asked that the tree and landscaping detail be discussed and liaised with Gillingham Town Council.

Members comments and questions

Cllr Cook made reference to the link to the B3081 and asked if this didn’t come to pass what would be the implications for buses coming down the street and would there be enough space for them to turn?  The Transport Development Liaison Manager advised that the road has not been designed with a turning head at the eastern end. The officer advised that the draft phasing plan illustrated that development would start at the Eastern end of the site and therefore it was highly likely that this connection to the B3081 would be provided in the early stages of development as the intention is that the link will be provided, most probably at the first phase of residential development.  In the unlikely event that this connection was not delivered the Transport Development Liaison Manager added that there were always engineering solutions to any problems that might be encountered.

Proposed: Jon Andrews

Seconded: Belinda Ridout

Decision

That the application be approved subject to no adverse comment from the Environment Agency and the conditions outlined in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

The Area Lead Planning Officer introduced the application for the erection of 60 No. dwellings, form public open space, local equipped area of play and attenuation pond. (Reserved Matters application to determine appearance, layout, landscaping and scale; and to discharge Condition Nos. 15 - Landscape Environment Plan, 17 - Soft Landscaping, 18 - Footpath Link, 21 - Materials Palette, 22 - Public Art and 24 - Lighting and Signage; following grant of Outline Planning Permission No. 2/2017/1095/OUT).

The officer highlighted the proposed site layout and the layout specifics. The proposed development was a mix of 2, 3 and 4 bed houses and flats. There were no design constraints as the application was not in a conservation area. 

There was a holding objection from the lead local flood authority in place. Conditions had previously been imposed on the outline application that prior to commencement of development drainage matters had to be agreed.  With these in place already this matter had been adequately addressed.

The key planning matters were highlighted – neighbour amenity and matters of design and layout.

The Transport Development Liaison Manager highlighted that the road layout complied with a speed limit of 20mph.  Car parking was built in line with council guidance, the provision being all on-street.  The Applicant had stated that the road would remain private and would not be offered for adoption.

A number of written submissions supporting and objecting to the proposal and a statement by the applicant were read out at the meeting and are attached to these minutes.  One late representation was received raising concerns about boundary fencing adjacent to existing properties.

Local Member for Stalbridge – Cllr Graham Carr-Jones

As the portfolio holder for housing Cllr Carr-Jones was very pleased to have this 100% affordable homes development within his ward.  He made reference to local chatter about the homes not being available for local people and explained to members how the housing register worked. He was still slightly disappointed with the design site layout. However, he was not asking for the application to be refused but asked that if there was anything in planning that could be done to mitigate the layout.  He asked who would be responsible for the maintenance of the trees and lighting specifics.  The Areas Lead Planning Officer advised that with regards to lighting the applicant would have to assign a management company to undertake maintenance and due care in the roads. In respect of tree management, condition 17 was around soft landscaping, and that the developer would need to notify Dorset Council for the first 4/5 years so the tree officer could go and see that it was all acceptable.

Members comments and questions

Cllr Fry asked about the size of the 2 bed houses and if they fitted with national criteria.  The Area Lead Planning Officer advised that officers could not enforce the size as this was guidance. In terms of renewable energy to make them climate change complaint, the officer advised that the applicant was not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

The Area Lead Planning Officer introduced the application to develop land at Marnhull by the erection of up to 61 No. dwellings, form vehicular and pedestrian access, public open space and attenuation basins. (Outline application to determine access).

The application had been originally determined by the former North Dorset District Council in 2019.  However, the reason the application was before members was because there had been a change to the terms of the Section 106 Agreement, specifically the NHS contributions could not be secured and their request for contributions had been retraced.  Therefore, members were now being asked to review the application and approve.

A number of written submissions supporting and objecting to the proposal and a statement by the applicant were read out at the meeting and are attached to these minutes.

Local Member for Marnhull – Cllr Graham Carr-Jones

There has been broad acceptance that Marnhull could take some development, although the application had not been that popular.  Parishioners would rather not have street lighting in the development, if they have to have something could it be sympathetic and considerate. He asked that a condition be added to the application that reduces the speed limit down to 20mph.   The Transport Development Liaison Manager advised that Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) and Planning Permissions were governed by separate legal processes. He suggested that the normal procedure would be that the Parish Council would pursue a TRO with Dorset Council.  He felt it was not particularly essential to this planning application. With regards to street lighting, the Area Lead Planning Officer advised that these details had not yet been supplied and would be brought forward at the layout stage.  However, the officer felt that the applicant would want to address this.

Members comments and questions

Cllr Cook made reference to the 40% affordable housing in this location and asked for details how much the NHS contribution would have been and if there was a way in asking for affordable housing to make up what the developer was going to give to the NHS.  The Area Lead Planning Officer advised that the Section 106 was legally binding and officers were unable to secure any additional contributions.

Cllr Fry asked about the consideration of renewable energies being included.  The Chairman advised that this application was an outline application at the present time, more details would follow at a later date.  The Area Lead Officer advised that he would add an informative on this matter.

Cllr Jones considered if members should be reviewing the other Section 106 monies as the original application was submitted in 2018 and approved in 2019.  The Area Lead Planning Officer advised that this was specific to the NHS Trust as they had withdrawn their request for Section 106 money and then proceeded to this basis. It was not made clear what needed to be reviewed as this was a bespoke issue relating solely to the NHS Trust.

Cllr Pothecary proposed approval of the application and that members did their  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

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 of business.