Agenda item

Construction of new vehicular and pedestrian access, surface water management ponds, open space and landscaping associated with the adjacent Wessex Grounds Residential Development.

Cllr Jean Dunseith moved to the public seating area of the room and did not take part in the debate.  She left the room during the vote on this application.

The Committee considered an application for the construction of a new vehicular and pedestrian access, surface water management ponds, open space and landscaping associated with the adjacent Wessex Grounds residential development.

The application was introduced by the Area Lead - Major Applications Western Team who advised that an update sheet circulated to members at the meeting included an amendment to the description of the development to omit the words "associated with the adjacent Wessex Grounds Residential Development", amendments to conditions 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 and a further representation on behalf of the owner of land to either side of the road to the north.

Members were shown a location plan, softworks plan, plans showing the existing and relocated access, aerial photo of Wessex Stadium and photos showing views of the stadium in relation to the surrounding area.

Cllr John Worth - Dorset Council Ward Member - Chickerell, addressed the Committee to say that the access would be an improvement. 

Cllr Jean Dunseith, speaking as Dorset Council Ward Member for Chickerell, considered that the position of the new access was too close to the Wessex roundabout and would result in cars queuing to get onto the roundabout from the proposed development at peak times due to a single entrance / exit road.

Emma Barnett, the Agent, spoke in support of the application, stating that it was principally the same as that approved in 2014.

Members asked why the application was being considered when Weymouth Football Club had no plans to have the site developed.

Officers confirmed that a condition requiring a replacement stadium was included when outline planning permission for a residential scheme was granted in 2014 and it also formed part of a Section106 Agreement.  Therefore a developer could not implement the scheme until such time as a replacement stadium was built and ready for use elsewhere.  There was a period of 2 years to implement the residential scheme and provide a replacement stadium if the reserved matters application was granted.

Despite the lack of objection on highways grounds, members who knew the area well considered the new access to be too close to the roundabout, given the volume of traffic at peak times, traffic speeds onto the roundabout, school routes and additional parking on match days.  Concern was also expressed regarding access for cyclists and pedestrians given the narrow footpath.  They considered the application to be precipitous in that it relied on other applications that had not yet been considered.

The Committee was informed that the Highways Authority owned a limited section of the verge and therefore the proposed access would provide improved visibility splays within land owned by the Highways Authority.

Cllr Nick Ireland proposed refusal of the application as it was against paragraph 91(a) of the NPPF.  He further stated that a condition to ensure that the cycle path continued into the site should be considered. The proposal was seconded by Cllr David Shortell.

The Highways Officer advised that alterations to the roundabout to reduce the number of lanes onto the roundabout from 3 to 2 lanes had been implemented in 2019 and there would be funding to provide a Toucan crossing off of Wessex roundabout to connect Radipole Lane to the site.

The Chairman proposed that the application be deferred to allow better understanding of the proposed crossing, cycleways and pavements and wider issues of safety.  This was seconded by Cllr Peter Barrow.  Cllr Nick Ireland and Cllr David Shortell agreed to withdraw the proposal to refuse the application. Cllr O’Leary and Cllr Barrow were concerned about wider safety issues of access and parking and sought for them to be addressed not just cycle paths.

Decision: That the application be deferred for the reasons outlined in the appendix to these minutes.