Agenda item

Develop land by the erection of up to 20 No. dwellings, form vehicular access and associated infrastructure. (Outline application to determine access).

Hannah Smith (Development Management Area Manager) gave an update on 5-year Housing Land Supply for the North Dorset Plan Area. She stated that the new housing land supply and housing delivery test for the North Dorset Plan area had recently been published. The new supply is 5.74 years, and the Housing Delivery Test was at 110%.

The latest housing completion data was a material consideration. It demonstrated that housing delivery was back on track. In view of this, the development plan policies relating to housing provision will no longer be automatically “out of date” for the purposes of paragraph 11 of the NPPF, and the tilted balance will not automatically apply. Therefore, full weight can be attributed to the spatial strategy and the housing policies contained with the plan. 

It was important to note that there is still a requirement to meet our ongoing housing need. This must be met through development that accords with our spatial strategy or where there are material considerations that may outweigh any conflict with policies contained within the plan.

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. Aerial photographs of the site, access and public rights of way were shown. Members were also provided with details of the neighbouring site plan and the proposed vehicular access. The Case Officer also gave a summary of the section 106 agreement and included photographs of the indicative site plan initially proposed, however, it was highlighted to members that access was for consideration only. He informed members that there were no objectives raised by the highway’s authorities subject to conditions. The recommendation was to grant subject to conditions subject to the section 106 agreement.

Mr S Savage, Transport Development Manager, informed members that traffic movement assessments had been carried out and that tactile paving had been proposed to ensure a safe and suitable access for all road users, giving priority to pedestrians. He discussed vehicle speed being low throughout the development and the well-used public footpath. There were no concerns raised regarding impacts to the highstreets and Mr Savage was satisfied that safety for all road users was assured.

Public Participation

Objections were made from residents who discussed flooding and water retention. Concerns were also raised regarding maintenance, drainage strategies and additional surface water runoff. Mr Kelliher also referred members to chapter 1 of the NPPF. He also discussed the protection of children and did not feel as though the proposal was appropriate for the area. Members were informed that the footpaths were frequently used by students, and they would be victim to dangerous drivers. He hoped members would refuse.

Gillingham Town Council spoke in objection to the proposal. They discussed the loss of existing green space and an increase in traffic congestion, which would cause significant danger risks to pedestrians using the footpaths. Cllr Weeks felt that the area should be protected and therefore members should refuse the officers recommendation.

Members questions and comments

·       Clarification on planning considerations.

·       Confirmation of flood risk and strategy.

·       Maintenance of surface water management.

·       Concerns raised regarding pedestrian safety.

·       Site access layout.

·       Clarification on traffic movements.

·       Emergency vehicle access.

·       Loss of green space.

·       Loss of amenity.

·       Members endorsed comments raised by Gillingham Town Council and the Highways authority.

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 Carole Jones, and seconded by Cllr Jon Andrews.

Decision: To grant the officer’s recommendation for approval.