Agenda and minutes

To disclose any pecuniary, other registerable or non-registrable interest as set out in the adopted Code of Conduct. In making their disclosure 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 Northam declared an interest in item 5d, because he had previously heard the item at a Weymouth Town Council meeting and as such was predetermined and would speak as a Ward Member for the item.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 25 July 2024.

The minutes of the meeting held on 25 July 2024 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 on Tuesday 03 September 2024.

Details of public representation have been listed in the details of the planning applications below.

To consider the applications listed below for planning permission

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

Outline application WD/D/17/000986 was an EIA application and an Environmental Statement was submitted with that application.

Reserved matters approval is subsequently sought for appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for:

"the construction of 136 dwellings, pedestrian, cycle and vehicular links, drainage works, landscaping, and associated infrastructure"

The Lead Project Officer presented the reserved matters application for a residential development within Bridport. The parameters of the application were detailed and the location was highlighted on a site map. The previously approved plans were shown, to give members an indication of the parameters of the development. It was also explained that the new application was similar to the previously approved one and significant weight was given to the fact that the previous application already had approval.

The proposed plans were shown to members, including details of the number and sizes of dwellings, access and parking and an area of landscaping. The Lead Project Officer explained that there were three defined character areas within Bridport that related to this application and that the application was acceptable in appearance, landscaping, layout and scale in relation to the character areas.

Public representation in objection to the application was received from Mrs Hudson, who expressed concerns about the usage of S106 funds and the increased traffic generated from the development. Cllr Mooney, representing Bridport Town Council, also spoke in objection to the application, noting the Town Council’s disappointment with the lack of sustainable materials used in the construction process.

Mr Mantell, representing the applicant, spoke in support of the application, expressing that the applicant had committed to certain sustainability targets and had adopted a carbon strategy to reduce carbon emissions from the development.

The Lead Project Officer confirmed that the S106 funds would be used for a variety of projects within the local area and the roundabout referenced by Mrs Hudson was not being paid for with funds secured by the S106 agreement.

In response to questions from members the Lead Project Officer and the Development Management Area Manager provided the following responses:

·       Policy states that affordable housing should consist of a split of 70% of affordable rented housing and 30% shared ownership properties.

·       The affordable housing provision is assessed across the entire development project rather than through each individual stage of the development.

·       The S106 legal agreement ensures that the affordable housing provision would be met by the applicant.

Having had the opportunity to debate the merits of the application, although some members had expressed concerns over the possibility of the applicant reducing the affordable housing provision in the future, there was support for the application in general.

Proposed by Cllr Kimber and seconded by Cllr Northam.

Decision: That authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and the Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement for the approval of reserved matters, subject to the discharge of any outstanding conditions on the outline planning permission (WD/D/17/000986) which are required to be discharged prior to the approval of the reserved matters (conditions 2 for the phasing, 7 for the LEMP, and 39 for floor levels of the dwellings) and subject to planning conditions as set out in the appendix to these minutes.

Replace all existing timber-framed windows with UPVC framed windows.

The Planning Officer introduced the application, which was for the replacement of timber framed windows with modern UPVC windows on a building within the Bridport Conservation Area. The building was shown on a site map and the location highlighted, as well as several nearby listed buildings. Photographs of the building and surrounding area were shown.

It was considered that the new UPVC windows would cause harm to the conservation area, as the building was prominent and would be publicly visible from the street. Also, the energy saving benefits would be minimal and the shorter lifespan of the UPVC windows was thought to counteract any of the energy saving benefits.

Cllr Mooney, representing Bridport Town Council and the agent Ms Bishop, spoke in support of the application. They explained that the UPVC windows that were proposed to be installed would be of a high quality and wouldn’t be overly noticeable from the street scene and that it would not impact on the setting of the nearby listed buildings.

The Development Management Team Leader provided the following responses to members questions:

·       The Local Planning Authority had taken a consistent approach and where possible had decided to retain traditional materials within the Conservation Area.

·       The applicant hadn’t submitted any further details of the proposed windows.

·       The application did not provide details about current heat loss levels from the timber framed windows.

·       No alternative proposals had been discussed, such as, keeping the timber framed windows on the front of the building and replacing the side and rear windows.

Having had the opportunity to debate the merits of the application, several members expressed disappointment at the lack of negotiation between the applicant and the Local Planning Authority to come to a suitable proposal.

It was proposed by Cllr Christopher and seconded by Cllr Shortell that the application be refused. The motion fell and members continued the debate.

It was proposed by Cllr Northam and seconded by Cllr Kimber that the application be deferred, to allow the applicant time to submit further details about the windows and liaise with planning officers. The motion to defer the application fell.

Following the debate, one member expressed that although the application as it was, was unacceptable, the applicant could consider the concerns raised and potentially bring forward a new application in the future, which could be acceptable.

Proposed by Cllr Wheller and seconded by Cllr Monks.

Decision: That the application be refused.

External alterations to include the provision of external insulation and solar panels and replacement doors and windows. 

The Planning Officer introduced the application for external alterations to an existing dwelling. The location of the dwelling was highlighted on a site map and various photographs were provided of the dwelling and the surrounding area. The existing and proposed elevations were shown to members, to give an indication of the proposed changes.

It was explained that the site fell within the Underhill Conservation Area and it was within the Defined Development Boundary. It was considered that the proposed changes would cause less than substantial harm to the Conservation Area, due to the visual loss of Portland stone on the exterior of the building and the increased height and bulk, which would impact the appearance of the terrace. In addition, the public benefits would be minimal and not outweighed by the harm to the Conservation Area.

Public representation was received from Mr Turner, Ms Mugford and Mr Hyde, the applicant, in support of the application. They highlighted the importance of improving the sustainability of the dwelling through modernisation and that the visual difference would be minimal, considering the exterior Portland stone was currently painted over.

In response to questions from members, the Planning Officer and Development Management Area Manager provided the following responses:

·       The Conservation Officer suggested alternative options should be considered for improving the sustainability of the property, before altering the external appearance.

·       Portland stone was listed as a desirable material for properties to retain in the Conservation Area Appraisal.  

·       The dwelling was not a listed building and any harm caused would be to the character of the Conservation Area.

·       There had been no letters of objection from the public and Portland Town Council had supported the application.

Several members expressed support for the application and thought that the energy saving benefits were important and that the applicant should be able to modernise their home, as the impact on the area was minimal.

The meeting adjourned to allow officers to draft conditions for the approval of the application. 12:13 – 12:38

Members considered that the benefits from improving the thermal efficiency of the dwelling outweighed the less than substantial harm to the Conservation Area.

Proposed by Cllr Monks and seconded by Cllr O’Leary.

Decision: That authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and the Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement to grant subject to planning conditions, the wording of which shall first have been agreed with the Chair of the Southern and Western Area Planning Committee.

The Committee agreed to extend the meeting beyond 3 hours.

Proposed addition of first floor storey.

The Planning Officer introduced the application for the addition of a first floor extension to a residential dwelling. The location of the application site was shown to members, as well as site photographs of the property and neighbouring properties. The existing and proposed elevations of the front, side and rear of the property were shown, which gave an indication in the proposed change in size and appearance.

It was explained that although the principal of development was considered acceptable, the proposed changes did not take cues from the surrounding area and that the increased size and bulk of the building would create an unacceptable level of impact on neighbouring properties.

Mr Tonkin, the applicant, spoke in support of the application, stating that there was no desire to undermine the character of the area and that the size of the building would be in keeping with other properties on the road. Cllr Northam, also spoke in support of the application as the Ward Member, he did not believe the height of the building would significantly impose on the neighbouring properties and that there were already a variety of different sizes of dwellings on the street.

Cllr Northam left the Council Chamber.

In response to members questions the Planning Officer confirmed the distance between the semi-detached properties and that any new windows in the side elevation could consist of obscured glass, as they were bathroom windows.

One member expressed support for the application, as they did not believe that the property would significantly overlook the neighbouring properties and given the variety of properties already on the street, the character of the area would not be negatively impacted.

The meeting adjourned to allow officers to draft a set of conditions for approval of the application. 13:42 – 13:52

Proposed by Cllr Wheller and seconded by Cllr O’Leary. 

Decision: That authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and the Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement to grant subject to planning conditions, the wording of which shall first have been agreed with the Chair of the Southern and Western Area Planning Committee.

Cllr Northam returned to the Council Chamber 13:56.

Construction of 13 Storage Units (with variation of condition 2 of Planning permission P/FUL/2023/06865 - amended plan to reposition footprint of storage units).

The Development Management Team Leader introduced the application that proposed to re-site several storage containers. The location of the site was shown to members, as well as the previously approved site plan and the proposed site plan. Photographs were also provided, showing the current progress of the application. It was explained that the application had come to the committee for determination as the access road to the site was owned by Dorset Council.  

Proposed by Cllr O’Leary and seconded by Cllr Shortell.

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

Replacement of mobile home (former railway carriage) with new dwelling with a detached double garage.  Install ground mounted PV panels and ground source heat pump.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application for the replacement of a mobile home with a new dwelling and detached garage. Members were shown the location of the site and the boundaries of the site and surrounding area were highlighted, part of which was also owned by the applicant. Photographs of the existing mobile home and land around the site were shown. A flood risk map was also provided, showing that the site was in a low-risk flood zone.

The proposed plans were shown, which gave an indication of the size and appearance of the proposed dwelling, as well as the floorplan of the property. The proposed dwelling would be located in the centre of the site, with the detached garage and solar panels situated nearby. The existing gate access was proposed to be moved further into the site.

The planning history of the site was summarised and included a certificate of lawfulness issued for mixed use of the land for agricultural purposes and the siting of a caravan, which meant the applicant already had permission to site a mobile home. The Senior Planning Officer provided the legal definition of a caravan and provided images of the type of mobile home that could be situated given the certificate of lawfulness.

It was considered that while development would not usually be granted in this area, due to the existing permission, the proposed dwelling was acceptable.

Mr Cooper, Mr Whittingham and Cllr Tarr, the Ward Member for the area, all spoke in opposition to the application. Their concerns included flooding in the area recorded by residents, over development of the countryside and loss of agricultural land.

Ms McLoughlin, the agent for the applicant, spoke in support of the application, noting that the applicant wished to create a sustainable dwelling and that the proposed bungalow would be a visual improvement on the current mobile home.

In response to questions from members the Senior Planning Officer and Development Management Area Manager provided the following responses:

·       The S106 agreement would restrict usage of the land under the applicant’s ownership, so that a caravan could no longer be sited there, in addition to the proposed dwelling.  

·       There were no proposed restrictions on the occupation of the dwelling, as the current permission had no such restrictions.

·       Dorset Fire and Rescue Service were not consulted about the application, due to its small size, however any dwelling would have to conform to building regulations ensuring its safety.

Proposed by Cllr Northam and seconded by Cllr Kimber.

Decision: That authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and the Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a S106 agreement to restrict land within the applicant’s ownership, and subject to planning conditions set out in the appendix to these minutes.

And

Refuse permission for the reason set out in the appendix to these minutes, if the legal agreement is not completed by 6 months from the date of committee or such extended  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

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 is no scheduled exempt business.

There was no exempt business.