Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence

No apologies for absence were received at the meeting.

To receive any declarations of interest

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

As Councillor David Morgan sat on the Allendale Centre Management Committee he considered he had an interest in the outcome of that application so would only speak as Local Ward Member but not take part in the debate or vote.

Councillor Shane Bartlett was Chairman of Folk Festival and café and on the Centre’s Committee but, having taken advice, decided that he was able to speak as the other local member, as part of the Committee and would vote on that application.

1)    To confirm revised minute 173 of the meeting held on 19 February 2021.

2)    To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 10 March 2021.

The revised minute 173 of the meeting held on 19 February 2021 and the minutes of the meeting held on 10 March 2021 were both confirmed.

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 application 3/20?2057/FUL on a proposal for the replacement of the roof to the existing building at Allendale Community Centre, Hanham Road, Wimborne Minster. The application was being brought before Members for decision given that it was a Dorset Council application and in the interest of transparency and probity of the process.

With the aid of a visual presentation, officers provided context of what the

main proposals, principles and planning issues of the development was; how

these were to be progressed; in that the proposed new roof would provide weatherproofing and ensure that the building continued to be fit for purpose as a community centre. The presentation focused on not only what the development entailed and its detailed design, but what benefits it would bring with plans and photographs providing an illustration of the location, orientation, dimensions and appearance of the roof – to have a very shallow

roof pitch - with part of the existing flat roof remaining. Two new windows – to replace those existing – were being proposed at a high level to the front of the building, facing east and west, so as to illuminate the interior ground floor space.

The buildings setting within that part of Wimborne and its relationship with other adjacent development was described and officers explained that the roof was designed to be in keeping with the characteristics of the current setting and the established local environment.

In summary, officers planning assessment adjudged that the overall design of

the roof was acceptable, with all, significant, planning matters having been appropriately, or adequately, addressed. Having assessed that the material considerations were acceptable, the recommendation made by officers to approve the application was based on this.

Formal consultation had seen no objection from Wimborne Minster Town Council and both local Ward Members were supportive. Whilst Councillor Morgan had decided not to take part in the vote given his involvement in the Centre’s Management Committee but was supportive of the proposal given the need to secure the buildings integrity by weatherproofing. Similarly Councillor Shane Bartlett considered the works needed to be done, for the same reason and  to ensure there was no further degradation of the building.

The opportunity was then given for members to ask questions of the

presentation and what they had heard, in seeking clarification of aspects so

as to have a better understanding in coming to a decision. Officers addressed

the questions raised providing what they considered to be satisfactory

answers, which the Committee saw as acceptable.

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

taken into account the officer’s report and presentation; and what they had heard at the meeting - particularly in taking account of the views of the two Ward members - in being proposed by Councillor Barry Goringe and seconded by Councillor Robin Cook, on being put to the vote, the Committee agreed unanimously to grant permission subject to the conditions set out in paragraph13 of the officer’s report. Councillor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 188.

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

The Committee considered application 6/2020/0013 to erect 17 dwellings and the creation of an access and associated parking and landscaping at land at White Lovington, Bere Regis.

Councillor Peter Wharf - one of the two local Ward Members – had requested that the application be presented to Committee due to concerns regarding the perceived increase in dwellings compared to the number allocated in the Bere Regis Neighbourhood Plan.

With the aid of a visual presentation, officers provided context of what the

main proposals, principles and planning issues of the development were; how

these were to be progressed; how the development would contribute to

meeting housing needs; and what this entailed. What the application entailed – with 6 of the dwellings being affordable, with monies provided to secure 40% provision - and the planning history of the area – the site being allocated for residential development in the Bere Regis Neighbourhood Plan (BRNP) - were also detailed. The presentation focused on not only what the development entailed and its detailed design, but what benefits it would bring and the effect it would have on residential amenity and the character the area.

Plans and photographs provided an illustration of the location, orientation,

dimensions – form, bulk, size and mass - and appearance of the development

and of the individual properties, with examples being given of how typical

properties would be designed, along with their ground floor plans; how it would look; proposed street scenes; the materials to be used; access and highway considerations; environmental considerations; the means of landscaping and screening and its setting within that part of White Lovington and the wider landscape of Bere Regis, particularly that - whilst it was within the Settlement Boundary of Bere Regis - it was within 400m from Black Hill Heath ,designated as SSSI heathland and Dorset Heaths Special Area of Conservation.

Officers showed the development’s relationship with other adjacent residential

development and how the buildings were designed to be in keeping with the

characteristics of the established local environment. The characteristics and

topography of the site was shown and its relationship with the highway

network and to properties in the adjoining roads in particular. Views into the

site and around it were shown, which provided a satisfactory understanding of

all that was necessary.

How the relationship between the proposal and the provisions of the Local Plan; the NPPF and the BRNP were applied and what considerations needed to be given to each were explained, as well as the weight to be given to each.

In summary, officers planning assessment adjudged that the overall design of

the development was now considered to be largely acceptable, with all,

significant, planning matters having been appropriately, or adequately,

addressed. Having assessed the material considerations these

were seen to be acceptable and sufficiently compliant with national and local planning policies – and addressed and complied with the provisions of the Neighbourhood Plan - so the recommendation being made by officers to approve the application was based  ...  view the full minutes text for item 189.

To consider a summary of recent planning appeal decisions.

A planning appeals summary was presented to Committee for its information and consideration.

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 of business for consideration.

6/2020/0013  - To erect 17 dwellings, creation of an access and associated parking and landscaping - Land at White Lovington, Bere Regis

Mr and Mrs Aldous

“This submission has been prepared and discussed by the residents of White Lovington and is submitted with the agreement of all those who signed the request for an extension on 30/3”

---------------------------

John & Helen Locke

(This submission has been prepared and discussed by the residents of White Lovington and is submitted with the agreement of all those who signed the request for an extension on 30th March. To avoid unnecessary contact during COVID restrictions we have not collected signatures a second time but can provide e-mail confirmation of support if needed)

We wish to express our disagreement with the planning officers’ recommendation for this application as follows:

1. The planning office report, Para 15.6 & 15.7 states that the “officers consider that the proposal does not conflict with the Bere Regis Neighbourhood Plan (BRNP)’. We disagree, and fully endorse the statement of the Parish Council in this regard.

Specifically, the wording “approximately 12 homes” was discussed by the community, agreed with the Parish Council and voted on by the village. Approximately 12 means 12 plus or minus a small number. Not a 42% increase.

Surely local buy-in is important to achieving sustainable development.

2. The proposed development will have a significant detrimental impact on the SSSI, with new housing built up to the limit of the 400m buffer zone, the main access road running through it, with a significant projected flow of vehicle and pedestrian traffic. The effect will be to marginalize the SSSI boundary. The mitigation offered involves a temporary HIP to be developed on site until the proposed SANG at Back Lane, on the other side of the village, becomes available. The land for the temporary HIP, which currently has no public access, will then revert to agricultural use. This seems to be very ad hoc and not consistent with the concept of sustainable development, and would benefit from more consultation with the local community, as indicated by the Parish Council.

3. Para 15.58 of the planning office report is confusing. The 11m x 62m area mentioned is an established woodland/copse frequented by wild life, includes a number of protected trees and with no public access. Is this part of the application? What landscaping is being proposed and if so where is the detail?

4. In paras 15.27 to 15.36 the officers have dismissed the concerns of residents of White Lovington about the loss of privacy and security resulting from the new road and public access to the rear of their properties. The officers, in a number of places, erroneously refer to the existence of ‘mature trees and hedgerows’ as mitigation of the noise and disturbance. In fact, many of the existing houses in White Lovington have open aspects to the rear with no significant screening by hedgerows or mature trees. The proposed development of housing, access road and path  ...  view the full minutes text for item 192.