Agenda item

One year retention of gypsy & traveller transit site for 25no. caravans between 1st April and 30th September 2024.

The Case Officer provided members with the following updates:

·       There was an error in the officer report at paragraph 9.0 page 108, Puddletown Parish Council was referred to, whereas it should have read Piddle Valley Parish Council.

·       The Ward Member following issue of the agenda and officer report requested that details of the Management Plan which previously in 2014 formed part of a planning condition regarding ongoing management of the site & security arrangements was updated and made available. This had subsequently been carried out, and an updated April 2024 Management Plan was now available to view on the application online. Both the Ward Member and the Parish Council had clarified that they were happy with the details as set out in the updated 2024 Management Plan.

·       Following the publication of the agenda, a further representation had been received from Brian Twigg, planning agent to the objector(s) to the scheme who was registered to speak on this item. This representation pointed out that the red line on the submitted plan did not include the roadway to the West of the site: The Applicant did not own the roadway but did have the right to use that roadway with or without vehicles at all times (as confirmed by the Title Deeds). The roadway was already in use for accessing the application site and had been for many years. In addition, the site was technically also accessible from the highway at the lower end of the site within the red line plan which had been submitted. The representation also raised further concerns with regards to serving Notices on relevant landowners. The Applicant had sent the required Notices to the owners of the relevant land and sufficient time was allowed for those owners to submit a further representation if they so wished. The Council had been provided with copies of the letters and Notices, which could be found on the Council’s website, and were satisfied that the correct Notices had been served.

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. Photographs of the site location were included, and the history of the site was explained to members. The Case Officer informed members that the location and impact on visual amenity was considered acceptable and a bespoke solution had been provided to protect Poole harbour catchment. There were no concerns regarding flooding, highways or impacts on neighbouring amenities. Therefore, the officer’s recommendation was to grant approval subject to conditions set out in the officer’s report.

Public Participation

Mr Twigg addressed the committee and explained his previous experience within planning. He had made previous objections to the proposal, questioning the need, sustainability of the location and the site access. Mr Twigg did not feel as though the proposal addressed national validation requirements and his representation also included his concerns regarding the implications on biodiversity and an increase in traffic movements. He hoped the committee would refuse the officer’s recommendation.

Members questions and comments

·       Clarification on site access and comments from Highways Officers.

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 Jon Andrews, and seconded by Cllr Valerie Pothecry.

Decision: To GRANT the officer’s recommendation for APPROVAL subject to conditions set out in the officer’s report.