Agenda item

Application for approval of reserved matters for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale in relation to outline approval WD/D/14/001938.

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 approval of reserved matters for access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale in relation to outline approval WD/D/14/001938.

 

The Area Lead - Major Applications Western Team advised members that it was a condition of the application that it could not be implemented until an access was provided.

 

Members were shown the site layout, softworks plan, floor plans, elevations, materials, cross section and street elevation, materials palette, aerial photo

and photos of the application site in relation to the surrounding area.

 

An update sheet.circulated to the Committee at the meeting included an additional plan to be added to the condition 1 plans list and a summary of 2 additional representations which were read out at the meeting.

 

Cllr John Worth, Dorset Council Ward Member - Chickerell stated that a shop should be considered for this isolated site as well as improvements to public transport.

 

Cllr Jean Dunseith, speaking as Dorset Council Ward Member - Chickerell, stated that Chickerell Town Council and the Civic Society were against the proposal. She had spoken against it in 2014 when outline permission for 150 -170 homes was granted and this scheme was at the top end of that number.  Condition 16 specified that development should not commence until a facility to replace Wessex Stadium was constructed and made available for use and yet no application for a stadium had been forthcoming. She was also concerned that there would be no affordable housing and no Section 106 funding other than £200k for the access road and footpath.

 

Emma Barnett, the Agent, stated that the principle of development had already been established and either met or exceeded space standards.  There had been no objections expressed by the Urban Design or Highways officers and £200k would be made available for cycle and pedestrian improvements. 

 

Members debated the lack of progress in building a new stadium, the lack of affordable housing, the positive prospect of a new bus route incorporating Southill and the confusing nature of 3 different applications in respect of the same site.

 

Legal advice was given that the planning authority could not compel an applicant to make one application and that the 3 applications were closely linked.

 

After some discussion the Committee agreed to defer the decision on this application until such time as the report on viability had been considered.

 

Note: the debate and decision below was taken after conclusion of the debate and vote on the viability report had concluded.

 

Following consideration of the report regarding viability of the Section 106 Agreement associated with outline planning permission WD/D/14/001938, members noted the lack of reference to a cycleway or number of charging points for electric vehicles, poor design and appearance, lack of affordable housing, overdevelopment of the site and concerns regarding the access.

 

The Committee was adjourned for 5 minutes for officers to discuss the reasons for refusal, following which the Legal Officer asked members to provide specific reasons for refusal.

 

Members advised that refusal should be on the grounds of design and appearance and access.

 

A further short adjournment took place for officers to form the reasons for refusal based on the comments made by members.  The Committee reconvened at 12:50pm

 

Proposed by Cllr Kate Wheller, seconded by Cllr Louie O'Leary.

 

Decision: That the application be refused for the reasons outlined below and in the appendix to these minutes.

 

1.   The proposed development by reason of its design and materials is not in keeping with nearby development. It is considered to be poor quality design with an urban character in a rural setting and is bland and lacking in distinctive character. Hence the proposed development is contrary to Policies ENV10 and ENV12 of the West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (2015) and paragraphs 127 and 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

 

2.   The proposed development having only one access point lacks permeability and constitutes poor urban design with a lack of choice of routes into, out of and through the site contrary to Policy ENV11 of the West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (2015) and paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).