Agenda item

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

The Committee considered application 6/2018/0566 for the redevelopment of existing hotel to provide new tourist accommodation including 30 bedroom hotel, apartments & villa accommodation, associated leisure & dining facilities (Environmental Impact Assessment development) at Knoll House Hotel Ltd, Knoll House Hotel, Ferry Road, Studland, Swanage.

 

With the aid of a visual presentation, and taking account the detail in the report, officers provided context of what the main proposals, principles and planning issues of the application were; how these were to be progressed; and what this entailed.

 

The development would generate a £60 million investment in the site, create some 230 jobs and, because all staff accommodation from the site was to be removed, offered an electric shuttle bus service to bring staff to and from work.

 

For context, plans and photographs provided an illustration of the location, composition, dimensions and appearance of the development and of the individual accommodation units - and their proportion - that would make up the overall hotel complex; what leisure facilities and amenities there would be, access and highway considerations; the characteristics and topography of the site and views into the site and around it; environmental designation considerations; what demolition would take place and what groundworks would be necessary in managing this “brownfield” site to an acceptable standard for development; drainage and water management considerations; the means of landscaping and screening; the development’s setting within that part of Studland and what constraints governed how the site should be managed and could be developed.

 

These constraints in developing this site were significant, being:-

·        within the Site of Specific Scientific interest, Special Protection Area, Special Area of Conservation, Ramsar site

·        within the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)

·        adjacent to Heathland Consultation Area

·        adjacent to the Dorset Heritage Coast

·        adjacent to UNESCO World Heritage site Jurassic Coast

·        surrounded by National Trust owned land

 

all of which played a significant part in the assessment of considerations for the officer’s recommendation.

 

Whilst the development would remain within the footprint of the existing development, there would be a significant change in appearance in terms of an increase in mass, bulk and dimensions which was considered to significantly impact on the adjacent environmental designations and in particular, the heathland.

 

Given all this, the proposal - by reason of its scale, massing and impact on environmental designations - was considered to be a major development within the AONB and the tests - as specified in the NPPF - had not been fully satisfied. However, the applicant was of the view that the development did not constitute a major development.

 

In addition, Natural England were unable to confirm that the proposals would not adversely affect the integrity upon international and European designated sites (Ramsar, SPA, SAC). Whilst mitigation measures had been suggested, there was no guarantee that these could be implemented satisfactorily.

 

Whilst it was acknowledged that the development would have substantial local economic benefits, given that it had been assessed as being major development within the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB); by reason of its scale, form and massing and the impact it would have on the

special character of the Heritage Coast, heathland and other environmental designations, these considerations formed the basis of officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.

 

The Committee were notified of written submissions and officers read these direct to the Committee – being appended to these minutes. Having heard what was said, officers responded to some of the pertinent issues raised, being confident that each one could be addressed by the provisions of the application.

 

The Local Ward member, Councillor Cherry Brooks, addressed the Committee asking that the application be supported in that it would provide much needed economic benefits for that part of Dorset and would be a considerable asset to Purbeck. The Portfolio holder for, Councillor Gary Suttle, was of this view too, considering that more emphasis should be given to the economic benefits the development would bring, which in his opinion outweighed any negative impact.

 

Formal consultation had seen an objection from Studland Parish Council on the grounds of the mass and impact of the development; harm to environmental designations and inadequate parking. Dorset AONB, Natural England and the Campaign to Protect Rural England all objected on similar grounds. Dorset Highways had considered the traffic management and hotel parking plan to be acceptable. There was also no guarantee that the National Trust would enter into an agreement for use of their neighbouring land for any mitigating landscaping and screening - as asserted by the applicant - having raised concerns over the scale and massing on the Dorset AONB and on the character and appearance of Studland and the surrounding protected heathlands.

 

The opportunity was then given for members to ask questions of the presentation and what they had heard, in seeking clarification of aspects so

as to have a better understanding in coming to a decision.

 

Some important points raised, some of which they considered still required clarification, were:-

•    concerns over the number of car spaces available on site and how traffic would be managed on the highway network to avoid congestion

·        how effective the shuttle bus service would be

·        what guarantee there was for the use of National Trust land for any mitigation works as being proposed

·        what the environmental designations there were and what impact the development would have on them

·        the massing of some of the buildings to the rear of the development and how these might be modified to be more acceptable

·        what use there was to be of the chalets and when these would be occupied

·        how the staff were to be accommodated and where this could be

.

Officers addressed the questions raised – and provided what clarification was needed - providing what they considered to be satisfactory answers, which the Committee understood to be, and saw, as generally acceptable.

 

From debate, the majority of the Committee welcomed the £60million investment for the site and saw the economic benefits this could bring; appreciated that the development would create some 230 jobs; and, in principle, considered that development of the site would be beneficial but expressed concern that the mass and bulk of some of the proposed buildings to the rear of the development would need to be reduced considerably to be acceptable to them. There were also concerns over the number of car spaces available, that there would be no staff accommodation on site and that the environmental designations could be adversely compromised.

 

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application and an

understanding of all this entailed; having taken into account the officer’s report and presentation; the written representations; and what they had heard at the meeting, in being proposed by Councillor Shane Bartlett and seconded by Councillor Mike Barron, on being put to the vote, the Committee agreed unanimously - 10:0 - to be ‘minded to’ refuse the application, on the basis of the officer’s report and presentation i.e. scale, form and massing and Heathland impacts.

 

The Head of Planning, having considered the representations and the officer’s presentation and having taken into account the views of the committee, made the following decision under delegated authority.

 

Resolved

That application 6/2018/0566 be refused.

 

Reasons for refusal

1)The proposal results in major development within the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and would not conserve or enhance the character and appearance of the AONB or Heritage Coast. The application would continue to generate significant adverse effects and would compromise the special qualities that underpin the AONB’s designation.

2)It has not been adequately demonstrated that the proposal would not have an adverse effect upon important international and nationally protected wildlife sites and as such it must be considered that there would be a likely significant effect which cannot be adequately mitigated against.

3)Economic benefits do not outweigh harm

4)There are clear material considerations which justify a refusal of this application.