Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

There were apologies for absence received from Cllrs Toni Coombs, Beryl Ezzard, Julie Robinson, Gary Suttle and Hannah Hobbs-Chell.

To disclose any pecuniary, other registrable or personal interest as set out in the adopted Code of Conduct.  In making their decision 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.

Cllr Brenton declared that 2 of the applications were located in her ward, however she was not pre-determined on these application.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 20 May 2026.

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 May 2026 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 Monday 22 June 2026.

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.

Residential development including the erection of 29no dwellings with garages and parking, formation of vehicular access from Wimborne Road, sustainable drainage infrastructure, new open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure.

The Lead Project Officer presented the application for residential development in Lytchett Matravers. The site was identified on a map of the area, with a wooded area noted along the northern boundary. It was explained that Policy H6 of the Local Plan allocated the site for development of approximately 30 dwellings.

The proposed masterplan was shown, indicating the delivery of 29 units. Photographs were provided, including views from various points around the site and views looking west towards Flowers Drove. A plan illustrating the topography of the site was also presented, along with a site layout showing the proposed mix of housing. Street scene drawings were displayed to demonstrate the design and types of dwellings proposed.

Members were advised that 23 objections had been received from members of the public. No objections had been raised by statutory consultees; however, objections had been received from the Parish Council and the Housing Officer in relation to the lack of affordable housing provision. It was clarified that concerns relating to inappropriate development in the Green Belt under Policy V2 were not applicable, as the policy had been amended and no part of the site fell within the Green Belt.

In respect of housing mix, the proposal was acknowledged to conflict with Policy H9, as it included a higher proportion of larger dwellings and fewer smaller units than required. Regarding affordable housing, it was reported that a policy-compliant scheme would normally deliver 11 affordable units on site, together with a financial contribution. However, the applicant had demonstrated that, due to increased construction costs and the cost of achieving nutrient neutrality in Poole Harbour, the scheme could not viably deliver affordable housing. The District Valuer Service had independently reviewed the viability assessment and identified some differences in approach but ultimately agreed that a fully policy-compliant scheme would not be viable. It was concluded that the maximum viable financial contribution the scheme could support was £369,642, and the applicant had agreed to this figure.

An image was provided showing the proposed vehicular access, which would connect to the existing pedestrian footway. In addition to the main vehicular access, a secondary pedestrian access was proposed. It was explained that off-site alterations to the junction of Wimborne Road, Wareham Road and Lime Kiln Road would be secured, along with an approved scheme to the south, to ensure delivery even if the other scheme did not proceed. A total of 58 allocated parking spaces were proposed, comprising a combination of driveways and parking courts, along with 18 garage spaces and six on-street visitor parking spaces. It was noted that there would also be capacity for informal on-street parking.

The scale, layout and character of the development were outlined, with all dwellings proposed at two storeys in height. A higher density of development was proposed at the entrance to the site, with lower density housing further into the site. An attenuation basin was proposed to the east of Flowers Drove. The dwellings would be predominantly constructed in brick, with some  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

Demolition of existing building and erection of four residential dwellings, including associated landscaping. As amended by plans to amend access.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the application for the demolition of existing buildings and the erection of four dwellings. The site was identified on a map of the area, noting that it fronted onto Dorchester Road. It was explained that the lawful use of the site was commercial, although it had been unused for approximately ten years.

Photographs of the site and its surrounding context were shown, including views of Forge Hall, Gavity, and 1 Forge Close. Existing buildings on the site were illustrated through survey drawings, and it was confirmed that these structures would be demolished as part of the proposal.

The proposed site plan was presented, along with front and side elevations. The design was described as traditional in appearance, incorporating red brick and timber-framed windows.

It was advised that the principle of development was considered acceptable due to the small scale of the proposal and the quality of the design. The site was located within a small village with access to local services, which further supported the proposal.

It was noted that the site lay within a Conservation Area and that Forge Hall was regarded as a non-designated heritage asset. A Grade II listed building was also located opposite the site. The impact on heritage assets was assessed as resulting in less than substantial harm to the Conservation Area. It was explained that Forge Hall was recommended for demolition due to structural defects, and its loss was not considered significant given its limited scale and condition.

The impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupants was considered. The relationship and distances between the proposed dwellings and neighbouring properties, including Gavity, were reviewed. Floor plans, elevations and separation distances were shown, and it was concluded that impacts on neighbouring amenity were acceptable. The living conditions of future occupants were also assessed, with the scheme judged to provide adequate levels of amenity.

In terms of character and appearance, the proposal was considered acceptable and likely to enhance the Conservation Area. Features such as chimneys and painted timber windows were highlighted as positive design elements. The modest depth and set-back positioning of the dwellings were considered to allow them to sit comfortably within the street scene.

Highways considerations were addressed, with two parking spaces proposed per dwelling. Access to the site would be provided via a five-metre-wide route between buildings, which was considered acceptable.

An ecological impact assessment had been undertaken and a bat emergence survey confirmed that no bat roosts were present on the site. Mitigation measures were proposed, including sensitive lighting and the avoidance of works during the bird nesting season.

Conditions relating to contamination and drainage were noted. The proposed surface water drainage scheme was confirmed to comply with policy requirements.

Public representation was received in objection to the application from Emma Hall. As a resident of a neighbouring property she expressed concerns about overlooking and loss of light, due to a larger building being situated on the site and closer to the property boundary.

Clare  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

Erect single and two storey extensions, loft conversion, dormers, Juliet balconies, roof lights.

The Planning Officer presented the application for the erection of single and two storey extensions, loft conversion, dormers, Juliet balconies and roof lights. The site location was shown on a map, identifying the property as being situated to the east of Dudsbury Road in Ferndown. It was noted that the property, along with neighbouring dwellings, was set back within its plot.

Existing elevations of the dwelling were displayed, followed by the proposed elevations illustrating the extensions. Photographs of neighbouring properties were also provided to give context to the surrounding area.

The Planning Officer advised that the proposal complied with the requirements of the Special Character Area and had been designed to avoid harm to nearby trees. The impact on neighbouring amenity had been assessed, with sufficient distances maintained between properties to prevent any significant adverse effects. In particular, it was noted that the proposal would not result in unacceptable harm in terms of overlooking or loss of light to neighbouring solar panels.

The application was recommended for approval, subject to conditions, which were displayed to Members.

Public representation was received from the applicant, Tony Brown. He stated that the scheme had been designed to complement the character of the area. In addition, there were already a number of large properties in the area.

Members were in agreement that the proposed scheme would be in keeping with the size of other properties in the area.

It was proposed by Cllr Sowry-House and seconded by Cllr Brenton, that the application be granted.

Decision: That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the appendix to these minutes.

Retain Unit 14 for use as dwellinghouse and/or commercial holiday let for short term lets.

The Committee agreed to extend the meeting beyond three hours.

The Planning Officer presented the application for the retention of a residential unit for use as dwellinghouse and/or commercial holiday let. The application site was shown on a map of the area. The site forms part of a wider development of 19 dwellings. The site fell within the Langton Matravers settlement boundary, within the Conservation Area and within the Dorset National Landscape.

Unit 14 was shown on a site layout plan of the overall development. Photographs were provided of the access to the site, the approach to the site from Old Malthouse Land and the access via Old Malthouse Lane. A photograph of the dwelling was also shown.

Permission was being sought to retain unit 14 as a dwellinghouse, but also to be used as a commercial holiday let, there were no proposed physical changes to the dwelling. A condition in the current planning permission required the property to be used as a principal residence to reflect policy H14 in the Purbeck Local Plan.

It was explained that the proposal had the potential to result in the loss of one permanent dwelling, however the dwelling could still be used as principal accommodation or as a holiday let. The Planning Officer addressed other issues with the application, including a concern raised by the Parish Council about community sustainability, however it was considered that because the proposal would only affect 1 property within a development of 19, it would not have a significant impact on the community. No impacts on the character of the area or heritage assets were anticipated as there was no physical changes included in the proposal and the dwelling was modest in scale (2 bedroom) so was unlikely to be occupied by more than one household as a holiday let.

.

Public representation was received from Ken Parke, the agent for the application. He stated that the policy set out that holiday lets were not considered as second homes and where the property was being used as a holiday let it would contribute to the local economy, while a second home would be empty for much of the year. The proposal was seeking flexibility for the dwelling to be let on a short-term basis, if it was not possible to let the property on a long-term basis.

A statement was read out by the Vice-Chair, on behalf of Cllr Peter Golob from Langton Matravers Parish Council. Concerns were raised including the loss of a residential dwelling, given the high proportion of holiday lets and second homes within Langton Matravers. It was also felt that the flexible designation did not provide enough clarity on what was being approved. There was also concern that approval of the application would lead to similar applications being brought forward.

Cllr Ben Wilson spoke as the Ward Member, in objection to the application. He stated that the application went against the intention of policy H14 in the Local Plan. He expressed that there was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

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 are no exempt items scheduled for this meeting.  

There was no exempt business.