Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

No apologies for absence were received at the meeting.

To disclose any pecuniary, other registerable or non-registerable 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.

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

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 5^th November 2024.

The minutes of the meeting held on 5^th November 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 Friday 6^th December 2024.

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.

Erect 6 no. dwellings, form vehicular access (demolish existing outbuilding)

With the aid of a visual presentation including plans and aerial photographs, the Case Officer identified the site and explained the proposal and relevant planning policies to members. He included photographs of the application site, the site location plan and proposed access, proposed block plan of the site and Housing types were shown. There were no objections from the Highway Authority on highway grounds. The principle of residential development was considered acceptable and, in its design, scale and layout and landscaping. There would be no significant harm to residential amenity and no material considerations that would warrant refusal.

Public Participation

Mr Barker spoke in objection to the proposal and had collaborated with his neighbours. He raised access issues and risks and explained that the fundamental problem and main objection was regarding the risk to personal safety and property created by allowing access for building and use of proposed houses through the bottleneck between Nos 15 and 17 Armada Way. He explained that there were concerns related to building machinery and vehicles and the daily access by occupants, visitors, deliveries, mail, maintenance, and other services present which would increase the volume of traffic through a restricted access with poor visibility. The people living in 15 and 17 access would be located by the bottleneck between both houses which would be constricted further when they used their parking spaces. Drivers exiting through the new site access would be unable to see any vehicles, cyclists or pedestrians until they were clear of the walls on either side. Emergency vehicles would have to negotiate the additional parked and moving traffic in a limited space, and would be adding to the risk to people, property and vehicles. He also spoke about the implications on Armada Way, which already had a significant passage of people, regularly young children for school and sports. Congestion would worsen the risk to these people and with the added construction and crossing the pavement and many vehicles would need to reverse crossing the pavement and the increased temporary parking of visitors, delivery vehicles, site maintainers and others. He explained that there were no concessions, or risk controls to minimise or mitigate the considerable impact on the quality of life for the adjacent residents due to noise, dirt, dust, waste, general building detritus and access denials, especially at busy times of the day. Nor were there any apparent risk controls to minimise the likelihood of any damage to utilities, road surfaces and adjacent property in this confined area. The root cause of all of the above risks and concerns is access to the proposed development across the pavement and through the bottleneck via Armada Way. All of these risks and concerns could be alleviated by singular vehicular access from the North, with access via Armada Way provided to pedestrians/cycles only.

Ms Farmiloe spoke in objection to the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring properties. She raised concerns that the highway department had not done their job to the fullest extent and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

Erection of 10no. dwellings with associated amenity, landscaping and infrastructure including widening of access road.

With the aid of a visual presentation including plans and aerial photographs, the Case Officer identified the site and explained the proposal and relevant planning policies to members. Proposed typic floor plans and photographs of the views from Littlefield, Noake Road and the entrance to Littlefield were shown. The Location plan showed the site boundary with the garage plots, site context was given showing the surrounding building types. There would be an erection of 10 dwellings in the development boundary of Sherborne and sufficient parking for each property with amenity areas and the proposal meets parking standards. Additional parking spaces had been added since the proposal was deferred. The proposal would be 100% affordable housing.  The committee was shown a list of key planning considerations, conditions and recommendations. 

Public Participation

There was no public participation.

Members questions and comments

• Asked if access points on the verges would get blocked by parked cars
• Around the rear boundary from 1-5 of the proposed layouts, there is access to the rear gardens. Maintenance of the rear boundary was queried and if fences could be added to both sides of the path.
• Questions asked about the amount of parking spaces and if this would be enough for resident’s family to park.
• Queried how parking would be enforced
• Concerns about the new road layout not being adopted.
• 2 areas of concern about the alleyway created which could potentially be a security risk and whether there would be lockable gates and high gates. Mentioned the lack of visibility in the alleyway, created a space there with lack of oversight and visibility.
• Queried about the access road on Littlefield which is too narrow for access vehicles, parked vehicles to get by and lots of retirement people live there and 2 vehicles unable to pass at the same time. The narrow road could create additional risk for accidents.
• Commented that there were no electric vehicle chargers, heat pumps or solar panels.
• Cllr Les Fry requested a condition to light the rear as highways at the back of the properties.

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 APPROVE the officer’s recommendation to GRANT planning permission as recommended, was proposed by Cllr Jones, and seconded by Cllr Taylor.

Decision: To grant planning permission with conditions for the reasons set out in the officer’s report.

1)    The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2)     The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: Location Plan - Drawing Number 2001 (May 2019) Proposed Site Plan - Drawing Number 2004 K (February 2021) Proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

Erection of 155 dwellings and associated infrastructure -  including informal and formal public open space. (Reserved matters application to determine access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following the grant of Outline planning permission 2/2018/0036/OUT).

The Case Officer provided the members with the following updates to the proposed conditions which were not in the report:

8. The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in accordance with the detailed biodiversity mitigation, compensation and enhancement/net gain strategy set out within the Biodiversity Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (BMES) & Biodiversity Construction Environmental Management Plan (BCEMP) (RSK Biocensus – 2485927 Rev 02 14/08/2024), subject to all new hedgerows to be species-rich native hedgerow that includes at least 5 woody species. Rev 02 14/08/2024.

Reason: To mitigate, compensate and enhance/provide net gain for impacts on biodiversity.

9. Prior to the commencement of the development above damp course level, a scheme showing precise details of all external lighting (including appearance, supporting columns, siting, technical details, power, intensity, orientation and screening of the lamps) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting strategy shall reflect the need to assist public safety whilst adhering to standards set out in the approved Biodiversity Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (BMES) & Biodiversity Construction Environmental Management Plan (BCEMP) (RSK Biocensus- 2485927 Rev 02 14/08/2024. In particular that light spill within the dark corridor identified in Figure 2 of this document does not exceed 1 lux. The approved scheme shall be implemented before the development is occupied and shall be permanently maintained thereafter. No further external lighting shall be installed on site without the prior approval, in writing, of the Local Planning Authority.

With the aid of a visual presentation including plans and aerial photographs, the Case Officer identified the site and explained the proposal and relevant planning policies to members. The proposal was for the erection of 155 houses and was a reserved matters application. The Case Officer showed the strategic allocation plan- Gillingham Southern Extension, as well as the land use plan and an illustrative masterplan and photographs of Principal Street- Western Junctions with B3092 New Road. Additional street parking, and traffic calming had been implemented. The Officer went through the summary which informed that the proposal had been through several reiterations to address concerns, the principle of residential development on this site had already been established, the proposal was acceptable in layout, scale, appearance and landscaping and the development would not lead to any material harm to residential amenity and there are no material considerations that would warrant refusal of this application.

 Public Participation

Mr Jackson spoke in support of the application on behalf of the applicant. This was now the fourth major Redrow application on this site and the fifth overall. He thanked the officers and the team for their work in getting to this stage and for the recommendation for approval. He urged that positive discussions continue, and the constructive discussions would ensure that they brought proposals that reflect the original ambitions of the site and the aspirations of the local authority. He added that the layout had been well considered, consistent with the previously approved applications which contribute towards sustainable development and wider town scape. The proposals  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

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 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.