Agenda item

Erect 3 no. dwellings with associated parking, access and landscaping. (demolish existing dwellings).

Members were provided with the following update;

• The officer’s recommendation had been altered to reflect the need for  affordable housing contributions in line with policy H11.
• Additional condition 19. There shall be no external lighting of the residential plots unless details have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To protect the character of the intrinsically dark Dorset National Landscape.

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 officer referred to concerns raised by the previous Local Ward member, Parish Council and third party objectors in regard to a lack of infrastructure and over development of the site. In addition to this, members were provided with details of the site history,  including pre application advice and were shown photographs of views looking towards the site, illustrative street scenes and proposed block and floor plans. Members were informed that the proposed design was similar to the pre application and would provide modern accommodation, garages and pools whilst being setback into the hillside to reduce height increases. The Case Officer advised members that a Landscape Visual Assessment had been carried out.

The officer also explained the proposed building materials, highlighting the inclusion of timber  screens and anti-reflective glass to prevent overlooking and light spill. The distances between each dwelling were considered to be acceptable and the sustainability statement advised that ground floor heat pumps would be installed as an appropriate alternative to solar panels. The principle of the development was considered to be acceptable as the site was within the settlement boundary. The layout, scale, design, impact on character and appearance of area and the Dorset National Landscape was also considered to be acceptable. Therefore, the officer’s recommendation was to grant planning permission subject to conditions set out in the officer’s report and an additional condition 19 and either:

• The completion of aS106 planning obligation to secure the Affordable Housing contribution in accordance with policy H11 of the Development plan,

OR

• The applicant providing full justification of particular circumstances that prevent the provision of affordable housing on the site and the viability assessment is verified by an independent person appointed by the Council in accordance with policy H11 of the Purbeck Local Plan 2024.

Public Participation

The planning agent for the applicant, Mr Davies, welcomed the officer recommendation and highlighted that the existing site had little architectural merit and needed work to be completed in order for the buildings to meet building standards. The agent explained the history of the site and the rational behind the combined plots. The proposed dwellings had been carefully and sensitively designed by a local architect with a mixture of styles and materials to respect the local character of the area. Mr Davies reiterated that the proposal was within the settlement boundary and the separation distances fitted comfortably within the area. Individual amenity space and parking had been included. He hoped the committee would support the officer recommendation and grant planning permission. 

Members questions and comments

• Councillor Trite sought clarification of theprevious Local Ward member’s comments.
• Clarification regarding viability of affordable housing.
• Councillor Flower raised concern regarding applications returning to committee with a changes to viability and reductions to affordable housing delivery. Councillor Flower has concerns regarding viability issues being determined by officers and changes to planning obligations  being made under the scheme of delegation.  The presenting officer clarified the requirements of policy H11 of the Development Plan and the Council’s legal advisor explained paragraph 151 of the constitution.
• Members requested further information regarding the pools.
• Questions regarding the element of the link with Almondsbury and the impacts that this would have had on existing neighbouring properties.
• Clarification regarding the location of the site within the Glebe Estate
• Thanked the officers for a comprehensive report and presentation.
• Questions regarding possibility of removing Permitted Development Rights to prevent future development impacting neighbouring properties.
• Limitations of screening height.
• Concerns of residents and the architectural design of the proposals were acknowledged
• Points of clarification regarding parking arrangements.
• Cllr Trite felt that the proposal was inappropriate in terms of scale and design and would have set a precedence for future development. He felt that the views of the Parish former ward councillor and residents had been disregarded,
• Concerns were raised that viability  should be considered as part of the officer assessment, not left to post committee
• Cllr Skeats proposed to approve the proposal on the grounds that the Permitted Development Right would have been removed. There was no seconder, therefore, the motion fell.
• Cllr Coombs proposed to grant the officer’s recommendation but with the additional condition that if there was a viability challenge that it would return to committee.
• Cllr Flower felt that viability should have been considered at the point of determining the application.

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 with additional condition 19 and the planning obligation subject to the proviso that if there was a viability challenge then the application would return to committee, was proposed by Cllr Toni Coombs, and seconded by Cllr Alex Brenton.

Decision: To grant the officer’s updated recommendation for approval subject to conditions set out in the officer’s report, additional condition 19 and the additional requirement that if there was a viability challenge that it would return to committee. And to refuse the application if the affordable housing contribution or viability justification was provided in 6 months or longer period agreed by the Head of Planning.