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 Roper declared that although Portland Town Council had considered item 8, he was not pre-determined on the application.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 04 September 2025.

The minutes of the meeting held on 04 September 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 30 September 2025.

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.

Install 3 new Portland stone plaques to be fixed to the existing panels of the memorial.

Application P/LBC/2025/04317 was moved to the front of the agenda, to ensure the meeting was quorate.

Cllrs Matt Bell, Kate Wheller, David Northam and Louie O’Leary left the Council Chamber at 10:05, as they also sat on Weymouth Town Council, who were the applicants for the application.

The Conservation and Design Officer presented the application for Listed Building Consent, to replace the plaques on a Grade II listed structure. The application had been brought before the committee for determination as the structure was owned by Dorset Council.

It was explained that the existing plaques had deteriorated over time due to exposure to the elements and were proposed to be replaced, with one being replaced like-for-like. The remaining two plaques could not be removed therefore, the new panels were proposed to be fixed directly onto the existing ones.

Designs for the proposed replacement panels were shown to the committee and officers considered that the proposed works would not cause any harm to the Grade II listed structure or the setting of the neighbouring listed buildings.

It was proposed by Cllr Eysenck and seconded by Cllr Bawden, to grant the application as per the officer’s report.

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

Use of land as camping site from 1st May to 30th September only, annually, (as an extension to the season permitted by planning permissions WD/D/18/002905 and P/FUL/2021/00928).

The Development Management Team Leader presented the application, which sought to extend the permitted camping season on site, from 1 May to 30 September.

The application site was shown in relation to Buckland House and the village of Buckland Ripers. The site was located outside the Defined Development Boundary (DDB) and was subject to several constraints, including two public rights of way and pockets of flooding. The site was situated approximately 75 metres from the nearest residential garden.

Photographs of the site were provided, showing the toilet block, camping area, surrounding field, and ancillary buildings. A flood map also showed the areas subject to flooding, however it was noted that visitors were directed away from these areas, and it was confirmed that there would be no significant impact in terms of surface water flooding.

The key considerations were outlined. The principle of development was discussed, noting the fall-back position that camping was currently permitted from 15th May to 31st August, and the proposal would add an additional 44 days. In terms of amenity, it was noted that no noise complaints had been pursued, although two complaints were received in the past three years.

It was also confirmed that since the publication of the report the Dorset Wildlife Trust had been in contact with the applicant to arrange for a survey to take place of the Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI).

Concerns had been raised about exhaust fumes and additional vehicular movements, however it was considered that due to the low speed of vehicles accessing the site and adequate screening, there would be limited impact from this. While there was some localised impact on neighbouring properties, this was not considered sufficient to warrant refusal and the economic and business benefits of the proposal were deemed to justify the development.

Mrs Bonham-Lovett, Mr Perrott and Mrs Beale spoke in opposition to the application. They raised concerns with the proposal, including the erosion of the natural environment around the village, the increase in noise and odour pollution from increased numbers of visitors and the lack of amenities in the village to cater to more people. In addition, they mentioned that they felt residents complaints had not been listened to.

Mr Carpendale spoke as the agent for the application, he noted that the extension of the season would allow for demand to be met and provide economic benefits to the local area. In addition, he stated that visitors to the campsite would have to agree to terms and conditions when booking and that a warden would be on site at all times.

In response to questions from members officers provided the following responses:

·       No comments had been received from the local Ward Members.

·       The applicant was entitled to conduct 60 days of camping in any 1 year period, under the General Permitted Development Order, however this did not apply to the application site as it already had permission for camping. 

·       There had been two complaints that had been pursued by Environmental Protection over  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Replace sceptre to King George III Statue.

The Conservation and Design Officer presented the application relating to the King George III statue in Weymouth. The proposal was to replace the missing sceptre, which was originally part of the statue when it was listed but was believed to have been removed during the 1970s.

The application was brought to the committee for determination as the statue was owned by Dorset Council. A photograph of the statue was shown, highlighting its prominent position within the town. The statue was set on a tall Portland Stone pedestal and held significant value within the Weymouth Conservation Area.

The proposed replacement sceptre would be as close a replica as possible to the original and the fixings would be similar in style to the original. At this stage, specific plans for the fixings had not been provided.

The proposal was considered to make a positive contribution to the heritage asset and would not impact the setting of neighbouring listed buildings. The principle of the development was deemed acceptable and details of the fixings were to be submitted via condition.

It was proposed by Cllr Bell and seconded by Cllr Northam, that the application be granted as per the officer’s recommendation.

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

Retain existing building with alterations to windows and doors for mixed use as drinking establishment with food provision and kitesurfing school/shop.

Cllr Simon Christopher left the meeting at 11:41.

The meeting adjourned from 11:41 – 11:48.

The Planning Officer presented the application for the retention of an existing timber-clad building, with alterations to the windows and doors, for mixed use as a drinking establishment and a kitesurfing school.

The location of the site was shown to members and the adjacent car park and skate park were identified. Photographs of the existing building were shown, including views from the car park and skate park. These images illustrated the building both before and after the works were carried out, including the installation of new doors and benches at the rear.

Plans were presented showing the proposed internal layout, with a bar located centrally within the building. Proposed elevations and a 3D illustration of the interior were also shown.

The proposal was considered acceptable in all aspects except for flood risk. A flood risk map of the area was presented, showing that the site fell within Flood Zone 3, with high surface water flooding risk affecting access and egress. The Environment Agency had objected to the application on the grounds of flood risk and had highlighted that the site was at risk from 1 in 200-year wave overtopping.

A search for alternative sites within a one-mile radius had been conducted as part of the sequential tests, but all identified sites were also located within Flood Zone 3. The application also failed the exception test as it was not considered safe for its lifetime. It was concluded that the community benefits of the proposal were limited and did not outweigh the flood risk.

Mr Smith spoke in support of the proposal, as the applicant. He noted that he believed there were substantial community benefits of the application, including providing access to water sports to young people and bringing economic benefits to the area, through hosting events. He also stated that he believed concerns about flood risk could be overcome through the business closing in extreme adverse weather conditions and that the Town Council had lent their support to the proposal.

Officer’s provided the following responses to members questions:

·       Under National Planning Policy drinking establishments were considered to be higher risk than other forms of recreation, due to the likelihood that people would be consuming alcohol.

·       The Environment Agency were a statutory consultee and flood risk experts.

·       A condition could be included requiring flood warning and an evacuation strategy, however this wouldn’t reduce the risk of flooding and there would still be an issue over the access and egress of the site.

·       A condition requiring closure in extreme weather conditions may not be enforceable.

Members considered that a potential suitable solution could be found that would mitigate the flood risk and felt that there were substantial community benefits, in the provision of water sports and hosting of events, as well as the economic benefits that the business would bring to a deprived area. 

The meeting adjourned at 12:30 – 12:47 to allow officers to draft a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

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.