Minutes - Planning Committee - 18 June 2009

BOROUGH OF POOLE

PLANNING COMMITTEE

18 JUNE 2009

The Meeting commenced at 9:30am and concluded at 1:03pm.

Present:

Councillor Mrs Stribley (Chairman)

Councillor Mrs Walton (Vice-Chairman)

Councillors Allen, Burden, Mrs Butt, Mrs Long, Mrs Moore (substituting for Councillor Trent), Wilkins and Wilson.

Also present:

Councillors Brooke, Eades and Leverett.

Members of the public present: 20 approximately

PC17.09APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Trent.

PC18.09MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 14th May 2009 be approved as a correct record, subject to minor amendments to Policy numbers.

Arising from a question by a Member regarding the need to refer to specific Member names in the Minutes, the Clerk advised that it was normal practice within this Authority to record Ward Councillor comments by name and to refer to other comments as ‘a Member’.

PC19.09DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillors Allen, Burden, Mrs Butt, Mrs Long, Mrs Moore, Mrs Stribley, Mrs Walton, Wilkins and Wilson declared a personal interest in Plans List items 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 by virtue of the proximity of these five application sites to properties owned by fellow Councillors/colleagues.

In addition:-

Councillors Mrs Butt (as Chairman of the Licensing Committee) and Wilson declared a personal interest in Plans List item 5.

PC20.09USE OF VOTING CARDS

Each Member had been given a set of three coloured cards held together by a treasury tag.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration Services advised the Committee that they were to be used for voting purposes, i.e., green For a proposal, red Against and yellow to Abstain.

This system had been devised as a simple compromise to Recommendation 5 of the Pitt Report, which suggested that “where decisions are not unanimous, a record should be kept of Councillors abstaining and voting for and against the motion. Members still retained the option to ask for their names and how they voted to be recorded in the Minutes.

He stated that following the publication and recommendations of the Pitt Report he had attended the AGM of the Branksome Park, and Canford Cliffs Residents’ Association to explain what action was being taken to implement the recommendations.

A Member indicated that he was not happy with the proposed system and wanted to see recorded voting in place.

A Member expressed strong views about Residents’ Associations having been consulted in advance of the Planning Committee on this matter. Having been a Member of the Planning Committee for 12 years he was offended that he was being told about a proposal after the event. He considered that electronic voting should be investigated.

A Member said the colour cards could be a good aid whilst two Members supported the proposal for a trial period.

A Member felt it would be a good aide memoir but said she always kept a note of how she voted.

RESOLVED that the use of coloured voting cards be approved for a trial period.

For:7 Against: 1Abstention: 1

The Head of Planning and Regeneration Services left the Meeting.

PC21.09MERLEY COURT TOURING PARK, MERLEY HOUSE, POOLE – USE OF LAND FOR THE SITING OF 12 HOLIDAY LODGE CARAVANS (AS AMENDED BY ARBORICULTURAL METHOD STATEMENT SUBMITTED ON 27/2/00) APP/08/29990/F/018

Members were reminded that at the Meeting of the Planning Committee held on 14 May 2009, it was resolved to refuse this Application due to the loss of provision for touring caravans, which was seen as an important part of the Borough of Poole’s tourism offer and therefore harmful to the tourism economy of the Borough. Officers were asked to consider appropriate wording supported by Policies for refusing the Application. No other concerns were raised by Members (Minute PC13.09(i) refers).

Following closer scrutiny and discussion with Strategic Planning, Officers advised that there was not a Core Strategy Policy/Local Plan Policy or Structure Plan Policy that could support the indentified concern of Members. Therefore no planning decision had been issued to date.

In acknowledging these concerns, and in order to ensure that the caravans would remain as holiday accommodation only, Officers had sourced additional conditions that appeared to meet these concerns and the objections to prevent the creation of permanent self-contained accommodation in the Green Belt.

Accordingly, the Committee was recommended to:-

(a)Rescind the Resolution passed on 14 May 2009 to refuse planning permission (Minute PC13.09(i) refers;

(b)Resolve to grant planning permission subject to the conditions previously recommended in the Report to the Planning Committee on 14 May 2009 (Appendix 1 to this Report; and

(c)Impose the following additional condition:-

“The individual lodges (cabins/chalets) shall not be occupied by any individual or group of persons for a period in excess of 28 days in any three month period.

Reason

To ensure that the holiday accommodation is not used as a permanent dwelling and that a tourism function is maintained on the site”.

Ward Councillor Mrs Long stated that this development was in the Green Belt and it was important to ensure that it did not develop into an eyesore. She suggested a condition to replace the cabins every 10 years. It was pointed out that the cabins were built to last 30 years and replacement after only 10 years would be too expensive.

A Member stated that there were 3 caravan parks in Poole, which provided touring pitches and this Application proposed a loss of this facility. He considered that the cabins were not caravans and an Officer from Strategic Planning should be available to explain why they were classed as caravans. Policy TO13 stated that there was a shortage equivalent to 18%. He asked that his name be recorded in the Minutes voting against the Application.

RESOLVED that

(a)the Resolution passed on 14 May 2009 to refuse planning permission (Minute PC13.09) refers) be rescinded;

(b)planning permission be granted subject to a Section 106 Agreement to secure the revocation of Application Ref: 6861/20 relating to winter storage of caravans; and

(c)the following conditions:

Informative Notes

Voting:

Recommendation (a) – 6 For,1 Against, 2 Abstentions

Recommendation (b) and (c) – 5 For, 1 Against, 3 Abstentions

(Councillor Allen asked that his Vote against the Application be recorded in the Minutes).

PC22.09COUNCIL CREST

A Member advised the Committee that the Poole Pottery Coat of Arms had not been put back on the wall of the Waterfront Museum. He stated that the Planning Committee imposed conditions on others and the Local Authority had, in this case, failed to follow its own conditions.

The Planning Officer said that this matter had already been raised with the Head of Library Services who had been told the Coat of Arms had to go back on the wall.

PC23.09PLANNING APPLICATIONS

The Committee considered the Planning Applications as set out in Schedule 1 of the Minutes and dealt with them therein.

PC24.09INFORMATION ITEMS

(i)Appeals Lodged

(ii)Appeal Decisions

CHAIRMAN

SCHEDULE 1

SCHEDULE TO THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE – 18 JUNE 2009

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

It was noted that this Application had been the subject of a Site Visit on 17 June 2009.

Mr Mallett, Applicant, made two points:-

• He had done everything possible to work with the Planning Officers from the pre-application proposal to the present to produce an acceptable scheme and he believed that the proposed smaller dwelling would work well on the site.

• The Planning Report was the view of the planning professionals who believed this was an acceptable scheme.

Ward Councillor Brooke expressed views, including:-

• The division of the plots changed the character of the area.

• The proposal would create two very small, inadequate plots and gardens.

• The need to remove an existing extension and put in another suggested the plot was too small.

• The positioning of the garage next to No.32 Fontmell Road would create noise and disturbance and change the character of the area.

• There were drainage issues.

Councillor Brooke requested that if the Committee was mindful to grant planning permission, two additional measures should be included:-

(i)That no building work to take place until the extension had been removed;

(ii)That the front of property be included within the removal of Permitted Development Rights set out in condition No.7.

After discussion, the Committee requested the imposition of conditions to include:-

• No further windows/dormer windows to be constructed in the rear and side elevations without planning permission.

• No further extensions of the new or retained dwelling without planning permission.

• Landscaping condition, including provision for planting.

• Prior to the construction of the new dwelling, the extension to be demolished.

• Permeable surfaces of the parking and turning areas.

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to (a) a Section 106 Agreement to secure financial contributions of:-

1.£2260 (plus administration fee) towards the provision of recreational facilities in accordance with Policy L17 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by the Secretary of State direction September 2007).

2.£1719 (plus administration fee) towards mitigating the harm to SSSI Dorset Heathlands in accordance with the Interim Planning Framework and Policies NE15, NE16 and NE17 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by the Secretary of State direction September 2007).

3.£1046 (plus administration fee) towards promoting modes of transport other than the car in accordance with Policy T13 of the Poole Local Plan First Alteration Adopted 2004 (as amended by the Secretary of State direction September 2007); and

(b) the following conditions:-

Voting:9 Grant0 Refuse0 Abstentions