Agenda and minutes

To receive any declarations of interest

There were no declarations of interest to report.

The Chairman of the Committee, Councillor T Coombe had no declaration to make but she read out the following statement to all those present at the meeting:-

“The application from Wyatt Homes to be considered on the agenda related to a site previously allocation by East Dorset District Council in its Core Strategy.  I was previously a member of East Dorset District Council and at the time voted in support of the submission of the Core Strategy to the Secretary of State.

I have taken advice from Dorset Council’s Monitoring Officer about my role as Chairman of this Committee and Whether I should take part in this meeting.  The Monitoring Officer is the Council’s Chief Legal Officer and responsible for ensuring that the Council’s actions are both lawful and uphold standards of behaviour.

The Monitoring Officer has advised me that I have no disclosable pecuniary interest under the Localism Act 2011 to prevent me from taking part in he meeting.  I have been advised by the Monitoring Officer that I have no interest to declare.

In addition, the Monitoring Officer has advised that simply having voted on the submission of the Core Strategy to the Secretary of State for examination in public by an Independent Planning Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State, does not prevent me or indeed any other councillor in that position from taking part to decide this specific planning application. I do not have a predetermined view about the application as a result of having voted on the core strategy and I am approaching the application before the committee completely afresh.”

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 03 July 2019.

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 July 2019 were confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

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.

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.

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

Proposal: Outline application (All matters reserved except for access and associated link road); with up to 386 dwellings (Class C3); up to 1000sqm of retail units (Classes A1-A5); up to 900sqm of offices (Class B1) and up to 2200sqm of foodstore (Class A1); together with accesses, a link road and associated highway works, public open space including SANG, allotments, landscaping and associated works.

The Major Projects Officer presented the report showing members all the relevant plans and drawings. The committee was advised that the application site comprised of 20.2ha of green field land and was located to the south-east of the intersection of the A347 and B3073, in the Parley Cross area, the local centre of the village. The A347 and the B3073 connected to the site east to west and north to south to the surrounding area.

The Major Projects Officer reported a number of updates to the committee including that additional comments had been received from East Dorset Environment Partnership.  However these issues did not include any matter relevant at outline stage that had not already been addressed within the report. Some matters did relate to the details to be submitted at reserved matter stage and where relevant would be included within an informative note.

Members were also advised that two further neighbour representations had been received, but no new issues had been raised. In respect of paragraph 8.5.2 and 8.11.2 of the report the reference to policy should be updated to read FWP6.  In respect of employment opportunities, the applicant had confirmed that the proposal had the potential to deliver up to 207 new FTE positions.  In relation to the location of the SANG car parking provision, the access to this was to be provided from either the link road, New Road or Christchurch Road, with the final location of the car park to be determined in consultation  with Natural England.  Members were also advised that in recommendation B the “Head of Planning Services” should be amended to read “Legal Services Manager”.

The committee was informed that the site had a Public Right of Way that crossed east to west connecting Church Lane to New Road and the land was allocated within the Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan Core Strategy.  The outline application was for the construction of up to 386 dwellings, new local centre comprising of up to 1000sqm of retail units, 900sqm of offices and 2200sqm of food store.  The application would include access from Christchurch Road and New Road, a link road which is forecast to alleviate congestion at Parley Cross, and associated highway works, open space, including SANG, allotments, landscaping and associated works; and a children’s play area.  

Members were reminded that the plan shown was indicative and demonstrated what could be delivered on the proposed site. The committee was asked to note that these designs were not set in stone.

The Major Projects Officer continued that the majority of properties abutting the site were located within Church Lane adjacent to the proposed SANG area and it was unlikely that there would be any unacceptable disturbance to amenity.  The development facing the site from Christchurch Road and New Road would also not be detrimentally affected and would see improvements to amenity as a result of the reduction in traffic and congestion in the area.

The proposed site was not within the green belt area, but  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

Proposal: Change of use of land to a suitable alternative natural greenspace (SANG) and associated works.

The Major Projects Officer presented a report and advised that the application sought planning permission for the change of use of land to a suitable alternative natural greenspace (SANG) for the residential element of the development proposed under the outline planning proposal. The existing agricultural buildings and associated hardstanding would be removed and meadow grassland, scattered tree planting, a pond, hedgerow and scrub habitats were to be provided.

As an update the Major Projects Officer reported that the following:-

·         An additional sentence should be added as paragraph 4.1 of the report “Planning policy contained in the National Planning Policy Framework and National Planning Practice Guidance is relevant and is a material consideration to be considered in the planning judgement.  The guidance contained in Department of Transport (DfT) Circular 01/2010 is also a material consideration”. 

·         Recommendation B replace “Head of Planning Services with Legal Services Manager “

Public Participation

Oral representations were received from Cllr Philip Bamborough, Chairman of West Parley Parish Council. In addressing members he indicated that the Parish Council accepted the provision of a SANG, in principle but expressed reservations that the Parish Council’s concerns had not been addressed in relation to the narrowness of Church Lane.  This road was not suitable for additional traffic or parking.  There were concerns over air pollution and signage.  The Parish Council requested that the responsibility of the SANG lease or freehold should be transferred to them to run and manage.

Cllr Andrew Parry spoke on the application as the Local Ward Member and reminded members of the strength of feeling in respect of the wider development of the area. He highlighted that the application was fragmented and expressed concerns that the airport would have increased risk of bird strike. He asked the committee to carefully reflect on the traffic management of the site and parking provision in order to protect visitors and local residents alike.  He also wanted to ensure that the long-term future of the site was secured.

In response to matters raised the Major Projects Officer confirmed that the applicant intended to maintain the SANG.  However the Parish Council could discuss this matter direct with the applicant outside of the planning process, if they so wished.

In respect of the airport and birds from the SANG, it was anticipated that there would be mainly small garden birds and following consultation,  the airport was content that bird strike would not be an issues subject to details of a Management Plan.

Debate

In response to concerns expressed the Chairman confirmed that, if required reserved matters could be referred back to the committee for decision. 

Responding to further questions for clarification, the Major Projects Officer advised that Church Lane was a very quiet road and the highways authority had raised no objection.  Putting traffic calming measures in place would be considered out of character for the site and area. It was further confirmed that reserve matters would include the links to the SANG.

Decision

It was proposed by Cllr S Bartlett and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

Proposal: Erect an 80 bedroom Care Home with associated parking, landscaping and amenity space.

The Major Projects Officer set out the report and the application to erect an 80 bedroom Care Home with associated parking, landscaping and amenity space. The application site comprised of 0.75ha of greenfield land and was located to the south of Christchurch Road.   There were a number of protected trees on the site which were proposed to be retained.

The accommodation would be provided over two storeys, with a main entrance to the building facing Christchurch Road and a servicing entrance to the north east of the building.  Vehicular access to the site would be via a new access off of Christchurch Road and parking would be provided at the front of the site for 35 vehicles. The site would consist of community facilities as well as bedrooms.  There was a good level of amenity and the extending roof line would prevent glare and heat build-up in the building.   In conclusion the proposal for the site conformed to the requirements of the general policies of the local plan and overall the proposal represented sustainable development.

Vote to Continue Meeting

As the meeting had reached its three hour limit and in accordance with the constitution, the Chairman interrupted the debate to seek a vote to continue the meeting to its conclusion. This was so proposed by Cllr S Bartlett, seconded by Cllr C Brooks and agreed by the committee.

Public Participation

Cllr Philip Bamborough, Chairman of West Parley Parish Council objected to the application on the ground that this proposal was  speculative and out of keeping with the surrounding area.  The design and scale of the building was overbearing.  There were also concerns expressed regarding traffic safety.

Cllr Andrew Parry, Local Ward Member expressed disappointment at a care home on this site rather than a community use.  This was not what was expected or required by the local community. He felt that the proposed building was of poor design.  If the care home was to provide high dependency level of care, he was anxious that there would be  insufficient car parking on the site.   If members were minded to approve, he asked that they request a CIL for the benefit of wider development for the community.

Oral representation were received from Mr Adrian Kearly as the applicant’s agent. This was a proposed residential nursing care home which was badly needed across Dorset. The home would help reduce bed blocking and reduce accommodation shortfall. There was an increasing need for specialist care in the catchment area and the NHS had raised no objection to the plans.  It was considered that the car park was acceptable and staff would be working shifts outside of normal office hours.  Full CIL contributions were also part of the application.

In response to some of the comments made, the Development Management Manager advised that community use did not preclude a care home on the site. In planning terms this was an acceptable proposal and no other use had been put forward.   The proposal also met the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

Proposal: Approval of all reserved matters in respect of Outline Planning Permission 3/15/0332/OUT to construct 3 detached bungalows with garaging and bin store with access off Stour View Gardens. Part demolish 24A Stour View Gardens and Workshop.

Before considering the item Cllr W Trite indicated that the applicant was known to him and asked if he should be making a declaration in this respect.  The committee were advised that as Mr Burt was a previous Councillor of the East Dorset District Council, he would be known to many councillors.

The Senior Solicitor  confirmed that it was up to individual to decide if this precluded them from making a decision on the application based on the closeness of their relationship with Mr Burt.  Cllr Trite indicated that he would speak and vote of the item. For clarity Cllr Bartlett  wanted to the committee to be aware that he served on Wimborne Town Council with the applicant.

The Principle Planning Officer advised that this was a residential development for approval of all reserved matters in respect of the outline planning permission at land off Stour View Gardens/91 Wimborne Road, Corfe Mullen, Wimborne.

Members noted that the proposal would have no adverse impact on the occupants of adjacent dwellings or the character and appearance of the locality.  There was a local need for this type of dwelling and the proposal was in keeping with the area.  The following updates were presented:-

·         There was one additional neighbour comment, clarifies that a strip of land 3.1m wide lies between the site and 24 Stour view Gardens retained by the developer of Stour view gardens & the hedge which currently provides screening lies beyond the site

Paragraph 8.3 of the report should be revised to read:- The new access from Stour view Gardens is be acceptable in the street scene and would result in a relatively low-key entrance to the site.  The timber fence enclosing the refuse store is acceptable as this is to be located inside the site entrance adjacent to the site’s west boundary; it would not be readily seen from the cul-de-sac given its set back position. There is currently also additional screening provided by the hedge at no. 24, beyond the site.

·         Concern that 24a Stour View Gardens is closer to the highway than the plans suggest.

Public Participation

Mr D Burt, highlighted a typing error in the report and asked members to support the application as set out.

Debate

Members considered the application to be in accordance with the outline planning permission and would have no adverse impact of the character and appearance of the immediate area.

Decision

It was proposed by Cllr S Bartlett seconded by Cllr D Morgan that the application be approved

GRANTED subject to conditions as set out in the appendix attached for these minutes.

Proposal: Erect Agricultural building for livestock and machinery.

In presenting the report, the Planning Officer advised that the application was to erect an agricultural building for livestock and machinery.  Members noted that Corfe Mullen Parish Council had objected to the proposal for a number of reasons as set out in the report. The following updates were also reported:-

·         Paragraph. 8.12 of the officer report should be deleted and replaced with the following:

“Paragraph 193 of the NPPF explains that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. In this case, the impact of the proposed development upon the setting of St Huberts church is less than substantial, and the proposed development is considered acceptable provided that its use is for agriculture only, and that additional planting is provided – as indicated on the submitted landscaping scheme”

·         An additional paragraph should be added at 8.13: Paragraph. 196 of the NPPF states that where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. In this case, there is some benefit in terms of the agricultural enterprise which outweighs the slight harm to the setting of St Huberts church.

Oral representations were received from Mr Munro the applicant’s agent. The building was required for the start up of trade and needed for security on site. It also was considered key to the success of this fledgling business.  He advised that the container currently on the site would not be used once the building had been built. 

Debate

Some members expressed concerns regarding the proposed siting of the building and the impact that it might have on the grade 2 listed church building.  Some members felt that it was detrimental for the line of the church and would detract from the listed building which was set in an area of green belt land.

It was suggested that the building could be sited in another area of the field, for example, the embankment or near the woodland area.  However, the Development Management Manager advised that these areas were at different levels and were likely to cause significant harm compared to the proposed location. Members were also reminded that they must consider the application before and not what they might like to see on site.

Although there were concerns expressed regarding the accesses to the field, members were reminded that there was had been no objection from the Highways Authority. It was the officer’s view that the impact of the proposed site would negligible.

Decision

It was proposed by Cllr B Ezzard seconded by Cllr M Dyer that the application be:-

GRANTED subject to conditions as set out in the appendix to these minutes.

Proposal: Reorganisation of depot for recycling collection vehicles. Provision of parking, porta cabins for office & welfare facilities, shipping containers for storage and new fencing and lighting.

The Planning Officer presented a proposal for the reorganisation of depot for recycling collection vehicles. Provision of parking, porta cabins for office & welfare facilities, shipping containers for storage and new fencing and lighting.   Member noted that the principle of development was acceptable for the site and within the development boundary.  All planning matters had been addressed and the location was considered to be sustainable and acceptable in terms of design and general visual impact.

Debate

As the Local Member, Cllr B Ezzard advised that the proposal was a considerable improvement to the site. Overall the committee were minded to support the application.

Decision

It was proposed by Cllr S Bartlett and seconded by Cllr A Brenton that the application be:-

GRANTED  subject to the conditions as set in the appendix attached to these minutes.

To inform Members of notified appeals and appeal decisions and to take them into account as a material consideration in the Planning Committee’s future decisions.

Decision

That the outcome of the planning appeal decisions as set out in the agenda were received and noted.

To note that the remainder of the committee’s meetings,  scheduled in the 2019/20 calendar of meetings,  will now be held in the Allendale Centre, Quarter Jack Room at Wimborne.  These meetings will commence at 10.00am.

Decision

That all future meetings of the Eastern Area Planning Committee set out in the 2019/20 Calendar would be held in the Allendale Centre, Wimborne starting at10.00am.

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 report.

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 are no exempt items on the agenda)

There were no Exempt items of Business to be considered.