Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was received from Cllr Pothecary for the afternoon part of the meeting.

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 interests were made at the meeting.

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 george.dare@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 speaking at this meeting is 8.30am on Friday 7 January 2022.

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.

Erect Yoga Studio with attached deck and sauna facilities, use of existing on site parking and turning to serve the proposed use, improvements to the access onto Chaffeymoor Hill and change of use Grove Farm from C3 to C1 use to provide B&B accommodation for not more than 20 persons in connection with the proposed use.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application to erect Yoga Studio with attached deck and sauna facilities, use of existing on-site parking and turning to serve the proposed use, improvements to the access onto Chaffeymoor Hill and change of use Grove Farm from C3 to C1 use to provide B&B accommodation for not more than 20 persons in connection with the proposed use.

Committee members were shown the location of the site which is next to a listed building and various photographs of the site. The officer’s presentation included details on the access to the site, proposed new hedgerow, plans for the change of use to provide B&B accommodation, 3D visuals of the proposed yoga studio, and the proposed elevations. The Senior Planning Officer referred to Policies 2, 6, and 12 of the Neighbourhood Plan.

The Transport Development Manager outlined the access to the site. Visibility splays would be created by removing some trees and hedgerow, leaving an ash tree as it would not impact on safety. There would be low traffic movement which would not affect safety.

The Technical Support Officer read the representations which are attached as an annexure to these minutes.

Members’ Questions and Comments

Members asked questions of the Senior Planning Officer and Transport Development Manager in relation to the application. The officers responded to the questions and advised that:

·         It was necessary for the Highway Authority to make changes to the access to ensure it was safe.

·         The amount of parking on the site was considered appropriate.

·         There were conditions limiting noise and number of people on the site.

·         There would be an increase in traffic, but it would be acceptable with the improved access.

·         The sedum roof on the studio would have the appropriate conditions for it to thrive.

·         If the site was sold, then the Planning Authority would need to check to see if a material change of use of the yoga studio had occurred.

·         Condition 4 did not allow amplified music to be played on the site.

·         A licence for the sale of alcohol needed to be dealt with by the Licencing Authority.

Members debated the application. Points of discussion included: neighbouring amenity; the use of the veranda; adding further conditions to the application; the improved visibility of the access; and playing music on the site.

Proposed by Cllr Les Fry, seconded by Cllr Jon Andrews.

The Committee were ‘minded to’ grant the application, subject to conditions.

The Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority: that the application be granted, subject to conditions.

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions outlined in the appendix attached to these minutes.

Erect 162 No. dwellings, form vehicular access, parking, landscaping, open space and carry out ancillary works.

The Lead Project Officer introduced the application to erect 162 No. dwellings, form vehicular access, parking, landscaping, open space and carry out ancillary works.

The Lead Project Officer presented his report to Members. The Committee was shown the location of the site, which is near an AONB, and various photographs of the site from different views. In 2016 an application was approved for 191 dwellings on the site; however, this current proposal was for 162 dwellings on the site, the main differences were highlighted to members, which included increased affordable housing. Members’ attention was drawn to elevations of street scenes and dwellings, and the proposed landscaping, which showed the proposed appearance of the development. The recommendation was to grant planning permission.

The Technical Support Officer read the representations which are attached as an annexure to these minutes. The Lead Project Officer responded to the representations with some points of clarification.

Members’ Questions and Comments

Members asked several questions which related to the application. Officers responded to the questions and confirmed that:

·         Refuse collection vehicles turning on the development had been catered for.

·         No renewables had been put forward by the applicant.

·         There was less traffic predicted compared to an application for this site in 2016. The reduced traffic movement was considered acceptable.

·         The site is near an AONB but not within it.

·         Condition 4 was a proposed lighting condition.

·         There should be 30% affordable housing due to the development being an extension of the settlement of Shaftesbury.

·         The building materials secured by condition 3 should include some Shaftesbury Stone.

·         Blinds in windows would be difficult to condition.

·         It is not reasonable to enforce domestic lighting levels.

·         A condition could be added for the applicant to provide further information about sustainability, prior to construction.

At 13.14 the meeting was adjourned until 14.00. Upon reconvening a vote was taken to extend the meeting as the duration was longer than 3 hours. Proposed by Cllr Mary Penfold and seconded by Cllr Jon Andrews. The vote was carried.

It was the view of the committee that Shaftesbury Stone was included in the building materials, and they did not expect it to be reduced, as Shaftesbury was famous for its stone. The committee also did not wish to see render introduced at a later date.

Proposed by Cllr Les Fry, seconded by Cllr Jon Andrews. 

The Committee were ‘minded to’ grant the application, subject to conditions and an additional Sustainability Statement condition.

The Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority: that the application be granted, subject to conditions and an additional Sustainability Statement condition.

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions outlined in the appendix attached to these minutes.

Sustainability Statement Condition:

Prior to the commencement of the development above damp course level, a Sustainability Statement shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

Installation of roof mounted solar photovoltaics (PV) equipment and associated infrastructure.

The Lead Project Officer – Corporate Projects introduced the application for the installation of roof mounted solar photovoltaics (PV) equipment and associated infrastructure. The committee were shown the location and photographs of the site, as well as various plans for the proposal.

The main planning issues were highlighted:

·         The acceptability in principle of the proposed development

·         Impact on amenity and biodiversity

·         Impact on character and appearance of the locality and setting and heritage significance of Campion Cottage.

There were no representations for this application.

Members’ Questions and Comments

There were no questions or comments from members.

Proposed by Cllr Stella Jones, seconded by Cllr Les Fry.

The Committee were ‘minded to’ grant the application, subject to conditions.

The Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority: that the application be granted, subject to conditions.

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions outlined in the appendix attached to these minutes.

Installation of roof mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) panels and associated infrastructure.

The Lead Project Officer – Corporate Projects outlined the application for the installation of roof mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) panels and associated infrastructure. The site was located within the Cerne Abbas Conservation Area and the school and adjacent buildings were not listed buildings, but they were non-designated heritage assets. The Committee was shown the proposals for the solar photovoltaic panels, which would be placed symmetrically on the westward and eastward facing roof planes, as well as various photographs of the school. If permission was granted, Condition 3 would prevent solar panels being installed on the eastward facing roof plane in the interest of preserving the Cerne Abbas Conservation Area.

The Technical Support Officer read the representations which are attached as an annexure to these minutes.

Members’ Questions and Comments

Members asked questions in relation to the reduction of the solar panels and harm that would be caused to heritage. Officers responded to the questions and advised that:

·         There was a statutory duty to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of the conservation area and to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings.

·         The Conservation officer did not consider it acceptable to have solar panels on the eastward facing roof plane.

·         All solar panels were in the proposal, but condition 3 would prevent the installation of some.

·         The school is located within a designated Conservation Area.

·         Harm to the heritage significance of designated heritage assets should be given great weight.

Members made comments on the application which included being minded to support the officer’s recommendation, as well weighing the harm against public benefits.

Proposed by Cllr Belinda Ridout that the application be granted, however there was no seconder for this proposal.

Proposed by Cllr Brian Heatley, seconded by Cllr Tim Cook that the application be granted without Condition 3.

The Committee were ‘minded to’ grant the application, subject to conditions, and excluding Condition 3.

The Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, the less than substantial harm to the heritage significance of designated and non-designated heritage assets and to the public benefits associated with the proposed development, confirmed that planning permission would be granted, subject to conditions, excluding condition 3.

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions outlined in the appendix attached to these minutes.

Install roof mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) panels, 2 No. wall mounted air source heat pumps and associated infrastructure.

The Lead Project Officer – Corporate Projects introduced the application to install roof mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) panels, 2 No. wall mounted air source heat pumps and associated infrastructure. The Committee were shown the site’s location which was within the designated Evershot Conservation Area and near to listed buildings. Great weight had to be given to any harm to the heritage significance of designated heritage assets when considering the application and the harm should be weighed against the public benefits. Condition 3 would prevent some solar PV panels being installed on the southwest-ward and the southeast-ward facing roof planes of the original school building in the interest of preserving the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and to limit harm to heritage significance.

The Technical Support Officer read a representation which is attached as an annexure to these minutes.

Members’ Questions and Comments

There were no questions from members. Members agreed that some solar PV panels would impact on the conservation area.

Proposed by Cllr Mary Penfold, seconded by Cllr Belinda Ridout.

The Committee were ‘minded to’ grant the application, subject to conditions.

The Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority: that the application be granted, subject to conditions.

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions outlined in the appendix attached to these minutes.

Erect rear flat roof extension.

The Area Manager introduced the application for the erection of a rear flat roof extension. The application was before the committee as the applicant was a Dorset Council employee in the Planning Department. The committee were shown the location of the site, photographs of the site, and the proposed elevations and floor plans. The main issued related to the application were outlined.

There were no representations for this application.

Members’ Questions and Comments

Cllr Hall asked if one of the paragraphs from the NPPF listed in the report was a correct reason for approval because it related to the provision of housing. The Area Manager confirmed it was not correct because this application did not provide housing.

Proposed by Cllr Stella Jones, seconded by Cllr Carole Jones.

The Committee were ‘minded to’ grant the application, subject to conditions.

The Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority: that the application be granted, subject to conditions.

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions outlined in the appendix attached to these minutes.

Erection of single storey dance school with mezzanine and pitched roof.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application for the erection of a single storey dance school with mezzanine and pitched roof. The Senior Planning Officer outlined the site location, proposed elevations, and proposed plans. There were no other alternative or suitable sites in Dorchester for this application. The proposed drainage strategy was highlighted. Members were shown various photographs of the site and where other clubs were located on the site. Dorchester Town Council had agreed to relocate the petanque court.

The key planning matters were highlighted:

·         Principle of development

·         Visual amenity

·         Residential amenity

·         Access and parking

·         Flooding

·         Other: included Dorchester Petanque Club; Dorchester Rifle & Pistol Club; Motorcycle school; Ownership issues raised by Dorchester Bowls Club; and renewable energy.

The Technical Support Officer read the representations which were received in relation to the application. The representations are attached as an annexure to these minutes.

Cllr Molly Rennie – Ward Member

The Ward Member for Dorchester East submitted a statement for this application. Cllr Rennie expressed her support for the application and addressed issues which included flooding and parking.

Members’ Questions and Comments

Members asked several questions of the Senior Planning Officer. In response to the questions, it was confirmed that:

·         The building colour could not be changed as it was a significant change to the application.

·         Landscaping would take up more car parking spaces which was a concern.

·         A soft landscaping condition could be explored for planters or climbing plants.

·         Dorchester Town Council owns the car park.

·         It was not in the scope of the application to add signage on Armada Way to warn drivers of pedestrians or cyclists.

·         It would be an anomaly in planning terms to restrict usage times of this club, but not other clubs on the site.

·         The correct notices had been served for the application.

Proposed by Cllr Belinda Ridout, seconded by Cllr Les Fry.

The proposer and seconder did not wish to include a soft landscaping condition and suggested the ward member could explore climbing plants with the applicant.

The Committee were ‘minded to’ grant the application, subject to conditions.

The Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority: that the application be granted, subject to conditions.

Decision: That the application be granted, subject to the conditions outlined in the appendix attached to these minutes.

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 x 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 was no exempt business.