Decisions

Reason(s) for Decision

To provide evidence that the provisions of clause 4.14 of the Supplemental s.106 Agreement dated 16^th June 2005 no longer apply to the property so that it can be sold by the current owner

Other Option(s) considered

None

To provide a certificate providing evidence that the provisions of clause 4.14 of the Supplemental s.106 Agreement dated 16^th June 2005 (the Agreement) no longer apply to 21 Kingfisher Avenue Gillingham and that the Council would not seek to enforce those provisions in the future.

This was required as the property had already been released from those provisions in 2015 but neither the Council nor the solicitors for the parties involved had retained a copy of the decision

The decision was by John Sellgren, the Executive Director of Place who, by virtue of Delegation 152(c) of the Officer Scheme of Delegation of the Constitution, has the power:

The Major Projects Officer set out the report and the application to erect an 80 bedroom Care Home with associated parking, landscaping and amenity space. The application site comprised of 0.75ha of greenfield land and was located to the south of Christchurch Road.   There were a number of protected trees on the site which were proposed to be retained.

The accommodation would be provided over two storeys, with a main entrance to the building facing Christchurch Road and a servicing entrance to the north east of the building.  Vehicular access to the site would be via a new access off of Christchurch Road and parking would be provided at the front of the site for 35 vehicles. The site would consist of community facilities as well as bedrooms.  There was a good level of amenity and the extending roof line would prevent glare and heat build-up in the building.   In conclusion the proposal for the site conformed to the requirements of the general policies of the local plan and overall the proposal represented sustainable development.

Vote to Continue Meeting

As the meeting had reached its three hour limit and in accordance with the constitution, the Chairman interrupted the debate to seek a vote to continue the meeting to its conclusion. This was so proposed by Cllr S Bartlett, seconded by Cllr C Brooks and agreed by the committee.

Public Participation

Cllr Philip Bamborough, Chairman of West Parley Parish Council objected to the application on the ground that this proposal was  speculative and out of keeping with the surrounding area.  The design and scale of the building was overbearing.  There were also concerns expressed regarding traffic safety.

Cllr Andrew Parry, Local Ward Member expressed disappointment at a care home on this site rather than a community use.  This was not what was expected or required by the local community. He felt that the proposed building was of poor design.  If the care home was to provide high dependency level of care, he was anxious that there would be  insufficient car parking on the site.   If members were minded to approve, he asked that they request a CIL for the benefit of wider development for the community.

Oral representation were received from Mr Adrian Kearly as the applicant’s agent. This was a proposed residential nursing care home which was badly needed across Dorset. The home would help reduce bed blocking and reduce accommodation shortfall. There was an increasing need for specialist care in the catchment area and the NHS had raised no objection to the plans.  It was considered that the car park was acceptable and staff would be working shifts outside of normal office hours.  Full CIL contributions were also part of the application.

In response to some of the comments made, the Development Management Manager advised that community use did not preclude a care home on the site. In planning terms this was an acceptable proposal and no other use had been put forward.   The proposal also met the general requirements of the planning policies.

Debate

There were some reservations expressed in respect of the design and size of the building and some members were concerned that it would be overbearing.  It was also disappointing that there was no direct access to the SANG for the residents of the care home as the use of green space was important for resident’s health.

Overall most members felt that the site and proposed building was acceptable development for the area and the increase care provision was an important factor for the local and surrounding areas of Dorset.

It was proposed by Cllr S Bartlett seconded by Cllr A Benton that the application be approved.  Before being put to the vote members discussed amending the following condition “ There shall be no pets on the site at any time” to read “There shall be no pets on the site at any time, with the exception of therapy animals”.

Upon being put to the vote the amendment was carried.

Decision

GRANTED subject to conditions, as amended and as set out in the appendix to these minutes.

Cllr Tooke left the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest to report.

The Chairman of the Committee, Councillor T Coombe had no declaration to make but she read out the following statement to all those present at the meeting:-

“The application from Wyatt Homes to be considered on the agenda related to a site previously allocation by East Dorset District Council in its Core Strategy.  I was previously a member of East Dorset District Council and at the time voted in support of the submission of the Core Strategy to the Secretary of State.

I have taken advice from Dorset Council’s Monitoring Officer about my role as Chairman of this Committee and Whether I should take part in this meeting.  The Monitoring Officer is the Council’s Chief Legal Officer and responsible for ensuring that the Council’s actions are both lawful and uphold standards of behaviour.

The Monitoring Officer has advised me that I have no disclosable pecuniary interest under the Localism Act 2011 to prevent me from taking part in he meeting.  I have been advised by the Monitoring Officer that I have no interest to declare.

In addition, the Monitoring Officer has advised that simply having voted on the submission of the Core Strategy to the Secretary of State for examination in public by an Independent Planning Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State, does not prevent me or indeed any other councillor in that position from taking part to decide this specific planning application. I do not have a predetermined view about the application as a result of having voted on the core strategy and I am approaching the application before the committee completely afresh.”

Reasons for Decision

Dorset Council has an established policy and procedure for the processing of requests from production companies and others for authority to film on Council owned land.  The Town Council has requested that Dorset Council provide this service in respect of their land and it is in the interests of Dorset Council to accede to this request as it ensures a degree of consistency of approach in the handling of applications for permits thereby making it easier to film in Dorset and promote the area.  Dorset Council will receive a commission from film permit application fees and so provision of this service should be cost neutral.

Alternative Options considered

Dorset Council could refuse the request but this is not in the interests of Dorset Council, the Town Council or the public.

To act as an agent of Weymouth Town Council in processing third-party requests for filming permits in respect of Weymouth Town Council land.

The following motion was proposed by Cllr K Clayton seconded by Cllr M Roe and supported by Cllrs B Heatley, J Orrell, N Ireland, D Bolwell, R Tarr, B Ezzard, D Taylor, S Williams, M Rennie, D Tooke and R Hughes

“We know that climate breakdown is already causing serious damage around the world. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2018 ‘Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C’ describes the enormous harm that a 2°C average rise in global temperatures is likely to cause compared with a 1.5°C rise and confirms that limiting Global Warming to 1.5°C may still be possible with ambitious action. As many local councils now recognise, and as the outline 'Climate Emergency' motion we passed in May recognises, we have a duty to act NOW, and cannot wait for national governments to change their policies.

In this context, this motion proposes that Dorset Council commits to:

1.    Make the Council’s activities net-zero carbon by 2030;

2.    Work with partners and stake-holders to achieve the same across the whole of the Council area;

3.    Develop a Dorset wide transport strategy that discourages car use, encourages walking and cycling, and drastically improves rail and bus services;

4.    Develop an energy strategy that provides local renewable energy generation and storage, increases the efficiency of buildings and addresses fuel poverty;

5.    Develop a new Dorset Local Plan that ensures all planning decisions are consistent with a shift to net-zero carbon by 2030;

6.    End any investment by the Dorset Local Government Pension Fund in the fossil fuel industry or other activities that have an impact on climate change;

7.    Ensure that our net-zero carbon by 2030 ambition is reflected in ALL strategies and plans, that all policy papers include a Climate Impact Assessment;

8.    Require the cross-party climate change panel to report back to Council, within nine months, to provide a time table and action plan detailing how all the above can be achieved;

9.    Take steps to proactively consult and include the opinions of residents, particularly young people, in all of the above, and consider setting up citizens’ assemblies; and

10. Call on the UK Government to provide the powers, resources and help with funding to make this possible, and lobby local MPs to do likewise.”

Decision

That the Notice of Motion be referred to the Climate Change Executive Advisory Panel for consideration and report back to Full Council.