Agenda item

Erection of up to 67 dwellings with associated access & drainage attenuation (outline application to determine access only).

The Development Management Area Manager (N) presented the report for an application which was the subject of an appeal against non-determination (made under s78(2) of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)), the Council having failed to determine it within the statutory period. The report was brought before committee to seek their resolution as to how they would have determined the application if the power to do so still rested with them.

With the aid of a visual presentation including plans and aerial photographs, the Case Officer identified the site and explained relevant planning policies to members. Photographs of the proposed site, indicative site plans and public footpath locations from around the site were included. Members were also provided with details of nearby settlement boundaries as well as relevant constraints including nearby listed buildings. The key planning considerations, affordable housing contributions, drainage, and impacts on highways were also discussed. The Officer’s comprehensive presentation also highlighted to members the setting of heritage assets, including the conservation area, and discussed visual impacts to the landscape.

Steve Savage, transport development manager, discussed the access to the development. He informed members that the site proposed was situated on a typical narrow country lane and lacked pedestrian connectivity. Mr Savage also discussed the priority junction and refuse vehicles. He highlighted to members that highways were unable to support the proposal.

Alister Trendell, Project Engineer, discussed the surface water drainage strategy and informed the members that there would be an increased flood risk from the development as the increased volume would be less than attenuated. Mr Trendell confirmed to members that the applicant has done extensive testing and confirmed the conclusion.

Public Participation

The Parish Council spoke in objection. Cllr Winder discussed the significant development and highlighted that it was outside the settlement boundary. He reiterated to members that there’s no local need for Marnhull to have additional housing and that they didn’t have the facilities to accommodate them. Cllr Winder also raised concerns regarding a lack of public transport or employment facilities, therefore, residents would be reliant on their own transport. He assured members that the Parish Council supports evolution of the village, however they have enough dwellings which exceed the local need.

The Local Ward Member also addressed the committee and felt that the applicant had made many propositions for Marnhull’s future. However, he supported the views of the Parish Council and the officer’s recommendation.

Members questions and comments

·       Concerns regarding access and pollution levels as a result of the development.

·       Disappointed with the lack of connectivity

·       Confirmation of figures set out in the officer’s report.

·       Clarification around the weight given to the Local Plan and settlement boundaries.

·       Confirmation on the agricultural grade of the soil

·       Sewage treatment nearing capacity

·       Loss of agricultural use

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 proposal was made was made by Cllr Carole Jones, and seconded by Cllr Jon Andrews.

Decision: To advise the Planning Inspectorate that, if the power to determine the application still rested with the local planning authority, the decision would have been to refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

1.    The site lies outside the settlement boundary for Marnhull contrary to the spatial strategy of Policies 2, 6 and 20 of the North Dorset Local Plan Part 1. The location of the site has inadequate and unacceptable accessibility for pedestrians and future occupiers with protected characteristics to enable safe access to the majority of services and facilities in Marnhull in terms of walking and cycling, with a lack of sustainable transport alternatives. For those with access to them, there would be reliance on the use of private motor vehicles, leading to harmful exhaust emissions. In the absence of any evidence of essential rural needs or any other 'overriding need' for this type of development, and given number of dwellings proposed, in this location the proposed development would lead to an unsustainable form of development, contrary to Policies 2, 6 and 20 of the North Dorset Local Plan Part 1 2016 and paragraphs 79, 105, 111 and 112 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021.

2.    The proposed drainage strategy fails to indicate the preliminary levels of the attenuation basin and demonstrate that it will be free draining and discharge to a recognised discharge point. The drainage strategy also fails to indicate acceptable exceedance flow routes to demonstrate where surface water can be directed, should the designed system fail or exceed capacity. It therefore cannot be satisfied that the proposed development would avoid risk of flooding downstream from all sources or seek to mitigate it appropriately. The proposal is contrary to Policy 4 of the North Dorset Local Plan Part 1 2016 and paragraphs 159, 167 and 169 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021.

3.    In absence of a completed Section 106 agreement to secure affordable housing and necessary community benefits (infrastructure: grey, social, green) the proposal would be contrary to Policies 8, 13, 14 and 15 of the adopted North Dorset Local Plan Part 1 2016 and paragraph 54 National Planning Policy Framework.