Agenda item

Retain petrol filling station, forecourt, and Class E retail unit with 24-hour opening and lighting scheme. 

The Planning Officer presented the application to retain the existing petrol filling station and forecourt with 24-hour opening hours and lighting scheme. It was noted that the application had been brought before the Committee because part of the application site was owned by Dorset Council.

 

The location plan was shown, identifying the site as a BP petrol filling station with an associated convenience store. Members were advised that the site was located outside the settlement boundary and the part of the application site on Dorset Council land was highlighted. The site also lay within the 400-metre heathland buffer zone. An aerial photograph was shown, illustrating the site's relationship with surrounding residential development and some commercial uses to the north. Photographs taken from various points around the site were displayed, including views of the access and egress arrangements.

 

The site plan was presented showing the development as implemented. The Planning Officer explained that, although the site was located within the countryside, all aspects of the operational development had previously been assessed and found acceptable, and they remained acceptable. The main change proposed related to the extension of opening hours of the filling station. It was considered that the use of the site would largely generate passing or linked trips rather than creating significant new travel demand.

 

Members were shown plans comparing the approved shop layout with the existing layout. It was advised that the facilities provided met an identified need and were located close to an existing settlement. The extension of opening hours demonstrated that this local need would continue to be met. The site was situated in an accessible location off Wareham Road and the impact of the extended operating hours was judged to be minimal.

 

The Planning Officer reported that objections had been received from residents of the park homes located to the rear of the site, primarily concerning impacts on residential amenity. It was noted that noise generated by the petrol filling station and retail use broadly coincided with the site's hours of operation. Previous planning conditions had restricted operating hours in order to protect local amenity; however, the site had been operating on a 24-hour basis in breach of those conditions. A noise impact assessment accompanied the application and concluded that there would be a negligible impact on noise levels. The assessment found that forecourt noise was largely dominated by general traffic movements on the highway and that night-time activity would be similar to existing traffic noise from the adjoining road network.

 

To mitigate amenity impacts, conditions were proposed restricting delivery and waste collection times. A further condition would require retail sales between 11.00 pm and 6.00 am to be conducted through a serving hatch only and would prohibit the use of loudspeaker systems during those hours.

 

It was explained that the application was supported by a lighting assessment. Proposed downlighters to the canopy and forecourt were shown on plans. It was noted that the existing totem sign had previously been granted separate advertisement consent and did not form part of the current application. Lighting levels would be adjusted and dimmed during hours of darkness to minimise impacts on neighbouring properties.

 

Photographs of the Wareham Road access arrangements were displayed. The Highway Authority considered that the proposal would not have a material impact on the local highway network. It was concluded that visits associated with the extended hours would largely comprise existing or linked trips rather than entirely new journeys, and therefore there were no highway grounds on which to recommend refusal.

 

The Planning Officer addressed concerns raised by neighbouring residents regarding the site exit and the potential for customers using the petrol station to obstruct access to the adjacent park home site. It was noted that the entry and exit lanes were clearly marked with directional arrows and that a defined route through the forecourt had been provided.

 

Concerns regarding increased litter and anti-social behaviour were also considered. It was advised that it was difficult to directly attribute such issues to 24-hour operation of the site. Adequate litter bins were available within the area, and a member of staff would remain on site at all times. CCTV coverage and site lighting would also contribute to site security and management.

 

In conclusion, it was advised that the development was considered acceptable in terms of its layout, scale and design. The proposal was supported by noise and lighting assessments that had been reviewed by the relevant Dorset Council teams, and it was also considered acceptable in highway safety terms.

 

Public representation was received from Alan Poole and Christine Wilson, in objection to the application. They raised concerns as residents of the residential park located behind the garage. They stated that there were existing issues with the garage including noise disturbance when the garage opens, conflict with users of the garage blocking the entrance to the park and users of the garage accessing the park for dog walking. They were concerned about increased opening hours as they did not believe there was sufficient demand to justify the 24-hour opening times and were concerned about increased noise and light pollution.

 

The Planning Officer clarified that any need is a commercial issue rather than planning and that the applicant can apply for increased opening hours if they consider that there is demand. Alcohol sales would be restricted by licensing rather than planning. There should be a disabled parking space at the front of the shop. Anti-social behaviour would be the responsibility of the owner of the garage to report to the police rather than a planning issue.

 

In response to members questions officers provided the following responses:

·       The distance between the rear of the filling station and nearest residential dwellings was approximately 8.5m.

·       The current planning consent permitted opening hours between 06:00 – 23:00.

·       The Planning Officer was not aware that any enforcement action had been taken in regard to opening outside of permitted hours.

·       The most recent consent for the garage was granted in 2022, and it was believed that it opened in 2024. Before that there was an established commercial use.

·       Condition 3 would restrict the times of waste collection by vehicles, however it was considered to be unreasonable to restrict the times that smaller waste bins were emptied.

·       A condition regarding lighting was included in the recommendation.

·       If planning conditions were not adhered to there would be an enforcement process and failure to comply with either enforcement notice or breach of condition notice would be an offence.

·       The majority of the access road into the residential park was owned by the park operator.

 

It was proposed by Cllr Coombs and seconded by Cllr Skeats, to approve the application, with an additional condition requiring an acoustic fence to be erected on the rear boundary, because of the increased hours of use resulting in additional noise impact on nearby residents. It was agreed to leave details and materials of the acoustic fences to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Meeting Adjourned 11:11 – 11:19

 

Draft wording of the proposed condition was presented to members and the proposer and seconder confirmed that they were content with the wording.

 

Upon being put to the vote the proposal to grant the application, with an additional condition for the installation of an acoustic fence, fell.

 

It was proposed by Cllr Ezzard and seconded by Cllr Robinson, that the application be refused on the grounds that the increased hours of operation would lead to an unacceptable level of noise disturbance for the residents of the nearby park home.

 

Cllr Coombs left the meeting at 11:33.

 

The meeting was adjourned 11:35 – 11:53, to allow officers to provide a draft form of wording for the reason for refusal.

 

One member raised concern about refusing the application and stated that should the decision be appealed successfully there would be no means of mitigating the impacts of the application.

 

Upon being put to a vote, the motion to refuse the application fell.

 

It was proposed by Cllr Bryan and seconded by Cllr Skeats that the application be approved in accordance with the officer’s recommendation and with an additional condition requiring details of the installation of acoustic fencing to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for agreement and the acoustic fence to be erected before the increased hours of operation are permitted. The precise wording of the condition would be delegated to officers. Cllr Bryan also requested that officers notify the applicant that they are currently in breach of their existing planning permission.

 

Decision: That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the appendix to these minutes.'