Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Emma Parker, Tim Cook, Belinda Ridout, Jon Andrews, and Stella Jones.

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 confirm the minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 15^th March 2022.

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 15^th March 2022 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 Guidance to speaking at Planning Committee

The deadline for speaking at this meeting is 8.30am on Friday 8^th April 2022.

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 the planning applications set out below.

Develop land by the erection of up to 39 No. dwellings, form vehicular and pedestrian access, and public open space.

The Case Officer presented to members the outline application of up to 39 dwellings. Members were shown the location of the site which wasn’t within a settlement boundary but joined residential settings in its northern site. They were presented with the proposed site access and were also informed of the provision of 50% affordable housing. Members were also provided with details of new pedestrian footpaths and crossings as well as the significant benefits of the scheme. The recommendation was to grant the planning application.

The Transport Development Manager outlined access to the site. He informed members of a new priority junction to the site as well as pedestrian footways. In addition to this, members were also informed of robust traffic movements which would not affect safety. Highways had no objections to the development.

Public participation

Mr Turner, Marnhull Parish Council spoke in objection to the application. Mr Turner advised members that Marnhull’s infrastructure amenities couldn’t cope with the additional houses and the development wouldn’t benefit the village. He strongly objected to the application due to a significant increase in traffic movement created by the scheme. Mr Turner also informed members that affordable housing was good but an additional 40 would be too much. He also stated that construction jobs provided temporary rather than permanent employment.

Mr Harden, resident of Marnhull spoke objecting to the application. Mr Harden advised members that the local need for housing was already covered and there wasn’t enough amenities to support residents. Mr Harden also outlined how the development was a conflict to Dorset Council Policy.

Mr Bainbridge, the agent, highlighted how the development met housing requirements. He advised members that the development would be sustainable, proposing more affordable and high-quality housing than required to help the future of the area.

Members Questions and Comments

·       Members were disappointed by the lack of consideration for cyclists and other road users.

·       Members praised the layout and design of the development.

·       Access to the site

·       Members praised the 50% affordable housing.

·       Members wished to see more access with footpaths.

·       Consider lowering speed limits.

·       There was an assessment of flooding in all areas to prevent risks of flooding. There was low risk of flooding.

·       There was a decrease in the number of dwellings. Members were pleased to see the reduction to 39 dwellings. However, pavements were needed.

·       Lack of employment and industrial land.

·       Sustainability of location

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, in being proposed by Cllr Carole Jones and seconded by Cllr Mary Penfold.

Decision: That the application be approved.

Application for approval of reserved matters for appearance, landscaping, layout & scale in relation to outline approval 2/2018/1749/OUT (& subsequent revisions).

The Case Officer presented to members the application of up to 114 dwellings. Members were shown the location of the site as well as aerial photos. Members were also provided with details of the site plan as well as the proposed street scenes and design elevations. The Case Officer also informed members of footpath links which would connect the site to neighbouring amenities and the proposed LEAP facility. The recommendation was to grant the planning application.

The Transport Development Manager outlined access to the site. He informed members of a priority junction to the site instead of a roundabout. Members were also provided with details of refuse vehicles accessing the site, in addition to this, he also provided members with details of parking which complies with the council’s guidance. Members were also informed of the availability of street parking. Highways had no objections to the proposal.

Public participation

The Agent informed members of keeping an area of open space as well as the number of footpaths which connected the site, creating good pedestrian links.

Members Questions and Comments

·       Members discussed the need for charging points for vehicles. Members wanted an amendment to condition 6 for the infrastructure for charging points per dwelling.

·       Members were disappointed by the lack of renewable energy for the dwellings. They considered a condition in regard to a sustainability statement agreement.

·       Length of construction hours are long. Members wanted a condition added for the construction time.

·       Lack of lighting in car parks. Condition of lighting to be submitted for parking courts.

·       Low level lighting acceptable on footways.

·       Members praised the urban routes and the preservation of pavements. 

·       Members were pleased with the number of parking for the dwellings. The provision of bird and bat boxes were also welcomed by members. However, the committee discussed the provision of owl boxes for the woodland.

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application and an understanding of all this entailed; having taken into account the officer’s report and presentation; the written representatives; and what they had heard at the meeting, in being proposed by Cllr Carole Jones and seconded by Cllr Les Fry subject to conditions 6 and including additional conditions for a sustainability statement, all parking courts and footpaths within the public open space, site working hours and an informative note to include owl boxes in the condition relating to bat and bird boxes).

Decision: That the application be approved subject to conditions, as amended.

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 was no exempt business