Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Michael Dyer, William Trite and John Worth.

To receive any declarations of interest

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

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 30 October 2019.

Resolved

The minutes of the meeting held on 30 October 2019 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.

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 a report by the Head of Planning

The Committee considered planning application 6/2019/0553, for the removal of a condition to allow unrestricted occupation of the dwellings at former West Lulworth Primary School, School Lane, West Lulworth.  Planning permission had been granted for the erection of six two storey dwellinghouses, and the conversion of the existing school buildings into another three dwellinghouses by the Eastern Planning Committee of Dorset Council in July 2019. Moreover, following officer’s recommendation, a condition requiring the homes to be occupied as a principal residence were included: condition 13 of planning permission 6/2018/0653.

With the aid of a visual presentation, and having regard to the provisions of the Update Sheet, officers explained what the reasoning for the recommendation was, what the planning issues of the development were; how these were to be progressed; and what the provisions of the development entailed. Plans and photographs provided an illustration of the location, dimensions and design of the development and how the housing would look, purely to provide for some context in member’s understanding and so they had some incisive perspective of what this entailed. The basis of the recommendation was not for the Committee to consider the merits of the development, nor for this to have any bearing on their deliberations, but solely to decide whether Condition 13 should be maintained or not in this particular circumstance.

The application sought to remove Condition 13 of planning permission 6/2018/0653, which would then allow the properties to be occupied either as a principal residence or a second home. That condition stated that the properties should only be occupied by a person as their principal home. This was designed to ensure that the socio-economic viability of the village could be maintained, which might otherwise prove to be more challenging. Officers explained that under delegated authority, the principle of that condition had been applied, by way of condition, to similar development throughout the Purbeck part of the Dorset AONB as contained within, and derived from, Policy H14 of the emerging Purbeck Local Plan. This stated that “proposals for all new housing in the Dorset AONB would only be supported where there was a restriction in perpetuity to ensure that such homes were occupied only as a principal residence..….” with that restriction being imposed through a planning condition attached to the planning permission or by a planning obligation. This policy had been agreed by the former Purbeck District Council in light of evidence showing that there was a significant number of unoccupied homes in the Plan area.

What the Plan was designed to achieve; how this would be done; and the reasoning for this was all explained in detail by officers so that members had a clear understanding of how it applied to this application and why the officer’s recommendation was being made as it was.

The decision taken by the former Purbeck District Council’s Planning Committee to pursue the imposition of this condition was taken in light of legal advice that the emerging Local Plan was at an advanced  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning

Members were asked to consider application 6/2019/0337 for the erection of a single storey rear extension at Misty Cottage, Worth Matravers.

Prior to such consideration, the Chairman explained that a request had been received from the local Ward Member, Councillor Cherry Brooks, for a site visit to be made so that members might see at first hand the issues being raised and have a better understanding of what this entailed, so as to be able to come to a meaningful decision on this.

On that basis, the opportunity was given for the officer to make their presentation and then for a vote to be taken on whether a site visit should be held. If that was the case, then a decision on the matter would be deferred pending the site visit and then to reconvene at the next meeting to determine the application. It was confirmed that those who has requested to address the Committee would be able to have their opportunity to do so at that time.

Members received the officer’s visual presentation, taking into account the provisions of the Update Sheet, after which the local Ward Member proposed a site visit be held on the basis she considered that this application did not enhance the Conservation Area and was not in keeping with the characteristics of that part of the village. Seeing the site at first hand would provide members with that clear perspective before they were asked to make their decision. A site visit was also considered to be beneficial by Worth Matravers Parish Council who had objected to the application, so that members could gain some context of what all this entailed. The proposal was seconded by Councillor Alex Brenton and, on being put to the vote, it was agreed to defer further consideration of the application pending a site visit being held on Monday 6 January 2020.

Resolved

That further consideration of application 6/2019/0337 be deferred pending a site visit being held on Monday 6 January 2020 so that members could see at first hand what the implications of the proposal entailed; what impact there would be and would have a more meaningful understanding of what they were being asked to determine.

Reason for Decision

To complement the decision making process in having every opportunity to base any decision on their better understanding of the full facts.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning

Consideration was given by members to application 6/2019/0458 which sought planning permission for the erection of a single storey extension at 5 Brushwood Drive, Upton to project off the south east elevation of the dwelling. This extension would feature a pitched roof with a high level window on the south east facing gable end, together with two Velux windows on the north east facing roof slope. A small part of the proposed extension would feature a flat roof. As part of the submission, the applicants also proposed to enlarge the existing window on the first floor south east elevation of the host dwelling.

With the aid of a visual presentation officers explained what the main proposals and planning issues of the development were; how these were to

be achieved; what the reasoning for the extension was to the applicant and how this would be to their benefit. Plans and photographs provided an illustration of the location, dimensions and design of the extension, including how the windows would be accommodated and what ventilation they would provide; how it would look and its setting; showed the development’s relationship with the characteristics of neighbouring residential properties and the surrounding town development and landscape.

In making their assessment and appraisal of the application, officers had concluded that:-

·       the principle of development was acceptable within the defined settlement boundary.

·       the proposals were acceptable in terms of design and scale and impact on the amenity of the area.

·       there was not considered to be any significant harm to neighbouring

residential amenity or privacy.

·       there were no material considerations which would warrant refusal.

Formal consultation had generated a number of objections from neighbouring residents and, in light of these, the Lytchett Minster and Upton Town Council was now supporting those views, where it previously had no objection to make. Objections made were on the grounds of the seemingly close proximity of the extension to a neighbouring dwelling; how access to the window might well compromise privacy; how the excavation of the extension might affect the condition of the protected Silver Birch tree species in the neighbouring garden; and what precedent such an approval might set.

David Wallis considered that, whilst he was not opposing the principle of the extension, the proposed close proximity to his property was of considerable concern and would adversely affect his family’s access to natural light by the extension’s overbearing presence. He was of the view that existing planning conditions did not provide for such an extension as was now being proposed and asked the Committee to refuse it.

David Hiljemark considered that the officer’s recommendation should be endorsed by the Committee as it complied with all that was required in planning terms and on the basis of what the officer’s assessment and appraisal of the application was. He confirmed that the window’s glazing would be opaque and, given its restricted opened, there could be no opportunity for his neighbour’s property to be overlooked. On that basis he asked for the application to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

To consider a report by the Executive Director of Place.

The Committee considered a report on the advertisement of a proposal for the implementation of a zebra pedestrian crossing on Dorchester Road, Upton on road safety grounds, in facilitating the crossing of the road by a readily accessible means that would otherwise not be the case. The main B3067, Dorchester Road, divided Upton and it had been considered that this community severance needed to be addressed satisfactorily.

As background, officers explained that the crossing scheme had been originally requested by Upton and Lytchett Minster Town Council to improve safety and accessibility going to the Infant and Junior Schools, and to encourage more walking to these, as well as providing a benefit for the wider community. The proposal had been considered by the County Council’s Regulatory Committee at their meeting on 12 July 2018. Whilst acknowledging the benefits of the crossing, a decision on whether the proposal should be implemented was deferred by them pending officers considering further the parking situation with regard to the use of zig zag lines adjacent to Upton Methodist Church, which housed a pre-school and nursery facility; car parking provision for any hearse using the church; amelioration measures for light pollution and; whether there should be either a pelican or zebra crossing - all issues which had been raised in representations received.

The proposal had been supported by the then local County Councillor, with this support still being maintained now by the three Dorset Councillors for Lychett and Upton.

Assessments made of pedestrian accessibility need had clearly demonstrated that the criteria for a zebra crossing had been met and its installation justified, with this being supported by all primary consultees. In line with the Regulatory Committee’s decision, another assessment and appraisal of the practicalities of what crossing was necessary and how this should be done had been made. In doing so, it had been determined that the original principles still held true, albeit with some minor modifications being seen to be necessary to accommodate and address, where practicable, some of those issues raised, without compromising the integrity of the scheme. On that basis, and having met with some of those involved on site, the proposal was now seen to be more acceptable whilst still being able to serve the purpose for which it was designed. However, as a consequence of the objections received to the advertised order, the Committee was now being asked to consider whether the proposals should be recommended to Cabinet for implementation.

With the aid of a visual presentation, officers showed where the crossing was advertised to be sited, the characteristics and configuration of Dorchester  Road; how the crossing would benefit access to local schools and amenities; its relationship with other roads in the surrounding road network; what parking arrangements there were; the setting of the crossing within the townscape and what amenities and facilities would be served by the crossing.

Members acknowledged that the design had been modified to take account of issues raised previously, including the installation of cowled hoods on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning

Consideration was given to planning application 6/2019/0564 for the construction of single storey, lean to extension to provide an outdoor classroom at Winfrith Newburgh C of E Primary School, School Lane, Winfrith Newburgh. The Committee were informed of the need for the facility - so that pupils could benefit from a space for flexible and adaptable working - and were being asked to approve this in accordance with the officer’s recommendation and on the grounds that, as it was a Council application, a Committee decision was required for openness and transparency purposes.

With the aid of a visual presentation, officers explained what the main proposals and planning issues of the development entailed; how these were to be achieved; and particularly, the reasoning for the new facility, which was being proposed as a means of benefitting what the school had to offer.

Plans and photographs provided an illustration of the location, dimensions

design and appearance of the classroom; the materials to be used; how the enhancements would look and their setting; showed the development’s relationship with the characteristics of the other school buildings; and where the school was situated within the town and its setting in the Dorset AONB.

.

The Committee were informed of what consultation had taken place and what

responses had been received. No formal objections had been received to this with, in particular, neither Winfrith Newburgh Parish Council or the two local Ward members, raising any objections to the proposal.

Given this it was officer’s view that the planning permission should be granted as:

·       the proposal was acceptable in its design and general visual impact.

·       there was not considered to be any significant harm to neighbouring

residential amenity, and

·       there were no material considerations which would warrant refusal.

Whilst situated within the Dorset AONB, given the very modest scale of the proposal and the materials to be used, the structure was not considered to be visually dominant in wider views of the area.

During consideration of the application, the Committee had the opportunity to ask questions of the officer’s presentation, with clarification being provided in respect of the points raised. It was confirmed that the roofing of the extension would be slightly pitched.

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application, having

understood what was being proposed and the reasoning for this; having taken

into account the officer’s report and what they had heard at the meeting,

the Committee were satisfied in their understanding of what the proposal was

designed to achieve, considering it to be an asset for the school and, on that basis – and on being put to the vote – the Committee considered that the application should be approved, subject to the conditions set out in the officer’s report

Resolved

That planning permission for application 6/2019/0564 for an outdoor classroom at Winfrith Newburgh C of E Primary School, School Lane, Winfrith Newburgh be granted, subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 12 of the officer’s report.

Reasons for decision  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

Application 3/19/0985/FUL, for a proposed single storey extension to Unit 3, to form a bedroom and en-suite at Misty Meadow, 147 Ringwood Road, Longham, Ferndown, was considered by members.

A visual presentation showed what the main proposals and planning issues of the development were; how these were to be progressed; and what the benefits for the applicant of the development would be. Plans and photographs provided an illustration of the location, dimensions and design of the extension; how it would look and its setting; showed the development’s relationship with the characteristics of the other development on site and in that part of Longham in particular.

Officers made particular reference to what impact the proposal would have on the character of the area and on amenity. As it was considered to be only a modest side extension to Unit 3 - of the same height and form as the existing dwelling and was set back and well screened - there would be minimal impact on the character of the area, with amenity being unaffected by the proposed improvement of creating a three bedroomed property.

Ferndown Town Council had objected to the proposal on the grounds that the

development would harm the openness of the Green Belt. However, officers explained that saved policy GB7 stated that infill development would be allowed in this area provided that it was contained wholly within the Village Infill Envelope and should be of a scale and character that respected the existing village form. This application fulfilled that requirement

The planning history of the site was explained, along with what relevant appeal decisions had been made. Significantly, the previously taken decision -  for removal of the planning condition limiting permitted development rights for

extensions - had since been reinstated, meaning that such a side extension could now be achieved without the need for express planning permission. The consequence of this and taking that into account that:-

·       the application complied with Policy HE2;

·       there was no harm to character of area or neighbouring amenity;

·       given that permitted development rights had been reinstated; and

·       an extension which was 0.1m narrower would be more beneficial,

officers found the application to accord with the Development Plan, National Planning Policy and guidance. There were not considered to be any matters which could warrant refusal of planning permission in this case and the application was therefore being recommended for approval.

Throughout consideration of the item, the opportunity was given for members to ask questions of the officer’s presentation or what they had heard from others, with officer’s providing clarification in respect of points raised, as necessary.

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application, having

understood what was being proposed and the reasoning for this; having taken

into account the officer’s report and what they had heard at the meeting,

the Committee were satisfied in their understanding of what the proposal was

designed to address and, on that basis – and on being put to the vote – the

Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

To receive and consider a list of planning appeal decisions.

Members considered a written report setting out details of planning appeal

decisions made and the reasoning for this and took the opportunity to ask

what questions they had.  

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 for consideration.

Eastern Area Planning Committee 4 December 2019 – Update Sheet

Planning Applications