Agenda item

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

The Committee considered application 3/21/1556/FUL for the redevelopment of Wimborne Market to continuing care community comprising of 67 age restricted apartments, 26 age restricted bungalows, 6 age restricted chalet bungalows, one wellness centre, 9 open market houses, parking , highway improvements and pedestrian link (description amended 24.09.2021 as agreed to include dwelling numbers) at Wimborne Market, Station Terrace, Wimborne.

 

The Committee were informed that the application had been referred to the Committee by the Head of Planning due to the scale of development and in the public interest and that consideration at this time was due to the fact that there was an appeal for a previous refusal – on the grounds of the need for affordable housing, heathland mitigation and flooding to be adequately addressed - which was imminently due to be heard at a public inquiry and the current scheme was seeking to overcome and address the previous reasons for refusal. Members recognised that given this it was therefore important to get a decision as soon as possible, as this could have a significant bearing upon the twin track appeal.

 

With the aid of a visual presentation, and taking account the detail in the report, officers provided context of what the main proposals, principles and planning issues of the development were; how these were to be progressed; how the development would contribute to meeting housing needs; and what this entailed. The presentation focused on not only what the development entailed and its detailed design, but what effect it would have on residential amenity and the character the area, taking into account the policies against which this application was being assessed.

 

The officer provided an update that Condition 21 had been amended to specify the retirement living aspects and accommodation only – so as to not infer that the 9 open market houses were included – with the reason being amended too to state that the parking was specific to the aged restricted development.

 

Plans and photographs provided an illustration of the location, orientation,

dimensions – form, bulk, size and mass - and appearance of the development

and of the individual properties, with examples being given of how typical

properties would be designed, along with their ground floor plans; how it

would look; proposed street scenes; the materials to be used; access and

highway considerations; environmental considerations; drainage and water management considerations, the means of landscaping, screening and open space provision and its setting within that part of Wimborne Minster and the wider landscape. Flooding, heathland mitigation and affordable housing issues were all given particular consideration.

 

The site was still currently in occasional use as a market - but this was to shortly cease - and currently contained a number of late 20th century market buildings, covered areas and a multi-storey car park, all being situated on tarmacked hardstanding with surface car parking available on site too.

 

Officers showed the development’s relationship with other adjacent residential

development and how the buildings were designed to be in keeping with the

characteristics of the established local environment. The characteristics and

topography of the site was shown and its relationship with the highway

network. Views into the site and around it was shown, which provided a satisfactory understanding of all that was necessary.

 

Moreover, with regard to financial information of the benefits of the proposal, officers explained what contributions were to be secured through Section 106 legal agreement, these being:

 

• £111,164 towards heathland mitigation

• £1,066,219 towards affordable housing

 

together with a net increase in 20 jobs, were considered to be of material consideration to the application.

 

In summary, the officer’s assessment considered the acceptability of the proposal in relation to the Development Plan, taken as a whole, and all other materials considerations, with this being considered in relation to the social, economic, and environmental benefits to be provided by the proposal. Therefore, it was considered the proposal was acceptable in relation to material planning considerations with all significant planning matters having been appropriately, or adequately, addressed. Previous reasons for refusal - relating to drainage, heathland mitigation and affordable housing contributions - had now been overcome with the submission of satisfactory additional information and the completion of the S106 Legal Agreement securing required contributions, so this formed the basis of the recommendation being made by officers to approve the application.

 

The Committee were notified of written submissions and officers read these direct to the Committee – being appended to these minutes. Having heard what was said, officers responded to some of the pertinent issues raised, being confident that each one could be addressed by the provisions of the application.

 

Formal consultation had seen comments from Wimborne Minster Town Council, primarily regarding issues about the highway and parking aspects of the application, and from Colehill Parish Council, who were objecting on much the same grounds. The Environment Agency raised no objection on the basis that conditions regarding flooding, drainage and water management would be enacted. Officers updated on the number of public representations received – this being 6 objecting to and 3 supporting the application.

 

The opportunity was then given for members to ask questions of the

presentation and what they had heard, in seeking clarification of aspects so

as to have a better understanding in coming to a decision.

Some important points raised were and which they considered still required clarification were :-

• how access arrangements and traffic flows would be managed and how this had been assessed

• how flooding, surface water and drainage issues would be satisfactorily managed, particularly in respect of the area around Leigh Road, which already experienced issues before, very recently in some cases

• what heathland mitigation there was to be and how this would be applied

·        what energy efficient measures were being applied

·        how meaningful social interaction could be encouraged between the development and areas in and around Wimborne 

·        how the affordable housing element of the application could be best applied to benefit the area, if at all practicable.

 

Officers addressed the questions raised – and what clarification was needed - providing what they considered to be satisfactory answers, which the Committee understood to be, and saw, as generally acceptable.

 

Of importance was that officers considered the flooding, water management and drainage issues to be addressed by virtue of conditions and, in the absence of any objection from the Environment Agency (provided these conditions were enacted) and having assessed the available evidence thoroughly, were confident that those concerns relating to water management could be satisfactorily addressed. There was also no reason to believe that surface water run off would inadvertently worsen the effect on surrounding roads and, indeed, the measures being taken could well serve to alleviate matters to a degree.

 

Similarly given the assurance by the Highways Officer that the highway and traffic management issues could be successfully accommodated as part of the development and having analysed the evidence in respect of this, officers were satisfied that this had been suitably assessed.

 

Officers informed members that there was provision in the conditions for the need for 10% of the total regulated energy used to be from renewable, low-carbon, and decentralised energy sources, with district heating and/or power facilities being considered too. Whatever green energy provision was practicable would be given consideration and applied as necessary - and Building Regulations providing for certain criteria to be met for energy efficient measures and insulation, to meet the necessary standards - but there was no requirement for any specific application.

 

One of the two Local Ward members, Councillor Shane Bartlett, took the opportunity to address the Committee. Whilst he had reservations that the site could have been better used, in his opinion, for alternative commercial development, he recognised the need for such accommodation within the town, that there was a need to make the best use of the land, and this development would contribute towards meeting the need for housing. In being assured that the maintenance of the development’s road network would be managed satisfactorily, that the flooding issues would be satisfactorily addressed and that that if there was an opportunity for affordable housing in the vicinity of Wimborne to be actively pursued, then on that basis, he felt obliged to support the application given there were no material considerations on which it could reasonably be refused. Although recognising it was not a planning consideration, he considered that given the significant increase of housing across Wimborne in recent years, this should be seen to justify the need for a substantial supermarket within the town.

 

The other local Ward member for Wimborne Minster - Councillor David Morgan - was of a similar view to Councillor Bartlett on what use the site could have been put too, but again supported the application as it stood.

 

The issue raised that the allocation of affordable housing should be within Wimborne, or at least the old East Dorset district area, was echoed by other former East Dorset members as they considered the benefits of this should be maintained as close to the development as possible. However, officers explained the criteria for such allocation and, whilst the affordable housing could not necessarily be guaranteed for the Wimborne or East Dorset area, the Committee were assured that this would be applied so that an identifiable need was met, based on its deliverability, an available site and the viability of the scheme so there was flexibility in how and where this could be best applied.

 

From debate, the majority of the Committee considered the proposal to be acceptable - understanding the fundamental issue of housing land supply, the need for accommodation of this sort and in making the best use of the land available – and considered that this development would significantly contribute to meeting the identified housing supply need within Dorset and should be seen to be beneficial. They considered this development to be a significant improvement on what was already there and would be an asset to the town and the needs of its residents. They also considered that the outstanding issues previously identified as requiring attention had now been satisfactorily addressed and, as such, progress could now be made.

 

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application and an

understanding of all this entailed; having taken into account the officer’s report

and presentation; the written representations; and what they had heard at the

meeting, in being proposed by Councillor Shane Bartlett and seconded by

Councillor David Tooke, on being put to the vote, the Committee agreed - by

7:1, with one abstention by Councillor Alex Brenton - to be minded to grant permission, subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 10 of the officer’s report and in the officer’s presentation update, with the enactment of their ‘minded to’ decision being made by the Head of Planning.

 

Resolved

1a)That planning permission be minded to be granted, subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 10 of the report and in the officer’s presentation update, and the completion of a legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in a form to be agreed by the Legal Services Manager to secure the following:

 

- £111,164 towards heathland mitigation

- £1,066,219 towards affordable housing

 

Or

 

1b) Refuse permission if the legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) is not completed by 6 months from the date of the Committee or such extended time as agreed by the Head of Planning.

 

2)Having taken into consideration the Committee’s minded to decision, the

delegation to the Head of Planning to be authorised to grant permission be enacted, subject to the completion of a legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in a form to be agreed by the Legal Services Manager, to secure the following:

 

- £111,164 towards heathland mitigation

- £1,066,219 towards affordable housing

 

Reasons for Decisions

• The principle of development was acceptable. • The number of residential units and mix of unit sizes were considered to be appropriate for the site. • The proposed highway layout was acceptable and sufficient parking was proposed. • The proposal was considered to be acceptable in its design and general visual impact on the character of the area and the adjacent conservation area. • Required heathland mitigation and affordable housing contribution would be secured by legal agreement. • The proposal was considered acceptable and there were no material circumstances which would warrant refusal of this application.