Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Julie Robinson.

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 David Tooke stated that he was predetermined for agenda item 7. It was agreed that he would speak as the ward member and would leave the room and not take part in the debate or decision.

Cllr Shane Bartlett declared his interest in agenda item 8 as a charity representee. It was agreed that he would take part in the debate and decision.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 11^th January 2023.

The minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 11^th January 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.  GuidanceforspeakingatPlanningCommittee.doc.pdf (dorsetcouncil.gov.uk).

The deadline for notifying a request to speak is 8.30am on Monday 20^th February.

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 written reports submitted on planning applications as set out below.

Use of lake for recreational activities (outdoor swimming) and retrospective siting of shipping container to provide changing room facilities.

It was requested that the Swineham Farm application be deferred as it had come to light at late notice that at least one landowner was not given notice of the planning application. The deferral will provide time for notice to be served and for any material considerations raised by the landowners to be considered in the assessment prior to consideration by the Committee.

Modify a Planning Obligation (dated 10 October 2017) for planning permission 3/16/1446/OUT (“Outline planning permission for the demolition of The Hawthorns former horticultural nursery and bungalow and erection of up to 60 dwellings (including up to 50% affordable housing), introduction of structural planting and landscaping, informal public open space, surface water flood mitigation and attenuation, primary vehicular access off Ringwood Road, pedestrian access off Broomfield Drive and associated ancillary works. 

 All matters to be reserved, with the exception of the site access points”) to reduce affordable housing provision from 50% to 15% (as 7 Affordable Rent homes); secure a Viability Review; secure a Biodiversity Compensation Payment; and secure the provision of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG). (Description amended 10 Feb 2023).

The Case Officer presented to members the modification of a Planning Obligation (dated 10 October 2017) for planning permission 3/16/1446/OUT (“Outline planning permission for the demolition of The Hawthorns former horticultural nursery and bungalow and erection of up to 60 dwellings (including up to 50% affordable housing), introduction of structural planting and landscaping, informal public open space, surface water flood mitigation and attenuation, primary vehicular access off Ringwood Road, pedestrian access off Broomfield Drive and associated ancillary works. All matters to be reserved, with the exception of the site access points”) to reduce affordable housing provision from 50% to 15% (as 7 Affordable Rent homes); secure a Viability Review; secure a Biodiversity Compensation Payment; and secure the provision of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG). (Description amended 10 Feb 2023).

An update was provided by the Case Officer as follows:

·       Paragraphs 12.2 and 13.6 of the District Valuer’s report refer to 22% when they should be 15%.

·       Abnormal costs noted in the District Valuer’s table should be the same as the developer’s abnormal costs.

With the aid of visual representation, members were shown the location of the application site as well as the proposed layout and design. The Case Officer informed members of the history of the site. Members were informed that the original application was initially refused by the Council and then allowed at appeal. As part of the appeal decision, it had been conditioned to allow for 45 dwellings. The Case Officer also discussed that there would be provision for affordable housing on site, however this application was to reduce it from 50% to 15%. Members were informed that objections had been noted but 15% affordable housing was deemed acceptable based on an assessment carried out by the District Valuation Service (DVS). Submitted drawings showed the location of affordable housing on the site and members were informed that housing officers had been consulted.

Public Participation

Mr Walker raised his concerns regarding the planning application and informed members that he was disappointed that it had gotten this far. He hoped members would refuse this application for a reduction in affordable housing.

The applicant hoped that the members would grant planning permission. Mr Lofthouse discussed Pennyfarthing’s background and experience as a local house builder. He also spoke about issues raised by Natural England in relation to the development. He praised the officers report as it discussed the unique elements of the site and informed members that there were significant impacts on the viability of the development. He highlighted the affordable housing reduction and hoped members would approve the officer’s recommendation.

The Parish Councillor was pleased to see that 15% affordable housing was provided, as the complete loss of affordable housing would have been detrimental to the area given they have already lost out on other development and there was a local need like most areas. The Parish Councillor hoped that members considered the value of affordable housing and not just its monitory value.

Cllr Tooke, the local ward member, spoke in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 329.

Replace storage kiosk.  Retention and relocation of Bamford's Water Pump.  Demolition of stone and concrete plinth.

The Case Officer presented to members the proposal which was to replace storage kiosk. Retention and relocation of Bamford's Water Pump. Demolition of stone and concrete plinth.

With the aid of visual representation, members were shown the location of the site, the new proposed layout, and designs, as well as photographs of the existing temporary storage kiosk. Details were provided regarding the site being within the settlement boundary and conservation area. The Case Officer also provided members with details regarding impacts on listed buildings in the area and neighbouring properties. Members were informed that the increased building size would increase the visual impact within the AONB and from the Quay and it was not considered to positively integrate with the area. The Case Officer discussed the application site being within the conservation area and identified that there would be harm to heritage assets with the level of harm being less than substantial. Details regarding flood risks was also provided as the site location was within flood zones 2 and 3.

Public Participation

The applicant’s representative encouraged the committee to grant planning permission. He informed members that the site had been operating for many years and the harbour has been a popular area for visitors. Mr Jones informed members that the current storage kiosk was an ugly structure which wasn’t fit for purpose anymore. The proposed increased size would result in less disruption as it would allow safety equipment to be stored separately and securely. He argued that the proposed design represented improvements to the existing kiosk, and the business had taken into consideration and cooperated with local neighbours.

Councillor Ezzard, the Local Ward Member did not approve of the application. She discussed concerns regarding the scale of the proposal and the visual impacts it would have on the local area. Concerns were also raised regarding the setting, and loss of public space on the quay for other local users due to the size. The Parish Council confirmed that their objections regarding land ownership had now been resolved but they wished to highlight the need for public access to the slip way and hoped this would be retained in the long term.

Members questions and comments

·       Existing building is dated.

·       Clarification was requested regarding the detrimental impact on the conservation area identified by officers. Members recognised conservation area concerns but judged that the design would avoid harm to the Conservation Area and the setting of other heritage assets.

·       Members felt the proposal was an improvement and welcomed the design. They recognised that it would limit access for the public to part of the quay.

·       The public benefit and need were judged to outweigh any harm.

·       Clarification regarding the existing location of the Bamford’s Water Pump and confirmation that it had been previously repositioned.

·       Conditions necessary to make the development acceptable were identified to be i) time limit, ii) plans, iii) material details- to be retained iv) repositioning of the water pump.

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits  ...  view the full minutes text for item 330.

Extension of existing Class E retail unit.

The Case Officer presented to members the proposal for the extension of an existing Class E retail unit.

With the aid of visual representation, members were shown the proposals and site, which was outside the settlement boundary within the Green Belt, and the surrounding areas. In addition to this, members were also shown photographs of the rear and side of the site as well as the proposed site plan and elevations. The Case Officer provided details regarding visual screening and informed members that there were no adverse visual impacts on the building or character of the area. Details regarding car and bicycle parking provisions were also explained.

Public Participation

The local ward member, spoke in favour of the application. She informed members that the site was a retail store which is used and convenient for all residents. The local ward member believed that the site would enhance the amenities in the area and hoped that members would support the officer’s recommendation.

Members questions and comments

·       Commend the officer report.

·       Potential for provision EV charging points queried but not necessary to make the proposal acceptable.

·       Clarification regarding impact on Dorset Council owned land.

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, a motion to grant was proposed by Cllr Shane Bartlett and seconded by Cllr Alex Brenton.

Decision: To grant planning permission subject to conditions set out in the officer report.

Proposed single story rear and side extension with alterations to form first floor balcony above. Replacement of glazed balustrade and flat roof to existing balcony. New vehicular access from Lighthouse Road.

The Planning Officer presented to members the proposal for a single story rear and side extension with alterations to form first floor balcony above. Replacement of glazed balustrade and flat roof to existing balcony. New vehicular access from Lighthouse Road.

With the aid of visual representation, members were shown the location of the site, as well as the existing dwelling and proposed design of the extension. The Case Officer also provided details regarding the proposed site access and informed members that no objections from highways had been raised, subject to conditions for a turning area. Members were informed that there would be some loss of greenery and minimal impacts which had no harm to the character of the area or the AONB.

Public Participation

There was no public participation.

Members questions and comments

·       Clarification regarding site access and overlooking of balcony.

·       Members praised the detailed officer’s report.

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, a motion to grant was proposed by Cllr Shane Bartlett and seconded by Cllr David Morgan.

Decision: To grant subject to conditions set out in the officer’s report.

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.