Agenda and draft minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2026.

The minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2026 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To disclose any pecuniary, other registrable or non-registrable interests 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.

The Senior Democratic and Governance Officer reported that in respect of agenda item 6 ‘Dog Related Public Spaces Protection Order 2027’, Councillors S Gibson, D Northam, S Jespersen and R Hope had indicated that they were dog owners and following advice from the Monitoring Officer, they had been granted a dispensation, to allow them to take part in discussion and voting (where applicable) on the item.

Representatives of town or parish councils and members of the public who live, work, or represent an organisation within the Dorset Council area are welcome to submit either 1 question or 1 statement for each meeting.  You are welcome to attend the meeting in person or via MS Teams to read out your question and to receive the response.   If you submit a statement for the committee this will be circulated to all members of the committee in advance of the meeting as a supplement to the agenda and appended to the minutes for the formal record but will not be read out at the meeting. The first 8 questions and the first 8 statements received from members of the public or organisations for each meeting will be accepted on a first come first served basis in accordance with the deadline set out below.  Further information read Public Participation - Dorset Council

All submissions must be emailed in full to [email protected] by 8.30am on 28 September 2026.

When submitting your question or statement please note that:

•         You can submit 1 question or 1 statement.

•         a question may include a short pre-amble to set the context.

•         It must be a single question and any sub-divided questions will not be permitted.

•         Each question will consist of no more than 450 words, and you will be given up to 3 minutes to present your question.

•         when submitting a question please indicate who the question is for (e.g., the name of the committee or Portfolio Holder)

•         Include your name, address, and contact details.  Only your name will be published but we may need your other details to contact you about your question or statement in advance of the meeting.

•         questions and statements received in line with the council’s rules for public participation will be published as a supplement to the agenda.

•         all questions, statements and responses will be published in full within the minutes of the meeting.

One question had been submitted from a member of the public. A copy of the question and the response provided at the meeting is set out at Appendix 1 to the minutes.

To receive questions submitted by councillors.  

Councillors can submit up to two valid questions at each meeting and sub divided questions count towards this total.   Questions and statements received will be published as a supplement to the agenda and all questions, statements and responses will be published in full within the minutes of the meeting. 

The submissions must be emailed in full to [email protected]  by 8.30am on 28 September 2026. 

Dorset Council Constitution – Procedure Rule 13

There were no questions from councillors.

To receive the report from the Service Manager Environmental Protection.

The committee considered a report of the Service Manager Environmental Protection, which summarised the findings from a Dog-related Public Spaces Protection Order public consultation undertaken between May and August 2026. Informed by the consultation, it proposed the new draft Dog-related Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) 2027, which would replace the existing PSPO. The report outlined the proposed provisions for the Council area for a period of 3 years from 1 January 2027 until 31 December 2029. The committee was invited to consider the matters within the report, make any comments on the draft Order and recommend the draft Order to Cabinet at their meeting on 10 November 2026.

The Service Manager, Environmental Protection, provided a presentation, which focused on the key issues of consideration by officers, for councillors to consider during their deliberations. The process of establishing the Order was about balancing competing interests and included review of the consultation responses, consideration of public health issues, the welfare of dogs and their needs, establishing a balance between different groups of people, recognising the role of having consistency across locations, review of complaints data, enforcement issues and equality impacts. In addition, it was noted that a petition had been received which included around 7000 signatures. The petition needed to be distinguished from the consultation response due to the nature of the petition and the limited information on the people that had added signatures. It provided evidence of significant public interest rather than information on specific recommendations. Councillors had to consider the information to reach a view on the provisions of the draft Order.

Councillors considered general issues arising from the report and presentation and points were raised in the following areas:

·       The review required consideration of a balance of needs between different groups

·       It was noted that there was a mixed response to proposals relating to the fixed period of beach related summer restrictions and this could be given further consideration during the next review period

·       It was reported that the issue of timings for beach restrictions had been included in the consultation and could therefore be considered at the meeting

·       In response to a question, it was noted that reference to ‘formal public gardens’, generally referred to gardens owned by town and parish councils who would determine which ones would be enforced. The definition could be reviewed during the drafting of the Order and amended as necessary to make this clearer.

The committee discussed the provisions contained within the report in turn. The recommendation in respect of the provision is provided, including comments of the committee where relevant.

6.0      Proposed Provisions – lead length and direction to be on lead.

6.1      Maximum lead length of 2m where required (page 11) and the areas are listed in Schedule 3 of the draft Order. This received strong support at 83%.

6.2     Dogs on lead as directed by an authorised officer, maximum lead length 2m, (page 12). This received almost universal support at 96%.

Recommended for inclusion

7.0      Proposed Provisions - dogs on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

To review the Place and Resources Overview Committee Work Programme.

To review the Cabinet Forward Plan.

The Place and Resources Overview Committee work programme was reviewed.

The Chair noted that he had attended a meeting with the Peer Review team this week, along with the other chairs of the overview and scrutiny committees. As part of this, a comment had been made around ensuring a greater focus on policy development and having greater visibility of forthcoming reviews.

To consider any items of business which the Chair 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 x 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 are no exempt items scheduled for this meeting.

There was no exempt business.

Question from Richard Daw

The Lyme Regis Dog Owners Group is asking Dorset Council to allow dogs off lead on Lyme Regis Town Sandy Beach before 10am and after 6pm from May to September, while retaining the current unrestricted access from October to April.

Dorset Council has acknowledged that the adjacent beaches are unsuitable for many people with mobility issues. Yet the current restrictions leave disabled and less able-bodied dog owners without a safe, accessible alternative for five months of the year.

The impact extends beyond disability. Local families and visitors who want to enjoy the beach with their dogs are also excluded during the summer months. Shift workers, whose working hours may not fit within the permitted times, can also be affected.

For some people, their dog is their only companion, their reason to leave the house and an opportunity to socialise. For families, being unable to bring their dog can mean missing out on a shared beach visit.

Our campaign has provided date-stamped photographs showing how frequently the beach is empty during the hours we are requesting. A Freedom of Information response also confirms that no fines for dog fouling have been issued on Lyme Regis Beach in the past three years.

We are not asking for unrestricted summer access. We are asking for a reasonable compromise that accommodates other beach users while allowing more people to enjoy the beach.

My question is:

How has Dorset Council assessed the impact of the proposed restrictions on disabled and less able-bodied people, local families, visitors and shift workers, and what evidence demonstrates that refusing a limited early morning and evening compromise is necessary and proportionate, particularly when the Town Sandy Beach is the only safe and accessible beach available to some people?

Response provided by the Service Manager Environmental Protection

Thank you for your question.

The Council has considered the impact of the proposed restrictions on a range of affected groups through both the public consultation and the Equality Impact Assessment, appendix C.

The consultation identified accessibility, disability, mobility and inclusion raised by respondents in relation to Lyme Regis Front Beach. The consultation also demonstrated that different user groups have competing needs and expectations regarding beach access.

The Equality Impact Assessment specifically considered the needs of disabled people, including those who rely on assistance dogs and those with impaired mobility. Assistance dogs are exempt from the restrictions proposed within the Order, recognising their role as an auxiliary aid under the Equality Act and the importance of ensuring disabled people are able to access public spaces on an equal basis with others.

In relation to people with limited mobility, officers considered representations both supporting and challenging the suitability of alternative exercise locations. This evidence includes information from Lyme Regis Town Council identifying alternative locations such as Monmouth Beach, where accessibility matting and level access from nearby parking are available, together with other nearby locations where dogs may be exercised. Conversely, other respondents argued that these alternatives are not suitable for all users due to gradients, surface conditions and walking distances.

There is therefore evidence presenting both perspectives. Even where some individuals may experience inconvenience as a result of a restriction, members are entitled to conclude that the restriction remains justified and reasonable in order to prevent and/or reduce the detrimental effect, or the risk of the detrimental effect, that the Order is seeking to address. Members may also wish to consider whether a less restrictive alternative would achieve the same outcome with comparable certainty and enforceability. The issue of accessibility will be kept under review during the period of the new Order.

The consultation findings, which included responses from residents, visitors and businesses showed that maintaining the dog exclusion zone during the spring/ summer period at Front Town beach received a majority 57% support.

With regard to the suggestion of early morning and evening access, officers considered this alongside other alternatives proposed during the consultation. The recommendation to retain the existing arrangements reflects officers' view that, in the absence of a clearly supported alternative, the current restriction remains the clearest, most consistent and most enforceable approach.

Members will determine whether that balance remains appropriate, and the weight given to the differing views expressed during consultation is proportionate.