Our Ref: - Dorsetforyou.com

Stratton House 

58/60 High West Street 

Dorchester 

Dorset DT1 1UZ 

Committee Administrator: 

Linda Quinton 

Direct Line: (01305) 252234 

Tel: (01305) 251010 

Fax: (01305) 251481 

Minicom: (01305) 261237 

DX: Dorchester 8724 

Website: www.westdorset-dc.gov.uk 

PLEASE NOTE 

CHANGE OF DAY 

Chief Executive 

D M Clarke 

Email: cmtteadmin@westdorset-dc.gov.uk 

10 th February 2004 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL EAST 

COMMITTEE – 18 th FEBRUARY 2004 

Dear Sir/Madam 

A meeting of the DEVELOPMENT CONTROL EAST COMMITTEE will be held in the 

COUNCIL CHAMBER, STRATTON HOUSE, HIGH WEST STREET, DORCHESTER, 

DORSET on WEDNESDAY 18 TH FEBRUARY 2004 at 2.15 p.m. to consider the business on 

the under mentioned Agenda. 

Yours faithfully 

D M CLARKE 

Chief Executive 

REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED ANY LATER THAN 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING 

WILL NOT BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE COMMITTEE AND THE REPRESENTATIVES WILL 

NOT RECEIVE AN INVITATION TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE. OFFICERS WILL REFER 

TO ANY LATE REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED DURING THEIR PRESENTATIONS. 

LETTERS AND PHOTOGRAPHS CANNOT BE CIRCULATED TO COMMITTEE MEMBERS AT 

THE MEETING AND MEMBERS SHOULD NOT BE LOBBIED IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO AND 

DURING THE MEETING. 

Membership of this Committee is as follows: 

Mr D J Barrett, Mr M V Clark, Mr I C Gardner, Mr E M Garrett, Mr S M Friar, Mr A F Horsington, 

Mrs E S Jones, Mrs N M Penfold, Mrs T M Seall, Mr P R Shorland. 

The following Members may attend and speak but not vote: 

Mr R W Coatsworth (Vice-chairman of Council) in the absence of Mrs N M Penfold (Chairman 

of Council) and the Leader and any Member of the Executive Committee (SO 22(c)) 

Ward Members as named on the Plans List 

Circulation: 

Full Agenda: Development Control East 

Committee Members; WDDC Officers; 

County Council Highways; Dorchester 

Library. 

Agenda front pages: 

Press; County Councillors – Dorchester area 

The agenda and reports will normally be available four days prior to the meeting on the 

District Council’s website at www.westdorset-dc.gov.uk (click on Council Committees). 

Chief Executive: DM Clarke 

Directors: D Evans; R S Scholes

A G E N D A 

1. APOLOGIES 

PAGE NO 

To receive any apologies for absence. 

2. MINUTES 

1 – 8 

To confirm the Minutes of the meetings of the Development Control 

East Committees held on 22 nd January 2004 

3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 

In accordance with the Code of Conduct, Members to declare the 

existence and the nature of any personal or personal prejudicial 

interests in the following items as defined in the Code and to indicate 

the action they will be taking when the item is considered.. 

Guidance Note 

Members are reminded that under the Code of Conduct it is the 

responsibility of individual Member to declare a personal or 

prejudicial interest. A Member who declares a personal interest 

may take part in the meeting and vote. If the interest is prejudicial, 

as defined by the Code, the Member must leave the room. 

Members with a prejudicial interest can still participate if a 

prescribed exception applies or a dispensation has been granted. 

4. DECLARATIONS OF PREDETERMINATION 

Members to declare if they consider that they have predetermined or 

may predetermine in the relation to the following items and to 

indicate the action they will be taking when the item is considered. 

Guidance Note 

It is the responsibility of individual Members to decide whether 

they have predetermined in relation to an item. Members who 

make a declaration should leave the room during the discussion 

and voting. 

Members who may wish to take part in the decision making 

process as a member of another committee, at which the item is to 

be considered, should decide whether they wish to participate at 

this stage.

PAGE NO 

5. PLANNING APPEALS 

To receive notification of appeals registered since the last meeting of 

the Committee. 

9 - 40 

6. DELEGATED APPLICATIONS 

To receive a report of applications approved and refused by the 

Development Services Manager. 

7. APPLICATION 1/E/2003/1549 – REYKOLT, FORMER HERRISON 

HOSPITAL, CHARLTON DOWN, CHARMINSTER. 

41 – 46 

47 – 50 

To consider a report by the Development Services Manager 

8. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 

51 - 123 

To consider applications for Planning Permission. 

A = Area Matters for Determination 

C = County Matters for Circ 18/84 Consultations for observation 

D = Recommendation to Council 

9. QUESTIONS 

To receive questions submitted by Members in writing to the Chief 

Executive and in respect of which appropriate notice has been given. 

10. URGENT ITEMS 

To consider any other items that the Chairman decides are urgent. 

11. DATE OF SITE VISIT 

Monday 1 st March 2004. 

12. EXEMPT BUSINESS 

GOLD PAGES 

To move the exclusion of the press and public for the following items 

in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information within the 

meaning of paragraph 12 of part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local 

Government Act 1972. 

13. MONKS HILL, LYONS WAY, MINTERNE MAGNA – EXEMPT. 

1 - 8 

To consider an exempt report by the Development Services Manager

Development Control East Committee Index of Applications 

18 February, 2004 

ITEM 

01 

1/E/2003/001319 

Erect 2No industrial buildings and covered links between proposed 

buildings and to existing building, together with associated parking, 

loading & storage areas & landscaping 

UNIT 23, ENTERPRISE PARK, PIDDLEHINTON, DORCHESTER, 

DT2 7UA 

Page No 51 

ITEM 

02 

1/E/2003/001954 

Erect 7No dwellings with associated car parking, modify existing 

vehicular & pedestrian access & provide a play area 

Land adjacent to The Coach & Horses Inn, WINTERBOURNE 

ABBAS 

Page No 52 – 

56 

ITEM 

03 

1/E/2003/001953 

Erect 2No residential dwellings with associated parking, modify 

existing vehicular & pedestrian access & provide a play area 

Land adjacent to the Coach & Horses Inn, WINTERBOURNE 

ABBAS 


61 

ITEM 

04 

1/E/2003/002473 

Erect 10 houses, 2 bungalows, 8 flats (in 2 blocks), erect bicycle 

stores and construct new vehicular and pedestrian access, construct 

new access road and car parking areas (revised scheme). 

LAND OFF SCHOOL HILL, CHICKERELL 

Page No 62 - 

69 

ITEM 

05 

1/E/2003/001802 

Partial demolition of boundary wall to create vehicular access and 

erect new retaining wall. 

Crossways, Bradford Road, SHERBORNE 

Page No 70 - 

72 

ITEM 

06 

1/E/2003/002271 

Partial demolition of stone boundary wall 

CROSSWAYS, BRADFORD ROAD, SHERBORNE, DT9 4BG 


75 

ITEM 

07 

1/E/2003/002122 

Erect single storey extension & carry out internal & external 

alterations to outbuilding 

101 NEWLAND, SHERBORNE, DT9 3DU 

Page No 76 - 

79

ITEM 

08 

1/E/2003/002255 

Demolish existing timber framed building & erect extension to 

dwelling 

UNIT 4, COLLEGIATE HOUSE, GREENHILL, SHERBORNE 

Page No 80 - 

84 

ITEM 

09 

1/E/2003/002254 

Partial demolition to remove timber framed building & erect 

extension to dwelling. Make internal & external alterations 

UNIT 4, COLLEGIATE HOUSE, GREENHILL, SHERBORNE 

Page No 85 - 

88 

ITEM 

10 

1/E/2003/002026 

Demolish existing outbuilding & erect 4No cottages with garages. 

Construct new vehicular & pedestrian access & sewage treatment 

plant 

Land at Brook Farm, CHESELBOURNE 

Page No 89 - 

93 

ITEM 

11 

1/E/2003/002375 

Erect 4No two storey terraced dwellings with courtyard parking & 

sitting/amenity area to the rear, modify existing vehicular access 

(AFFECTING SETTING OF LISTED BUILDING) 

MANOR FARMHOUSE, HIGH STREET, YETMINSTER, 

SHERBORNE, DT9 6LF 

Page No 94 - 

98 

ITEM 

12 

1/E/2003/002291 

Change of use of building to Auction Room 

CAMELOT HOUSE, THREE LANES END, PUDDLETOWN, 

DORCHESTER, DT2 8RR 


101 

ITEM 

13 

1/E/2003/001237 

Demolish part of existing building, erect extensions and make 

alterations to building. Construct new vehicular access. 

Dorford Baptist Church, Bridport Road, DORCHESTER 


109 

ITEM 

14 

1/E/2003/002314 

Erect 3No barn style "work at home" dwellings with garages. 

Construct new vehicular & pedestrian access and modify existing 

vehicular and pedestrian access 

HEATHFIELD, 6 WARMWELL ROAD, CROSSWAYS, 

DORCHESTER, DT2 8BS 

Page No 110 - 

115 

ITEM 

15 

1/E/2003/002270 

Erect lean-to extension to existing agricultural building 

CORNFIELDS, CHURCH LANE, FRAMPTON, DORCHESTER, DT2 

9NL 


118 

ITEM 

16 

1/E/2003/002326 

Use of land for stationing of an agricultural workers mobile home 

retain garden shed, greenhouse, poultry pen & two avairies 

LYON'S HILL, LYON'S GATE, MINTERNE MAGNA, DT2 7BD 

Page No 119 - 

123

Development Control East Committee – 22 nd January 2004 

WEST DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL EAST COMMITTEE 

22 nd January 2004 

At a meeting of the Development Control East Committee held in the Council Chamber, 

Stratton House, 58/60 High West Street, Dorchester on Thursday 22 nd January 2004 at 

2.15p.m. 

Present: 

Mrs T M Seall (Chairman) 

Mr P R Shorland (Vice-chairman) 

Mr D J Barrett, Mr M V Clark, Mr I C Gardner, Mr S M Friar, Mr A F Horsington, 

Mrs E S Jones 

Also attending: Mr M Pearce and Mr D L Smy 

Officers: 

Mr J Greenslade (Development Services Manager), Mr A Muir (Legal Services 

Manager and Monitoring Officer), Mr S Ludgate (Principal Planning Officer), 

Miss A Coles (Senior Planning Officer), Mr B Burden (Principal Planning Officer), 

Mr D Rogers (Senior Planning Officer), Mr G Cox (Senior Tree and Woodland 

Officer) and Mrs K Critchel (Administrative Officer) 

Also attending: Mr I Madgwick (Dorset County Council Highways) 

APOLOGIES 

100 Apologies for absence were received from Mr E M Garrett and Mrs N M Penfold 

(other Council business) 

MINUTES: Pages 1 – 9 

101 The Minutes of the meeting held on 18 th December 2003 were confirmed as a correct 

record and signed by the Chairman. 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 

102 There were no declarations of interest. 

DECLARATIONS OF PREDETERMINATION 

103 The Chairman declared an interest in respect of planning application 

1/E/2003/002023. She advised Members that she would leave the room while the 

item was considered. 

PLANNING APPEALS: Pages 10 – 37 

104 The following appeals had been received since the last Development Control East 

Committee: 

1/E/2003/1668 – 9 Roberts Place, Dorchester – Erect two storey rear extension – 

Delegated refusal. 

1


1/E/2003/1827 – Junction of A35/A352, adjacent to Max Gate Roundabout, 

Dorchester – Erect 10m high telecommunications pole with integral antennae, 

equipment cabinet and development ancillary thereto – Delegated refusal 

13/10/2003. 

1/E/2003/1099 – Home Barn Farm, Bradford Peverell – Develop land by the erection 

of 24 dwellings, village shop and business units (Class B1 Use) together with parking 

and garaging provisions. Construct new vehicular and pedestrian access – Appeal 

against non-determination. 

1/N/2003/0868 – Site at land to the rear of the former Abbey Primary School, 

Horsecastles, Sherborne – Land to the rear of the former Abbey Primary School, 

Horsecastles, Sherborne, Dorset – Appeal against refusal 14/11/2003. 

1/N/2002/1370 – Longacre, Springfield Farm, Halstock – Change of use from 

agricultural to the repair of agricultural vehicles and machinery together with repair, 

servicing and sale of used Land Rover vehicles and the fabrication of agricultural 

products – Tuesday 27 th January 2004 West Dorset District Council Offices, Stratton 

House, 58/60 High West Street, Dorchester. 

1/W/2003/510 – Barn at Brook Barton, Uploders, Loders – Relief from condition 2 of 

1/W/1997/0736 – the development hereby approved shall not be used otherwise than 

for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the existing dwelling known as Brook 

Barton – Tuesday 3 rd February 2004 The Marriage Room, Bridport Town Council 

Offices, Mountfield, Bridport. 

1/N/2003/1040 – Lyons Gate Caravan Park, Minterne Magna – Renewal of PA 

1/E/2000/472 – Erect mobile home for site operator – Appeal against refusal 

13/08/2003. 

The following decisions have been received: 

1/E/2003/0550 – Woodbine Cottage, Osmington – Convert part of existing dwelling to 

form new dwelling and construct new cottage and 2No double garages – Allowed 

5/12/2003 (Delegated decision) – Approx cost £100.00. 

1/E/2003/0594 – 1 High Street, Fordington, Dorchester – Make alterations to convert 

building to 6No self contained flats – Allowed 5/12/2003 (Delegated decision) – 

Approx cost £100.00. 

1/E/2003/0067 – St Marys Church, Puddletown – Erect new Parish Room with 

kitchen and toilet facilities within the Churchyard – Allowed 29/12/2003 (Committee 

decision) – Approx cost £100.00. 

1/W/2003/0224 – Flat at rear of 20A Broad Street, Lyme Regis – Change of use of 

store/workshop to self contained flat (Retrospective application) – Dismissed 

29/12/2003 – Approx cost £150.00. 

DELEGATED APPLICATIONS: Pages 38 – 41 

105 Members received and noted a list of applications delegated for determination by the 

Development Services Manager. 

2


APPLICATIONS – CATEGORY ‘A’: Pages 42 - 97 

106 Planning applications, details of which are set out in appendix 1 to these minutes, 

were submitted, together with Parish Council’s observations and the 

recommendations of the Development Services Manager. All representations 

received in respect of those applications were reported. With regard to application 

1/E/2003/2151 for the conversion of the Price of Wales at Puddletown, the 

Development Services Manager read out Policy SC5 of the Local Plan for Member’s 

clarification. With regard to application 1/E/2003/0869 for the kennels and cattery at 

Chickerell, the Committee requested that the Environmental Health Division continue 

to monitor the site and take necessary action as and when required. 

RESOLVED 

107 That the decision of the committee, in pursuance of the Town and Country Planning 

Act and the Town and County Planning General Development Orders, be as 

indicated in column (iii) of that appendix and the applications determined accordingly, 

provided that, where the decision cannot be accepted by the Director of Planning and 

Environment, the application be referred to Council and, subject to referral to the 

Secretary of State where appropriate. 

QUESTIONS 

108 There were no questions. 

URGENT ITEMS 

109 The Chairman reported that there were no urgent items. 

The meeting closed at 5.55pm 

3


DEVELOPMENT CONTROL EAST COMMITTEE – 22 nd January 2004 

Category ‘A’ – Applications determined by Committee 

APPENDIX 1 

Page 1 

Application 

No 

Applicant and Description of 

Development 

Resolution 

1/E/2003/002160 

Plots B 03 and 04 Fosters Field, Tinneys 

Lane, Sherborne DT9 3DZ – Erect 2 houses 

(amendment to planning permission 

1/N/2002/0423 to provide each house with a 

dormer window on the front elevation and a 

second floor window on the gable elevation) 

– C G Fry and Son Ltd 

Approve with conditions 

(i) Approval of materials for 

dormers. 

1/E/2003/002173 20 McCreery Road, Sherborne DT9 4DS – 

Erect extensions – Mr and Mrs Chandler 

Approve with conditions. 

(i) Material to match existing. 

Oral representations were received from Mr Mortimer in support of the application, Mr Hawkin of 

Cerne Valley Parish Council and Mr D Oliver, the applicants agent. 

1/E/2003/002308 

1/E/2003/002172 

The Existing Village Hall Site, Wills Lane 

and Land at Barton Lodge, The Folly, Cerne 

Abbas – Demolish existing Village Hall and 

redevelop site with terrace of 3 cottages 

with garaging and form new vehicular and 

pedestrian access; omit 2No approved 

semi-detached properties and replace with 

terrace of 3No thatched cottages, driveway, 

garaging and gazebo (affecting setting of 

listed building) – G W G Hunt 

Land adjoining The Forge, Bishops Lane, 

Bradford Abbas – Erect detached dwelling 

and construct new vehicular access 

(Approval of reserved matters 

1/N/2001/1800) – Mr S Dunford 

Delegate authority to Director to 

approve subject to: 

(i) Section 106 legal 

Agreement to ensure that the 

previously approved pair of 

semi detached dwellings are 

not built and commuted sum of 

£4,000 in respect of public open 

space/community facilities 

(ii) Design 

(iii) Materials 

(iv) Tree Protection 

(v) Hard and soft landscaping 

(vi) Levels 

(vii) Drainage 

(viii) Highways 

(ix) Parking 

(x) means of enclosure details 

(xi) windows treatment (timber 

to be used) 

Approve reserved matters with 

conditions 

(i) Materials 

(ii) Highways conditions 

4




APPENDIX 1 

Page 2 

Application 

No 


Development 

Resolution 

1/N/2003/002045 

1/E/2003/002266 

Mobile Home, Bridge Wood, Middlemarsh, 

Minterne Magna – Retain mobile caravan 

for occupation by forestry/horticultural 

worker – R and D Finney 

The Coach House, 1 East Hill, Charminster 

– Relief of Condition 2 of Planning 

Permission 1/E/1999/0618 limiting the use 

of converted coach house to holiday 

accommodation only – Mr J L Mand 

Mrs R R Joly 

Refuse 

Having regard to the submitted 

information the applicant has 

not demonstrated that there is 

an essential agricultural need 

for the retention of a temporary 

dwelling in this location. Hence 

the proposal is contrary to 

Policies SP3 and H5 of the 

adopted West Dorset District 

Local Plan, Settlement Policy 1 

of the approved Bournemouth, 

Dorset and Poole Structure 

Plan and PPG7 Annex 1. 

Delegate authority to the 

Director of Planning and 

Environment to approve subject 

to the completion of a Section 

106 Agreement restricting the 

occupation of the building to a 

carer employed by the 

applicants or family members. 

The Agreement would also tie 

the two the two properties 

together to prevent their 

separate sale or lease. 

5




APPENDIX 1 

Page 3 

Application 

No 


Development 

Resolution 

Oral representation was received from Mrs Shackleton of Owermoigne Parish Council. 

Oral representations were also received from Mr Dance the applicants agent. 

Mrs Seall, Chairman of the Committee declared an interest in the following application. She left the 

room while the item was considered. 

Mr Shorland, Vice-chairman took the Chair. 

1/E/2003/002023 

Owermoigne School, Moreton Road, 

Owermoigne – Erect 5No houses and 

construct new vehicular and pedestrian 

access – Mr C E Gabbarelli 

Delegate authority to Director of 

Planning and Environment to 

approve subject to: 

(i) Satisfactory amended 

plans addressing the proposed 

new access. 

(ii) Negative condition relating 

to the bank/hedgerow 

(iii) Section 106 legal 

agreement to address the 

affordable housing issue and 

appropriate commuted sum in 

respect of public open 

space/community amenities. 

(iv) location and treatment of 

meter boxes 

(v) Highways 

Oral representations were received from Mr P Drake, Mr R Bennett, Mrs A Knight, 

Mrs Durkin- Jones, Miss B Fulcher, Mr Maunder and Miss Parker as objectors to the following 

application. 

Oral representations were also received from Mr C Leonard on behalf of Puddletown Parish Council. 

1/E/2003/002151 

1/E/2003/002242 

The Prince of Wales Inn, 14 High Street, 

Puddletown, Dorchester DT2 8RU – 

Conversion of building to 5No flats and 

vehicular access – Young and Partners Ltd 

5 Memorial Cottages, Main Road, 

Tolpuddle, Dorchester DT2 7EH – Change 

of use from residential to shop, office and 

storage. Construct disabled access ramp - 

TUC 


The proposal would be contrary 

to policy SC5 of the adopted 

West Dorset District Local Plan. 


(i) External materials 

(ii) Hours of opening as 

specified in the planning 

officers report. 

6




APPENDIX 1 

Page 4 

Application 

No 


Development 

Resolution 

Oral representations were received from Mr Kelly the applicants agent. 

1/E/2003/002183 

8 Freemantle Road, Charlestown, Chickerell 

DT4 9Z – Demolish existing garage and 

erect house with integral garage. Modify 

existing vehicular and pedestrian access – 

Mr and Mrs R Gainey 


(i) Standard 5 years only 

(ii) Materials 

(iii) Provision and retention of 

parking 

(iv) No permission given for 

the proposed boundary 

treatment to the northern 

boundary adjoining 6 

Freemantle Road which is to be 

retained as existing. 

(v) Details of levels 

(vi) The existing hedge along 

the western boundary adjoining 

Nos 2 and 4 Southcroft Road to 

be retained 

(vii) Highways 

Oral representations were received from Mr Ives as an objector to the following application. 

Oral representations were also received from Mr Hocking the applicant. 

1/E/2003/002143 

19 Clare Avenue, Chickerell, Weymouth 

DT3 4NT – Erect two storey side extension 

and single storey rear extension – 

Mr A Hockings 


(i) Materials 

(ii) Highways 

(iii) Siting of garage door and 

parking 

Oral representations were received from Mr Vine and Mr Billett as objectors to the following 

application. 

Oral representations were also received from Mr J Lane on behalf of the applicant. 

1/E/2003/000869 

Valentines Boarding Kennels and Cattery, 

Knights in the Bottom, Chickerell – Erect 

individual runs to dog kennels within 

existing communal dog runs and demolish 

redundant buildings – Valentine Boarding 

Kennels and Cattery 


1/E/2003/002146 23 Kings Road, Dorchester DT1 1NH – 

Erect double garage – Mr J Cleall 


(i) Materials 

(ii) Restriction of use 

(iii) Hard/soft landscaping 

7




APPENDIX 1 

Page 5 

Application 

No 


Development 

Resolution 

1/E/2003/002204 

1/E/2003/002241 

42Cambridge Road, Poundbury, Dorchester 

DT1 2LS – Erect extension of modify 

vehicular access – S A Spicer 

Westfield, 50A Bridport Road, Dorchester 

DT1 2NQ – Erect conservatory – 

Mr G G and Mrs S J A Curtis 


The proposed development by 

reason of its design would have 

an adverse impact on the street 

scene. 

Approve 

8


18 th February 2004 

PLANNING APPEALS 

The following appeals have been received since the last Development Control East 

Committee Meeting: 

TYPE OF 

APPEAL 

P.A. REF NO: LOCATION DEVELOPMENT DELEGATED 

OR 

COMMITTEE 

DECISION 

Hearing 1/E/2003/120 Land at Knights 

in the Bottom, 

CHICKERELL 

Advertisement 1/E/2003/1595 

Broadmayne 

Garage, Main 

Street, 

BROADMAYNE 

Inquiry 1/E/2003/254 Former Olds 

Garage, The 

Moor, 

PUDDLETOWN 

Develop land by 

the erection of 

1No. bungalow and 

garage. Construct 

new vehicular and 

pedestrian access 

Erect internally 

illuminated free 

standing sign 

Demolish existing 

garage and erect 

6No. dwellings, 

including 1No. 

work at home unit, 

and associated 

garages and car 

parking. Erect 

1No. B1 industrial 

unit with 

associated parking. 

Construct new 

vehicular and 


Delegated 

refusal 

09/07/2003 

Committee 

refused 

20/11/2003 - 

Officer 

recommended 

approval 

Delegated 

refusal 

9

The following decisions have been received: 

TYPE OF 

APPEAL 

P.A. REF NO: LOCATION DEVELOPMENT DECISION COST 

APPROX 

Written reps 1/E/2003/0928 Land at 

Replace existing Dismissed £100.00 

Dorchester 

Rugby Club, 

Coburg Road, 

DORCHESTER 

floodlight tower with 

a 14.5m 

telecommunications 

tower with 

integral antennae, 

floodlight & ground 

based equipment 

cabinet 

21/01/2004 

Inquiry 1/W/2002/1664 

& 

ENF/2003/190 

Land at Cains 

Farm, 

CHIDEOCK 

Dismissed 

19/01/2004 

£3,000 

Hearing 1/N/2003/868 Site at land to the 

rear of the former 

Abbey Primary 

School, 

Horsecastles, 

SHERBORNE 

Inquiry ENF/02/00267 Land adjoining 

Wentwell, South 

Rew, 

MARTINSTOWN 

To exceed limitations of 

numbers, size and type 

of vehicle subject of the 

Certificate of 

Lawfulness dated 15 

May, 2000 (Ref 

1/W/2000/0052) to 

permit use of the site for 

the stationing and 

operation of the 

following total number 

of commercial vehicles:- 

6 No artic tractor units 

of 38-44 tonnes which 

have use of 8 trailer 

units; 2No rigid trucks of 

18-20 tonnes; and 2No 

rigid local delivery 

trucks of 7.5 tonnes 

(AMENDED 

DESCRIPTION). 

Erect eight houses, 

construct road and 

provision of public 

open space 

Enforcement Notice 

Material Change of 

Use 

Withdrawn 

by applicant 

Allowed 

18/1/2003 

N/A 

£2000 

10

The following Hearings/Inquiries are being heard:- 

TYPE OF 

APPEAL 

P.A. REF NO: LOCATION DEVELOPMENT DATE, TIME and 

VENUE 

Hearing 1/N/2003/0161 The Noor, NETHER 

COMPTON 

Relief of condition 1 

of 1/N/1997/108 – 

The occupation of 

the dwelling shall 

be limited to a 

person solely or 

mainly working, or 

last working, in the 

locality in 

agriculture or 

forestry, or a widow 

or widower of such 

a person, and to 

any resident 

dependents 

(AMENDED 

DESCRIPTION) 

10.00am 

23 rd March 2004 

The Council 

Chamber, 

Sherborne Town 

Council Offices, 

Newland, 

SHERBORNE 

Please contact Technical Support on Ext. 2224 should you require any further 

information on the above. 

11

DELEGATED DECISIONS 


Between 13/01/2004 and 09/02/2004 

1/E/03/001511 Full 

Erect 5No. dwellings with garages and construct shared drive. Modify existing sewage 

treatment plant 

Land at 19 Main Road, TOLPUDDLE 

1/E/03/001898 Full 

Replace existing field shelter with new field shelter 

St.Michaels Cottage, 2 Church Lane, OWERMOIGNE 

1/E/03/001988 Full 

Construct double garage over existing driveway. Erect garden shed. 

4 St Martinsfield, WINTERBORNE ST MARTIN 

1/E/03/002064 Variation of condition 

Variation of Condition No 5 of Planning Permission 1/N/2001/1582 (erect new slaughter house 

& farm building) 

Oak Tree Farm, HOLNEST 

1/E/03/002071 Full 

Retain the stationing of a mobile home for agricultural worker 

Little Bridge Farm, Mandeville Road, CHICKERELL 

1/E/03/002103 Change of Use 

Change of use of adjacent paddock to residential curtilage & form compound for electricity 

transformer station relocation 

WAVERLAWNS BARN, LONGFORD ROAD, THORNFORD 


Change of use from retail (toy shop A1 Use Class) to restaurant (A3 Use Class) 

PURSUITS/PASTIMES, DIGBY ROAD, SHERBORNE, DT9 3NL 

1/E/03/002168 Full 

Change of use of redundant Chapel to 1No unit of holdiay accommodation. Construct new 

vehicular access and modify existing pedestrian access 

DUNTISH CONGREGATIONAL CHAPEL, FACTORY LANE, DUNTISH, BUCKLAND 

NEWTON, DORCHESTER, DT2 7DR 

1/E/03/002171 Full 

Erect extension & carry out alterations 

MANOR FARM, SHORT CROSS JUNCTION , FROME ST. QUINTON, DORCHESTER, DT2 

0HF 

1/E/03/002179 Full 

Raise level of an existing section of Ridge Hill runway 

RIDGE HILL AIRFIELD, COURT FARM, BUCKLAND NEWTON, DORCHESTER, DT2 7BT 

1/E/03/002187 Full 

Erect first floor extension 

FARTHING GATE FARM, OFF STREET LANE, HOLNEST, SHERBORNE, DT9 5PX 

1/E/03/002197 Full 

Erect two storey rear extension 

Refused 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

41



Between 13/01/2004 and 09/02/2004 

4 HIGHER TOTNELL, TOTNELL, LEIGH, SHERBORNE, DT9 6HT 

1/E/03/002213 Full 

Erect conservatory 

CHILTERNS, HIGH STREET, CORSCOMBE, DORCHESTER, DT2 0NX 

1/E/03/002222 Full 


14 WESTBRIDGE PARK, SHERBORNE, DT9 6AW 

1/E/03/002226 Listed Building Consent 

External alterations to front & side elevations 

1 & 2 The Old Green, THE GREEN, SHERBORNE 

1/E/03/002230 Full 

Erect single storey extension 

THIKA, CLATCOMBE LANE, SHERBORNE, DT9 4RN 

1/E/03/002231 Full 

Erect single storey extension and conservatory 

THE OAKS, HARTS LANE , STALLEN, NETHER COMPTON, DT9 4PZ 

1/E/03/002236 Full 


MEADOWSIDE, B3143, PIDDLETRENTHIDE, DT2 7QX 

1/E/03/002250 Full 

Raise pitch to kitchen roof and carry out alterations 

6 LONGDOWN, THORNFORD, SHERBORNE, DT9 6QJ 


Erect satellite dish 

10 HIGH STREET, FORDINGTON, DORCHESTER, DT1 1LZ 

1/E/03/002263 Full 

Erect partial framed dairy building & extension to cubicle house 

WHITFIELD FARM, BAILEY RIDGE LANE, LILLINGTON 

1/E/03/002268 Full 

Erect detached timber garage 

PETS HAVEN, BAILEY RIDGE, LEIGH, SHERBORNE, DT9 6HU 

1/E/03/002272 Full 

Demolish existing ground floor bathrooms to each unit & erect bathroom extension to both 

properties 

13 & 15, HARDY AVENUE, DORCHESTER 

1/E/03/002273 Full 

Demolish existing ground floor bathrooms to each unit & erect new bathroom extension to both 

properties 

9 & 11, HARDY AVENUE, DORCHESTER 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

42



Between 13/01/2004 and 09/02/2004 

1/E/03/002276 Full 

Convert glasshouse & store into office & recycling use 

WHITFIELD RURAL ACTIVITY CENTRE, POUNDBURY ROAD, BRADFORD PEVERELL 

1/E/03/002279 Full 

Erect extensions & install dormer window 

29 SYWARD ROAD, DORCHESTER, DT1 2AJ 

1/E/03/002287 Full 


BROOKSIDE, BENVILLE LANE, CORSCOMBE, DORCHESTER, DT2 0NN 

1/E/03/002288 Full 

Erect two storey extension 

SHAMBLES, RINGSTEAD, DORCHESTER, DT2 8NG 

1/E/03/002290 Full 

Convert existing building into 2no. dwellings 

CAMELOT HOUSE, THREE LANES END, PUDDLETOWN, DORCHESTER, DT2 8RR 

1/E/03/002294 Full 

Retention of existing dog kennels 

ANIMAL CARE UNIT, KINGSTON MAURWARD COLLEGE, KINGSTON MAURWARD 

HOUSE EAST ENTRANCE L, LOWER BOCKHAMPTON, STINSFORD 

1/E/03/002303 Full 


19 EGDON GLEN, CROSSWAYS, DORCHESTER, DT2 8BQ 

1/E/03/002307 Conservation Area Consent 

Demolish Village Hall 

VILLAGE HALL, WILLS LANE, CERNE ABBAS, DORCHESTER, DT2 7JY 


Change of use of Units 12B-12F to motorcycle servicing/workshops & Units 12J-12L to 

motorcycle showroom & accessory sales 

UNITS 12B-12F & UNITS 12J-12L, HYBRIS BUSINESS PARK, WARMWELL ROAD, 

CROSSWAYS 

1/E/03/002319 Full 

Demolish part of existing building & erect garage & annexe 

THE OLD FORGE, HORCHESTER JUNCTION A37 LONG ASH LANE TO, FROME ST. 

QUINTON, DORCHESTER, DT2 0HG 


Erect extension to form reception, offices & toilets 

DORCHESTER COACHWAYS, GROVE TRADING ESTATE, DORCHESTER, DT1 1ST 

1/E/03/002329 Full 


2 EAST FARM COTTAGES, CHURCH LANE, OWERMOIGNE, DORCHESTER, DT2 8HS 

Approved 


Approved 

Approved 


Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

43



Between 13/01/2004 and 09/02/2004 

1/E/03/002330 Full 


ROWAN COTTAGE, 3 WATERSIDE WALK, WATERSIDE WALK, SYDLING ST. NICHOLAS, 

DORCHESTER, DT2 9PJ 

1/E/03/002333 Full 

Retain ground floor window to kitchen on side elevation 

23 MIDLEAZE, SHERBORNE, DT9 6DY 

1/E/03/002335 Full 

Erect extensions 

WOODEN CABBAGE, EAST CHELBOROUGH, DORCHESTER, DT2 0QA 


Erect extensions and carry out internal & external alterations (alternative scheme to that 

approved under planning applications 1/E/2003/1762 & 1/E/2003/1763) 

13 & 15 THE FOLLY, CERNE ABBAS, DORCHESTER, DT2 7JR 

1/E/03/002341 Full 

Erect extensions to No 15 & garage/workshop/drive to No 13 together with single storey 

extension (alternative scheme to that approved under planning applications 1/E/2003/1762 & 

1/E/2003/1763) 

13 & 15 THE FOLLY, CERNE ABBAS, DORCHESTER, DT2 7JR 


Demolish internal partitions in kitchen 

THE OLD RECTORY, 8 CHURCH LANE, OWERMOIGNE, DORCHESTER, DT2 8HS 

1/E/03/002346 Full 

Erect modular building 

LOUDS MILL SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS, ST GEORGES ROAD FROM ALINGTON 

AVENUE, FORDINGTON, DORCHESTER, DT1 1PE 


Erect side gate and install heating system and flue. Fit burglar alarm box 

16 DUCK STREET, CERNE ABBAS, DORCHESTER, DT2 7LA 

1/E/03/002364 Full 


14 FORTRESS GREEN, DORCHESTER, DT1 2TF 

1/E/03/002368 Full 


14 EVERDENE DRIVE, CHICKERELL, WEYMOUTH, DT3 4NU 

1/E/03/002369 Full 

Erect two stables & hay store 

DURBEYFIELD, UNSPECIFIED STREETS, HOLYWELL, EVERSHOT, DT2 0LH 

1/E/03/002372 Full 

Demolish existing buildings & garage. Erect 5No industrial units for B1 (business) use and car 

repair workshop. 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

44



Between 13/01/2004 and 09/02/2004 

REDBRIDGE ROAD INDUSTRIAL SITE, REDBRIDGE ROAD, CROSSWAYS 

1/E/03/002377 Full 

Erect extensions 

TRINITY LODGE, MAIN ROAD, GODMANSTONE, DORCHESTER, DT2 7AQ 


Demolish chimney, timber porch, store & corner of bathroom. Erect extensions and carry out 

internal and external alterations 

TRINITY LODGE, MAIN STREET, GODMANSTONE, DORCHESTER, DORSET, DT2 7AQ 

1/E/03/002387 Full 


ALPINE COTTAGE, WEST END, CATTISTOCK, DORCHESTER, DT2 0JA 

1/E/03/002388 Full 


HORSESHOES, WEST END, CATTISTOCK, DORCHESTER, DT2 0JA 

1/E/03/002394 Full 

Erect first floor extension 

12 UNDEFINED STREETS, TINCLETON, DORCHESTER, DT2 8QP 

1/E/03/002399 Full 


THE BRIARY, MAIN ROAD, OSMINGTON, WEYMOUTH, DT3 6EH 

1/E/03/002406 Full 

Erect 2m high front boundary wall 

THE STABLES, LONG ASH LANE, FRAMPTON, DORCHESTER, DT2 9NW 

1/E/03/002412 Full 

Erect conservatory extension 

MANOR HOUSE, COMPTON ROAD ST MICHAELS CHURCH JUNCTIO, NETHER 

COMPTON, SHERBORNE, DT9 4SW 

1/E/03/002422 Full 

Erect extension to form swimming pool with changing rooms, plant room & WC. 

WAKE COURT, RYALLS LANE, BISHOPS CAUNDLE, DT9 5NG 


Partial demolition to remove part of gable to create arch, construct swimming pool with 

changing rooms, plantroom & wc. Make external alterations 

WAKE COURT, RYALLS LANE, BISHOPS CAUNDLE, DT9 5NG 

1/E/03/002426 Full 

Erect dormer window to south elevation, extend roofline to south elevation and carry out 

alterations 

STABLE FARM, NEW BARN ACCESS ROAD, BRADFORD PEVERELL, DORCHESTER, 

DT2 9SE 


Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

Approved 

45



Between 13/01/2004 and 09/02/2004 

Erect new non-illuminated signage and paint fascia 

BOOTS THE CHEMISTS, 29 CHEAP STREET, SHERBORNE, DT9 3PU 

1/E/03/002449 Full 


1 THREE ACRES, SYDLING ST. NICHOLAS, DORCHESTER, DT2 9NZ 

Approved 

46

Development Control East Committee 

18 February 2004 

1/E/2003/001319 ITEM NUMBER 01 

Application Number: 1/E/2003/001319 Full 

Registration Date: 14 July, 2003 

Application Site: UNIT 23, ENTERPRISE PARK, PIDDLEHINTON, 

DORCHESTER, DT2 7UA 

Proposal: Erect 2No industrial buildings and covered links between 

proposed buildings and to existing building, together with 

associated parking, loading & storage areas & landscaping 

Applicant: Crendon Timber Engineering 

Ward Members: Cllr Mrs N Barker 

Case Officer: Ann Coles 

1. Information report to Committee 

1.1 The purpose of this report is to update Councillors on the latest situation with regards to 

the above planning application. 

1.2 Members will recall that the application by Crendon Timber Engineering for the above 

proposed development went before this Committee in November 2003. At that meeting the 

Committee resolved to approve the application subject to conditions, contrary to Officer 

recommendation. 

1.3 Following that meeting the Director of Planning and the Environment decided that based 

on Government Guidance the Committee resolution to approve the proposed development 

represented a significant departure to the Development Plan. Given that the resolution to 

approve represents a significant departure from the Development Plan the application would 

have to go before Full Council to be determined. The application was therefore advertised 

again with consultations taking place under the terms of The Town and Country Planning 

(Development Plans and Consultation) (Departures) Directions 1999. 

1.4 Councillors will be aware that the Revised Draft Deposit Local Plan is shortly to go on 

deposit for the statutory 6 week consultation period. Discussions have taken place between 

the Development Services Manager, the applicant and the owner of the site and the 

applicant has asked that the determination of the application be deferred until after the 

statutory 6 week period has expired. The request is due to the fact that the policies in the 

revised draft of the deposit plan may alter the policy context in which the application is to be 

considered. 

1.5 The Development Services Manager has formed an officer team to look at the possible 

future of Piddlehinton Camp as an employment site and how this fits in with the emerging 

Local Plan policy. The applicants and owner of the site are receptive to the idea, hence the 

request that the application be held in abeyance. 

1.6 The outcome of this process will be reported to this Committee in due course 

51



1/E/2003/001954 ITEM NUMBER 02 


Registration Date: 29 September, 2003 

Application Site: Land adjacent to The Coach & Horses Inn, WINTERBOURNE 

ABBAS 

Proposal: Erect 7No dwellings with associated car parking, modify 

existing vehicular & pedestrian access & provide a play area 

Applicant: Raglan Housing Association Ltd 

Ward Members: Cllr Slade 

Case Officer: Simon Ludgate 

1. Summary Recommendation 

1.1 Approve 

2. Description of development 

2.1 This full planning application seeks permission to develop a site which was 

previously the car park to The Coach and Horses Public House for residential 

development. Outline consent exists for a total of 8 dwellings on the whole 

site. This application covers the main part of the site. Application 

1/E/2003/1953 for two dwellings is also to be considered making a total of 9 

houses on the whole site. 

2.2 The 7 dwellings would be in a single terrace with slight stepping forward and 

back of the houses. They would be constructed of flint and render with 

Antique Brown and Slate Grey tiles. The accommodation would provide 

6 x 3-bedroomed properties and 1 x 2-bedroomed property. 

2.3 The development would be principally to the road frontage of the site, set 

back behind the Winterbourne stream with private gardens to the rear and a 

parking court behind that. 

2.4 Parking provision is at 1 space per property with shared visitor parking. 

2.5 Public Open Space is indicated to the rear of the site. 

3. Main planning issues 

• 

• 

Effect of the residential amenity of neighbouring dwellings. 

Design of the proposed dwellings. 

52

• Surface and foul water drainage. 

• 

Provision of public open space. 

4. Statutory Consultations 

Parish Council 

4.1 See correspondence Appendix 

Highway Authority 

4.2 No objections subject to conditions. 

5. Other consultations - None 

6. Other representations 

6.1 See correspondence appendix 

7. Human Rights 

7.1 Article 6 - Right to a fair trial. 

7.2 Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life and home. 

7.3 The first protocol of Article 1 Protection of property 

8. Relevant Planning History 

App. Ref. Applicant Proposal Decision & 

Date 

1/E/2001/1074 

1/E/2002/0777 

1/E/2003/1482 

1/E/2003/1483 

1/E/2003/1484 

Mr and Mrs A L 

Cauldwell 


Cauldwell 

Raglan Housing 

Association 


Association 


Association 

9. The Development Plan 

Develop land by the erection 

of 11 houses. Construct new 

vehicular and pedestrian 

access. 

Erect 8 dwellings. Construct 

new vehicular and pedestrian 

access and associated car 

parking. 

Erect a dwelling with 

associated parking 

Erect 2 dwellings with 





27.03.2002 

Approved 

16.07.2002 

Withdrawn 

Withdrawn 

Withdrawn 

The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Structure Plan (adopted 13 July 2000) 

• Settlement Policy H 

Setting of the Area); 

• Settlement Policy G 

(Scale and Design should reflect the Form and 

(Role of Villages and Self-Contained Communities; 

53

• Environment Policy Q (Safeguarding Protected Areas such as 

Conservation Areas); 

The West Dorset District Local Plan (adopted 6 November 1998) 

• Policy SP1 (Development within Defined Development Boundaries); 

• Policy CD5 (Protection and Character of Conservation Areas); 

• Policy CU1 (Flooding); 

• Policy R1 

(Public Open Space); 

• Policy H7 (Local Needs Housing within Defined Development 

Boundaries); 

• Policy H3 (Residential Development within Defined Development 

Boundaries); 

• Policy CD1 


(Design Standards); 

(Retention and Planting of Trees). 

The First Deposit Plan of the Local Plan Review (Published 17 January 2003) 

• Policy SS1 (Development within Defined Development Boundaries); 

• Policy HS3 (Local Needs Housing inside Defined Development 

Boundaries); 

• Policy SA21(Protection of Character or Appearance of Conservation 

Areas); 

• Policy DA1 (Retention of Trees, Hedgerows and Other Important 

Landscape Features); 

• Policy DA3 (The Scale and Form of Settlement and the Pattern of Streets 

and Spaces); 

• Policy DA5 (The Scale and Position of Buildings); 

• Policy DA6 (Privacy, Daylight and General Amenity); 

• Policy DA7 (Detailed Design and Materials). 

9. Supplementary planning guidance - None 

10. Planning issues 

Affect on the Residential Amenity of Neighbouring Properties 

10.1 

This development is proposed on the road frontage of the A35 and is some 

distance from the properties to the south in Butt Close and to the north in 

West Way. There are no gable windows looking towards either The Coach 

54

and Horses to the east or the Valley Cottage Development to the west. The 

Public Open Space provided is also some distance from neighbouring 

properties and should not cause detriment to the residential amenity of 

properties on Butt Farm Close and Valley Cottages. 

Design of Dwellings 

10.2 

Although there is some in-depth development throughout the village of 

Winterbourne Abbas there is a predominance of road frontage development 

running parallel to the trunk road. Recent development at Valley Cottages 

and across the road at Grange Farm have repeated this development style. 

Subject to the correct materials being used, this proposal will strengthen this 

linear development feature and would provide an efficient land use for these 

2 and 3- bedroomed units. Plots 1 - 5 would be constructed with Banded 

Flint and render with brick soldier arches over the windows and 2 different 

styles of porch canopy. Chimneys would be included in the roof which would 

be covered with interlocking concrete Slate Grey colour tiles with a Terracotta 

ridge. Plots 6 and 7 would be of a rendered construction with brick arches 

over the windows and front canopy porches over the front doors. The roof 

would be similar tiles to Plots 1 - 5 but in Antique Brown colour. Boundary 

walls to the west and east of the development would be brick 2m high walls 

with pedestrian access gates. 

10.3 Visually the gable ends of these properties will be dominant, particularly when 

approaching the village from the west. Plot 1 on this end of terrace site would 

have the flint and render banding which is traditional for this village. Plot 7 on 

the eastern end of the development site would be rendered. Both elevations 

would be seen in relation to 2m high boundary structures. These would be a 

close boarded fence on the western end elevation and a brick wall on the 

eastern elevation. All of these design features copy similar developments 

within the village and the scale and proportion of the dwellings is felt to be 

appropriate to this site, which is adjacent to the Conservation Area. 

Drainage 

10.4 

Concerns have been raised by the community with regards to foul and 

surface water drainage in the village generally. Since the outline consent was 

granted on this site, improvements have been made to the foul sewage 

pumping station and the Environment Agency raise no objection to the 

principle of the development of this site for residential purposes. 

Public Open Space 

10.5 

This application includes an area of Public Open Space to the rear of the 

terrace of cottages which is shared with the previous application 

(1/E/2003/1953). For this development to meet the requirements of Local 

Plan Policy, it will be necessary to secure the provision of this Public Open 

Space through a condition requiring a Management Agreement and a longterm 

Maintenance Scheme to be put in place before development 

commences. 

11. Conclusion 

11.1 The principle of development on this site has already been established and 

this full application seeks construction of 7 small dwellings on the road 

55

12. Recommendation 

frontage, which is in character with the village of Winterbourne Abbas. The 

development would appear to comply with Local Plan Polices for such 

housing developments and, subject to a condition requiring the provision of 

the Public Open Space, approval would seem appropriate for this 

development. 

12.1 Approve 

i. Materials; 

ii. 

iii. 

iv. 

Landscaping; 

Car parking; 

No development to commence until a scheme for the provision and longterm 

maintenance of Public Open Space has been agreed. 

56



1/E/2003/001953 ITEM NUMBER 03 


Registration Date: 29 September, 2003 

Application Site: Land adjacent to the Coach & Horses Inn, WINTERBOURNE 

ABBAS 

Proposal: Erect 2No residential dwellings with associated parking, 

modify existing vehicular & pedestrian access & provide a play 

area 

Applicant: Raglan Housing Association 

Ward Members: Cllr Slade 

Case Officer: Simon Ludgate 


1.1 Approve. 


2.1 This is a full planning application on a site which was recently granted outline 

consent for residential development. This application seeks permission to 

build 2 houses on part of the site. They would be semi-detached properties, 

both with 2 bedrooms. They would be constructed with brick walls and slate 

grey tiled roof. 

Outline planning permission exisits on this site for 8 houses. This application 

should be read in conjunction with 1/E/2003/1954 for 7 houses making a total 

of 9 for the whole site. 

2.2 Allocated parking spaces of 1 per dwelling have been provided with visitor 

parking in conjunction with the other associated development on this site. 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Effect of the residential amenity of neighbouring dwellings. 

Design of the proposed dwellings. 

Surface and foul water drainage. 

Provision of public open space. 

Protection of trees. 

57



4.1 See correspondence Appendix same as 1/E/2003/1954 


4.2 No objection subject to conditions. 

5. Other consultations 

Environment Agency 

5.1 No objection 









Date 

1/E/2001/1074 


Cauldwell 

Develop land by the erection 

of 11 houses. Construct new 


access. 


27.03.2002 

1/E/2002/0777 

1/E/2003/1482 

1/E/2003/1483 

1/E/2003/1484 


Cauldwell 


Association 


Association 


Association 

Erect 8 dwellings. Construct 

new vehicular and pedestrian 

access and associated car 

parking. 

Erect a dwelling with 






Approved 

16.07.2002 

Withdrawn 

Withdrawn 

Withdrawn 



• Settlement Policy H 

Setting of the Area); 

• Settlement Policy G 

(Scale and Design should reflect the Form and 

(Role of Villages and Self-Contained Communities; 

58

• Environment Policy Q (Safeguarding Protected Areas such as 

Conservation Areas); 


• Policy SP1 (Development within Defined Development Boundaries); 

• Policy CD5 (Protection and Character of Conservation Areas); 

• Policy CU1 (Flooding); 

• Policy R1 

(Public Open Space); 

• Policy H7 (Local Needs Housing within Defined Development 

Boundaries); 

• Policy H3 (Residential Development within Defined Development 

Boundaries); 




(Retention and Planting of Trees). 


• Policy SS1 (Development within Defined Development Boundaries); 

• Policy HS3 (Local Needs Housing inside Defined Development 

Boundaries); 

• Policy SA21(Protection of Character or Appearance of Conservation 

Areas); 

• Policy DA1 (Retention of Trees, Hedgerows and Other Important 

Landscape Features); 

• Policy DA3 (The Scale and Form of Settlement and the Pattern of Streets 

and Spaces); 

• Policy DA5 (The Scale and Position of Buildings); 

• Policy DA6 (Privacy, Daylight and General Amenity); 

• Policy DA7 (Detailed Design and Materials). 



10.1 Outline Planning Consent has been granted on this site for residential 

development and that planning permission is still valid. The adjoining 

residential properties in Butt Close and The Coach House will be affected by 

this development; but the design of the proposal has been put forward to 

minimise the overlooking with no windows to the rear of the properties facing 

59

Butt Close and only a clear bedroom window and obscured bathroom window 

facing The Coach House. A significant tree lies between the development 

and The Coach House. 

Design of the Dwellings 

10.2 

The scale and proportion of these small dwellings have been designed to 

relate to the scale of the adjacent Butt Close properties, but at the same time 

relate to the street frontage of the development as they will seen through the 

access from the A35. Best described as low key design, the proposal should 

blend in well to its setting. 

Drainage 

10.3 

There have been long running concerns from the community about the 

existing foul and surface water drainage system through this area. On the 

previous planning approval Wessex Water and the Environment Agency were 

consulted and raised no objection to the development, claiming that there was 

sufficient capacity within the existing foul system to cope with the additional 

dwelling. 

Public Open Space 

10.4 

It is a requirement of the Local Plan Policies for new development to provide 

or make payment in lieu of public open space. This planning application 

includes an area for public open space. It would be necessary to condition 

this planning approval to ensure that this area was provided within a 

reasonable timescale. The Parish Council have not offered to take 

responsibility for this area so it will be necessary to ensure the long-term 

provision of this facility by the Housing Association. 

Parking Provision 

10.5 

One space has been provided per dwelling with visitor parking indicated on 

adjacent land. This density of parking would comply with Central Government 

Advice contained within PPG3. 

11. Conclusions 

Density of housing - at just over 20 houses per hectare on this particular 

planning application, the density of development falls below Government 

Standards but, bearing in mind the relationship to adjoining residential 

accommodation, it is felt that the proposal provides an efficient use of this 

building land. 

Protection of trees 

Two trees will have to be removed to allow construction of the houses but it is 

proposed to replace these trees with mature specimens. 

11.1 The principle of development of this site for residential purposes has become 

established but this full application deals with the siting, design and density of 

development and appears to be an appropriate form of development for this 

site adjacent to the Conservation Area. 

60


12.1 Approve 

i. Landscaping; 

ii. 

iii. 

iv 

Materials; 

Parking provision; 

No development to commence until a scheme for the provision and 

maintenance of public open space has been submitted to and approved in 

writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

61



1/E/2003/002473 ITEM NUMBER 04 


Registration Date: 18 December, 2003 

Application Site: LAND OFF SCHOOL HILL, CHICKERELL 

Proposal: Erect 10 houses, 2 bungalows, 8 flats (in 2 blocks), erect 

bicycle stores and construct new vehicular and pedestrian 

access, constuct new access road and car parking areas 

(revised scheme). 

Applicant: Magna Housing Association 

Ward Members: Cllr Gardner, Cllr Jolliffe, Cllr Rogers 



1.1 Delegate authority to the Director of Planning and the Environment to 

approve with conditions subject to the satisfactory outcome of a land 

contamination risk assessment, the comments of the Engineering Services 

Manager and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure 

affordable housing, and a commuted sum for public open space. 


2.1 Planning permission is being sought to erect 8 two storey dwellings in the 

form of four pairs of semi-detached properties. Also proposed are two semidetached 

bungalows and 8 flats in 2 blocks. Associated with this is a new 

vehicular access from School Hill, a pedestrian access from School Close, 

associated parking areas, cycle stores and drying areas. Six of the proposed 

semi-detached two storey dwellings would have 2 bedrooms. The other 4 

houses would have 3 bedrooms. The 2 bungalows would have 2 bedrooms 

and the 8 flats 1 bedroom. The proposed materials are brick in contrasting 

colours and slate or clay tiled roofs. 

2.2 The land constituting the site stretches from the north of the houses on the 

eastern side of School Hill, down behind those houses and to the east of the 

houses in School Close. The land slopes southwards from the top of School 

Hill to the houses in School Close. The majority of the site is within the 

defined development boundary for Chickerell, however the area which is 

proposed for the new vehicular access to the development and which is 

between 20 and 20b School Hill is outside the defined development boundary 

and designated as Land of Local Landscape Importance in the adopted local 

plan. The designation of Land of Local Landscape Importance covers the 

open countryside to the east of the site as well. 

2.3 The site over which the vehicular access from School Hill would run is 

currently a paddock. The land to the east of the houses in School Hill 

effectively forms part of the gardens for those houses although most of the 

62

land is overgrown and not used as gardens. The land to the east of School 

Close is currently overgrown. Beyond the site to the east is open countryside. 

There is an existing overgrown hedgerow on the eastern boundary of the site 

which is very important to the character of the site and separating the urban 

element of Chickerell from the open countryside beyond. 

2.4 There is a history of outline planning permissions for 17 dwellings on the site 

dating back to 1986. However these permissions did not encompass the land 

between 20 and 20b School Hill or the land to the east of School Close. The 

proposed vehicular access to the site was to be created by demolishing one 

of the existing houses in School Hill. The last of the outline planning 

permissions for the site expired in 2002. 

2.5 In September 2003 a full planning application was submitted for the same 

number and type of dwellings as is now proposed in this current planning 

application. However the application was withdrawn after the agent was 

advised that officers were minded to recommend the refusal of the planning 

application for a number of reasons. The concerns were that the proposed 

development would result in the loss of a significant section of native 

hedgerow to enable the creation of the proposed vehicular access and would 

be detrimental to the character and appearance of the LLLI. Other concerns 

were that the design was not of sufficient quality and the flats did not relate 

well to existing houses in School Close or the wider countryside. Finally it 

was considered that the proposed development would have an adverse 

impact on existing vegetation and in particular the existing hedgerow on the 

eastern boundary of the site. 

2.6 Following the withdrawal of that earlier application there have been a number 

of discussions with the applicant which have resulted in this current 

application. The current application differs from that previously submitted in a 

number of ways. The amount of frontage hedgerow which would be removed 

from School Hill has been reduced in length from 45m to 18m. A slight kink 

has been introduced into the access road crossing the existing paddock in an 

attempt to make it look more informal. The pedestrian path is now separated 

from the road, to visually break up the area of hardstanding. There would 

also be flush kerbs and landscaping to soften the visual impact of the access. 

With regards to the houses and bungalows, plots 1 - 4 have been moved 

closer to the edge of the road to ensure that the hedgerow on the eastern 

boundary does not come under long-term pressure for removal. Block 1 of 

the flats has been rotated through 90 degrees to give a more open feel to the 

site. An open grassed area with a gravel path is proposed between the two 

blocks of flats this would enable views of the countryside to remain open from 

School Close. Generally the proposed landscaping around the flats has been 

improved. 


• Impact on visual amenity and the street scene. 

• Visual impact on the designated Land of Local Landscape Importance. 

• Highway safety. 

• Impact on residential amenity. 

• Drainage and flooding. 

• Provision of affordable housing. 

• Provision of public open space. 


Town Council 

63

4.1 See correspondence appendix. 




5.1 Environment Agency - No objection subject to conditions and a contamination 

risk assessment. 

Wessex Water - No objection. 









Date 

1/E/86/211 WDDC Develop land by the erection 

of 17 houses and construct 

Approved 

new vehicular access. 

1/E/87/568 WDDC Develop land by the erection 

of 27 houses and construct 

new access. 

1/E/89/545 WDDC Renewal of PA 1/E/86/211 to 

develop land by the erection of 

17 houses. 

1/E/92/362 WDDC Renewal of PA 1/E/89/545 to 

develop land by the erection of 

17 houses. 

1/E/94/655 

1/E/97/682 

1/E/03/1813 

West Dorset Housing 

Association 

Magna Housing 

Association 

Magna Housing 

Association 


Withdrawn 

14/11/89 

Approved 

18/9/89 

Approved 

20/8/92 

Renewal of PA 1/E/92/362. Approved 

28/5/95 

Renewal of PA 1/E/94/655 Approved 8/5/98 

Erect 10 houses, 2 bungalows, 

8 flats (in 2 blocks), erect 

bicycle stores, construct new 


access, new access road and 

car parking areas. 

Withdrawn 

19/11/03 


Settlement Policy G - The role of villages in accommodating development 

Settlement Policy H - Scale and design of developments 

Housing Policy B - Mix of accommodation and housing types 

Housing Policy C - New housing development and reducing the need to travel 

Environment Policy F - Maintaining the quality and diversity of the landscape. 


64

SP1 - Development within defined development boundaries 

SP3 - Development outside defined development boundaries 

H3 - Residential development within defined development boundaries 

H7 - Local needs housing within defined development boundaries 

L4 - Land of Local Landscape Importance 

CD1 - Design Standards 

CD2 - Retention and planting of trees 

R1 - Public open space in new housing developments 


SA6 - Land of Local Landscape Importance 

AH2 - Surface water drainage 

SS1 - Development within defined development boundaries 

SS3 - Development outside defined development boundaries 

HS2 - Residential development within defined development boundaries 

HS3 - Local needs housing within defined development boundaries 

TRAN5 - Parking provision 

TRAN8 - Cyclists and pedestrians 

TRAN9 - New pedestrian routes 

IN4 - Outdoor playing space in new housing developments 

DA1 - Retention of trees, hedgerows and other important landscape features 

DA2 - Landscape schemes 

DA3 - The scale and form of settlements and the pattern of streets and 

spaces. 

DA5 - The scale and positioning of buildings 

DA6 - Privacy, daylight and general amenity 

DA7 - Detailed design and materials 

10. Supplementary planning guidance 

10.1 Chickerell Environmental Management Plan/Planning Brief - Adopted 

November 1999. 

10.2 West Dorset District Council Revised Interim Supplementary Planning 

Guidance - Affordable Housing - Adopted January 2004. 


11.1 The actual land for the houses and flats is within the defined development 

boundary and therefore in principle, given Policies H3 and SP1 of the adopted 

local plan, residential development may be acceptable. The site of the 

proposed new vehicular access to serve the development from School Hill is 

however outside the DDB and designated as LLLI. 

11.2 It is considered that the fact that the proposed access is outside the DDB is 

not a sufficient reason to say that it is unacceptable in principle. However the 

impact of the access on the visual amenity of the LLLI and the street scene in 

general must be carefully considered. The applicant's have liased closely with 

the Council's landscape officer to try and minimise the impact of the access 

on the character and appearance of the LLLI. The existing hedgerow and 

trees to the front of 20b School Hill and across nearly half of the frontage of 

the existing paddock would be retained. The opening for the access has been 

kept to the minimum it can be to comply with highway safety requirements. 

The access road itself crossing the paddock is proposed with a slight kink in it 

to give it a more informal look than a completely straight road. The road would 

have flush kerbs meeting the grass verge on either side. The pedestrian path 

would be separated from the road by a grass verge to visually break up the 

extent of the hardstanding. The road would be finished in a zebraflex resin 

bonded hardstone surface in buff. Such a service is not dissimilar in 

65

appearance to many of the roads in Poundbury but has been found to be 

more hard wearing and suitable for pushchair's and wheelchairs. There would 

also be new hedgerows and tree planting. The applicant has made a 

significant effort to address the Council's concern about the visual impact of 

the access on the LLLI and has done much to soften its appearance, retain 

existing vegetation and now proposes a significant amount of additional 

planting. The Council's landscape officer now considers the proposals to be 

acceptable in terms of trying to maintain the rural appearance and quality of 

this part of the LLLI. Whilst the proposed access would undoubtedly change 

the character of this part of the LLLI, it is considered that it would not be so 

detrimental to visual amenity as to warrant the refusal of planning permission. 

11.3 In terms of the design and appearance of the proposed houses and 

bungalows they are not dissimilar in appearance to the semi-detached red 

brick houses on School Hill. However the houses have open fronted porches, 

chimney's and quoin's and brick detailing under the windows in contrasting 

bricks. No garages are proposed for the houses, just parking to the side of the 

properties and a wooden shed in the rear gardens. It is proposed that the 

bungalows would have car ports to the side. Units 5 -12 would have brick 

dwarf walls with railings on top to separate the front gardens form the 

pavement. Part way down, the access road would be narrowed by the use of 

cobbles to create a speed restriction. The rear gardens of the houses in 

School Hill would be contained by a 1.5m high close boarded fence. There 

would be visitor parking spaces for the new houses beyond the fencing at the 

end of the gardens. The existing earth bank and hedgerow on the eastern 

boundary of the site would be retained and would provide a natural boundary 

treatment between the gardens of the new dwellings and the fields to the 

east. Protective fencing would be erected prior to development commencing 

and maintained during construction to ensure the hedgerow is protected from 

damage. It is considered that the design of the proposed houses and 

bungalows is acceptable and that this element of the proposed development 

would not detract from the visual amenity of the open countryside beyond the 

fields. The hedgerow and most of the trees on the eastern boundary of the 

site would be retained, ensuring that the natural boundary between Chickerell 

and the countryside beyond is maintained. 

11.4 The new access road at the bottom of School Hill would turn left behind the 

houses in School Close to access the 2 blocks of proposed flats. A parking 

area for 10 cars would be surfaced in a contrasting material to the road and 

its entrance would be marked by a brick wall and piers on either side. A 

further 2 parking spaces would be provided to the front of block 1. The two 

blocks of flats, each consisting of 4 flats, would be set at right angles to each 

other. Dwarf brick walls would separate the pedestrian paths from landscaped 

areas adjacent to the flats. A cycle store for 8 bikes would be provided as 

would two bin stores and a drying area. A hedgerow would be planted around 

the boundary of the site apart from a small section of the eastern boundary 

between the two blocks of flats where a post and rail fence would be used to 

allow views from School Close though the site to the countryside beyond. The 

existing pavements from School Close would connect to those in this part of 

the development allowing pedestrian access to the flats from School Close. It 

is considered that the Officer's previous concerns about the relationship of the 

flats to the houses in School Close and the countryside beyond have now 

been overcome by the re-orientation of one of the blocks. The impact of the 

development on the character, appearance and amenity of the LLLI has also 

been addressed by the proposed landscaping for this part of the site and the 

creation of an open view between School Close, the flats and the fields 

beyond. 

66

11.5 The Highway Authority have no objections to the proposed development 

subject to conditions. 

11.6 The issue of the impact of the proposed development on the residential 

amenity of the existing residential properties in the vicinity must be 

considered. The distance between the front elevations of the new houses and 

bungalows and the rear elevations of the existing houses in School Hill 

ranges from 23m - 36m. Such distances are considered to be sufficient to 

ensure that there is not any significant loss of privacy to the existing 

properties in terms of the overlooking of their rear windows. There is a shorter 

distance between the proposed dwellings and the boundaries of the existing 

rear gardens, but most of the existing properties would have a garden of at 

least 15m and there would be a 1.5m high close boarded fence on the 

boundary with the new verge/parking spaces. With regards to the blocks of 

flats there would be 17m between the front of block 1 and the side elevation 

of 15 School Close and 14m between the gable end of block 2 and the rear 

elevation of 14 School Close. Again such distances are considered to be 

acceptable in terms of residential amenity and the proposed development 

would not significantly impact on the light to the properties or their privacy. 

11.7 The Town Council have objected to the proposed development and 11 letters 

of representation have been received. In summary the letters of 

representation cover the following main points: 

(1) Strain on sewage and drainage systems. Flooding caused by surface 

water run-off. 

(2) Increased parking problems due to occupiers and visitors to the flats 

parking in School Close. 

(3) Increased use of School Close for pedestrian and bicycle access. 

(4) Loss of amenity for public due to the development of the overgrown land 

at the end of School Close. 

(5) Loss of vegetation for wildlife. 

(6) Pressure on medical and educational facilities. 

(7) Devaluation of existing dwellings. 

(8) Privacy and security of existing houses in School Hill. 

(9) Potential for cars crashing into boundary of School Close with the 

proposed access road (i.e. 9 School Close). 

The Town Council's concerns relate to some of the above points and also ask 

that in the first instance tenancies on the new dwellings be offered to local 

applicants. 

11.8 Wessex Water and the Environment Agency have no objections to the 

application subject to conditions and the submission of a satisfactory 

contamination risk assessment. The Council's Engineering Services Manager 

has been consulted with regards to the application and copies of the letters of 

representation relating to issues of drainage and flooding have been passed 

to him for his comment. A reply is currently awaited and Members will be 

verbally updated at the Committee meeting. 

11.9 Twelve parking spaces are proposed for the 8 flats as are 8 bicycle stores. 

There is no reason to believe that the development of the flats would result in 

additional cars being parked on the road in School Close and the Highway 

Authority have not objected to the application. Vehicular access to the flats 

would be via the proposed access road from School Hill. A pedestrian link 

would be created between the flats and School Close to save the occupiers of 

the flats having to walk up the new access road and then down School Hill to 

access Chickerell. The site does not link directly in with the public footpath 

that the Town Council have mentioned in their comments, whereas the site 

immediately abuts School Close. It is not considered that the proposed 

footpath link for pedestrians or cyclists with the flats and School Close would 

67

have a significant adverse impact on the amenity of the dwellings in School 

Close. Occupiers of School Close also consider that the development of the 

land for the flats would result in a loss of visual amenity due to the removal of 

the existing overgrown vegetation. The proposed scheme has taken account 

of views from School Close into the site and in fact a view through to the LLLI 

beyond the site will be created. No evidence has been submitted to show that 

the removal of the overgrown vegetation would be to the detriment of wildlife 

in the area. A new hedgerow is proposed around the site and the existing 

important hedgerow and trees to the east of the new houses is to be retained. 

11.10 Turning to the rest of the points raised by local people, it is not considered 

that the erection of an additional 20 dwellings in Chickerell would exert 

unacceptable pressure on local medical and educational facilities. The impact 

of the proposed development on the value of existing properties in the vicinity 

of the site is not a material planning consideration. Issues of residential 

amenity have already been addressed in para. 11.6. Concern has been 

expressed that cars using the new access road could crash into the gardens 

of no.9 and 11 School Close. The access road would have a gradient of 1:12, 

something which the Highways Authority have not objected to. There is an 

existing hedgerow on the boundary of no.s 9 and 11 with the site and it is 

proposed that there would be additional planting in front of this in the 5m wide 

strip of land between the edge of the road and the centre of the existing 

hedge. With the regards to the matter of the affordable housing and the Town 

Council's comment about who occupies it, this is a matter for the organisation 

that manages that element of the housing. 

11.11 The developer is offering a percentage of the housing as affordable. Given 

that the number of dwellings proposed is 20 and that Chickerell has a 

population of over 3,000, then the Council would require 35% of the units to 

be affordable in line with the Council's SPG on affordable housing which was 

adopted in January 2004. This would mean that 7 of the dwellings would be 

affordable. Which of the dwellings are affordable could be agreed in 

negotiation with the applicant, the planning officer and the Council's lead 

officer for housing strategy and development. 

11.12 Regarding the issue of public open space it is not considered appropriate that 

this be provided on this particular site, but that it would be dealt with by 

means of a commuted sum. 


12.1 It is considered that the Officer's concerns about the previous withdrawn 

scheme have now been addressed. The proposed development is considered 

acceptable in terms of its impact and relationship with the LLLI. The design 

and layout of the scheme is acceptable and would not have any significant 

adverse impact on the amenity of adjacent residential properties. The 

highways Authority have no objection to the development and matters relating 

to affordable housing and public open space can be dealt with via a Section 

106 Agreement. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with the 

relevant policies of the Development Plan. 


13.1 Delegate authority to the Director of Planning and the Environment to 

approve with conditions subject to the satisfactory outcome of a 

contamination risk assessment, the comments of the Engineering Services 

Manager and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure 

affordable housing (7 dwellings), and a commuted sum for public open space 

(£1,000 per dwelling). 

i. Materials 

68

ii. Highways 

iii. Surface water drainage details 

iv. Soft landscaping scheme and implementation 

v. Hard landscaping details 

vi. Erection of protective fencing 

69



1/E/2003/001802 ITEM NUMBER 05 



Application Site: Crossways, Bradford Road, SHERBORNE 

Proposal: Partial demolition of boundary wall to create vehicular access 

and erect new retaining wall. 

Applicant: John Sutherland 

Ward Members: Cllr Shorland, Cllr Mrs Snowden 


This application has been called to Committee by Cllr Mrs Snowden. 


1.1 Refuse. 


2.1 Planning permission is being sought to create a vehicular access and offroad 

parking area for the property known as Crossways. The house is a 

grade II listed building and is on the corner of Yeovil Road and Bradford 

Road opposite the girls school. The site is adjacent to the boundary for the 

conservation area, although outside of it. 

2.2 To create the access a section of natural stone boundary wall which is 1m in 

height would have to be removed across 6m of the frontage with Bradford 

Road. At present the stone wall acts as a retaining wall as the garden of 

Crossways is at a higher level than the road. Therefore the parking area for 

the cars which measures 6m by 5.5m would have to be excavated to a depth 

where it is level with the road. A new retaining wall to the parking area would 

then be erected using concrete blocks and faced with natural stone to match 

the existing. 


• Highway safety 

• Impact on the character, setting and appearance of the listed building and 

conservation area. 


Town Council 

4.1 No objections. 



70


5.1 None. 


6.1 None received. 







Date 

1/N/86/150 LB Miss R P Holloway Partially demolish wall to 

construct new pedestrian 

access and close existing. 

1/N/86/151 Miss R P Holloway Construct new pedestrian 

access. 

1/N/89/238 Miss R P Holloway Construct new vehicular 

access 

1/N/03/2271 LB J Sutherland Partial demolition of stone 

boundary wall 


Approved 

19/4/82 

Approved 

27/6/86 

Refused 6/9/89 

Adjacent item on 

committee 

agenda 


Environment Policy Q - Built Heritage 



CD5 - Protection of character of conservation areas 

CD8 - Proposals affecting listed buildings 


SS1 - Development within defined development boundaries 

SA21 - Protection of character or appearance of conservation areas 

SA19 - Alterations, extensions and changes of use of listed buildings 


10.1 None. 


11.1 The main issues for consideration are the highway safety implications of the 

proposed new access and any visual impact the access and associated works 

may have on the character, setting and appearance of this grade II listed 

building. 

11.2 In terms of highway safety the Highway Authority have raised no objections to 

the proposed new vehicular access from Bradford Road subject to conditions. 

11.3 In order to create the vehicular access and off road parking area a 6m section 

of the natural stone frontage boundary wall would have to be removed. An 

area of 33 sq.m would then have to be excavated by approximately 1m to 

create a level comparable with that of the adjacent carriageway. That area 

71

would then become an area of hardstanding on which cars would be parked 

directly outside the listed building. A new retaining wall to the parking area 

would have to be erected given the difference in ground levels. 

11.4 The Council's conservation and listed building officer has been consulted and 

objects to the proposed development as he considers it would neither 

preserve or enhance the character and setting of this listed building. Given 

the extent of the works which would be necessary to create the vehicular 

access and area of hardstanding it is considered that the cumulative impact of 

the proposals would be to detract from the character, appearance and setting 

of this listed building contrary to Policy CD8 of the adopted local plan. 


12.1 Whilst the proposed development may be acceptable in highway safety terms 

it is considered that it would have a detrimental impact on the character, 

appearance and setting of the listed building and would be contrary to Policy 

CD8 of the local plan and would not preserve or enhance views into or out of 

the conservation area contrary to Policy CD5 of the local plan. 


13.1 Refuse: 

i. The proposed development by reason of the removal of the natural stone 

frontage boundary wall, the excavation required to create the parking area, 

the erection of a new retaining wall and the parking of vehicles in front of 

the house would detract from the character, appearance and setting of this 

grade II listed building and would neither preserve or enhance views into or 

out of the conservation area. Hence the proposal is contrary to Policies 

CD8 and SP1 of the adopted West Dorset District Local Plan. 

72



1/E/2003/002271 ITEM NUMBER 06 

Application Number: 1/E/2003/002271 Listed Building Consent 


Application Site: CROSSWAYS, BRADFORD ROAD, SHERBORNE, DT9 4BG 

Proposal: Partial demolition of stone boundary wall 

Applicant: J Sutherland 

Ward Members: Cllr Shorland, Cllr Mrs Snowden 

Case Officer: David Chiplen 

This application was called to Committee by Cllr Mrs Snowden. 




2.1 Listed building consent is being sought to demolish part of a natural stone 

boundary wall to allow for the creation of a vehicular access and area of 

hardstanding for the parking of cars at this property known as Crossways. 

2.2 Crossways is a grade II listed building on the corner of Yeovil Road and 

Bradford Road, opposite the girls school. To create the access a section of 

natural stone frontage boundary wall which is 1m in height would have to be 

removed across 6m of the frontage with Bradford Road. At present the wall 

acts as a retaining wall as the garden of Crossways is at a higher level than 

the road. Therefore the parking area for the cars which measures 6m by 

5.5m would have to be excavated to a depth where it is level with the road. A 

new retaining wall to the parking area would be erected using concrete 

blocks and faced with natural stone to match the existing. 


• Impact on the character, setting and appearance of the listed building. 


Town Council 



4.2 No comment. 


5.1 None. 


73

6.1 Correspondence appendix 




7.3 The first protocol of Article 1 Protection of property. 



Date 

1/N/86/150 LB Miss R P Holloway Partially demolish wall to 

construct new pedestrian 

access and close existing. 

1/N/86/151 Miss R P Holloway Construct new pedestrian 

access. 

1/N/89/238 Miss R P Holloway Construct new vehicular 

access. 

1/E/03/1802 J Sutherland Partial demolition of boundary 

wall to create vehicular access 

and erect new retaining wall. 


Approved 

19/4/82 

Approved 

27/6/86 



the committee 

agenda 




CD8 - Proposals affecting listed buildings. 


SA19 - Alterations, extensions and changes of use of listed buildings. 


10.1 None. 


11.1 The determining issue is the impact of the proposals on the character, 

appearance and setting of this listed building. 

11.2 The Council's conservation and listed buildings officer has been consulted 

and objects to the proposed development as he considers that it would 

neither preserve or enhance the character and setting of this listed building. 

Given the extent of the works which would be necessary to create the 

vehicular access and area of hardstanding and the loss of the frontage natural 

stone boundary wall it is considered that the cumulative impact of the 

proposals would be to detract from the character, appearance and setting of 

this listed building contrary to Policy CD8 of the adopted local plan. 


12.1 For the reasons detailed above it is considered that the proposals would have 

a detrimental impact on the character, appearance and setting of the listed 

building and would be contrary to Policy CD8 of the local plan. 



74

i. The proposed development by reason of the removal of the natural stone 

frontage boundary wall, the excavation required to create the parking area, 

the erection of a new retaining wall and the parking of vehicles in front of 

the house would detract from the character, appearance and setting of this 

grade II listed building. Hence the proposal is contrary to Policy CD8 of the 

adopted West Dorset District Local Plan. 

75



1/E/2003/002122 ITEM NUMBER 07 


Registration Date: 10 November, 2003 

Application Site: 101 NEWLAND, SHERBORNE, DT9 3DU 

Proposal: Erect single storey extension & carry out internal & external 

alterations to outbuilding 

Applicant: S Waddington 

Ward Members: Cllr Farmer, Cllr Clark 



1.1 Approve with conditions 


2.1 Listed building consent is being sought to make a number of alterations both 

internal and external and to erect a single storey extension to the existing 

detached outbuilding at the rear of 101 Newland, Sherborne. 

2.2 101 Newland is a grade II* listed building and therefore the outbuilding is 

listed by virtue of it being within its curtilage. The outbuilding is at the 

northern end of the garden to no.101 some 60m from the main building. The 

outbuilding is constructed of natural stone with a tiled roof. The existing 

building is partly 3 storey's in height and partly 2 storey's. 

2.3 The application proposes the erection of a single storey extension to the 

south west elevation of the property to form a kitchen and hall. There would 

be a window in the gable end of the extension and a rooflight in the south 

east elevation to enable the roof space to be used as a bedroom. A new 

staircase to access the first floor area would be inserted and new partition 

walls on the first floor would be used to form a bathroom. The second floor 

would remain unaltered 

2.4 The proposed alterations and extension are intended to enable the building to 

be used as an independent dwelling. The change of use of the outbuilding to 

a self-contained independent dwelling is the subject of a separate planning 

application which has not yet been determined. 

2.5 An application for listed building consent was submitted in 2001 for "partial 

demolition to remove external brick walls. Erect single storey extension with 

room in roof space to former terrace cottage and make internal and external 

alterations". The Development Control North Committee resolved to refuse 

listed building consent on 20th May 2002 for the following reason: 

"The proposed development is considered unacceptable in that the change of 

use, and in particular the associated parking area, would have a significant 

adverse effect upon the setting of the important listed building and would 

76

therefore be contrary to policy CD8 of the adopted West Dorset District Local 

Plan and Environment Policy Q of the Bournemouth, Dorest and Poole 

Structure Plan". 

That application was for more extensive works to not just the outbuilding the 

subject of the current application but to outbuildings attached to the rear of 

no. 101 in order that 3 dwellings in total could be created on the site with 

alterations to some of the outbuildings to form car ports. At the same time the 

planning application was refused and both applications went to appeal and 

were subsequently dismissed. See the correspondence appendix for a copy 

of the Inspector's decision. 

2.6 Members should note that the Inspector in his decision did not express any 

particular concerns about the proposed alterations to the outbuilding the 

subject of this application. In listed building terms he was concerned with 

alterations to the main building and the attached outbuildings. 


• 

• 

Impact on the character and appearance of the curtilage building. 

Impact on the character and setting of the main building. 


Town Council 





5.1 See the correspondence appendix for the comments of English Heritage and 

the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings. 






7.3 The first protocol of Article 1 Protection of property. 



Date 

1/N/2001/1834 S Waddington Partial demolition to remove 

brick walls. Erect two storey 

extension to former terrace 

cottage & make internal & 

external alterations. 

1/N/2001/1835 S Waddington Make alterations to convert 

existing dwelling into 2 no. 

dwellings & make alterations & 

erect two storey extension to 

former terrace cottage to 

Refused 20th 

May 2002 

Appeal 

dismissed 6th 

February 2003 

Refused 20th 

May 2002 

Appeal 

Dismissed 6th 

77

convert into 1 no. dwelling. 

Form associated car parking. 

1/E/2003/2123 S Waddington Erect extension and carry out 

alterations to convert 

outbuilding to a two storey 

dwelling. 

February 2003 

Yet to be 

determined 









9.1 None. 


10.1 The determining issues in this application are the effect of the proposed 

alterations and extension on the character and appearance of this curtilage 

building and also the impact of the proposals on the character and setting of 

the main listed building. 

10.2 The Council's conservation and listed buildings officer has no objections to 

the proposed extension and alterations and considers them to be acceptable. 

The outbuilding is not listed in its own right but rather by virtue of it being 

within the curtilage of no. 101. There is however a considerable distance of 

over 50m between the buildings. 

10.3 The Town Council have objected to the application for three reasons. The first 

is that they consider there to be insufficient parking. Parking is not a material 

consideration in the determination of this application which is for listed 

building consent only. Their second concern is that the property would 

become isolated, which again is not a relevant consideration in the 

determination of this application. Finally, they consider that there would be a 

reduction in the aesthetic quality of the buildings. Whilst this is a relevant 

consideration, it is important to note that the Council's listed buildings officer 

does not have any concerns about the impact of the proposals on the 

character and appearance of the listed building, nor did the Planning 

Inspector in his decision on the earlier application. It is considered that the 

proposed external alterations and the erection of the extension would not 

have a significant adverse impact on the character of this outbuilding. Nor 

would the alterations have any adverse impact on the setting of the main 

listed building which is some considerable distance to the south west. 

10.4 Both English Heritage and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings 

have objected to the application. However the concerns that they both raise 

about car parking and the subdivision of the historic burgage plot are material 

considerations in the determination of the planning application only and are 

not relevant to the determination of this application for listed building consent. 

10.5 A letter of representation has been received from the occupier of the 

neighbouring property who is concerned about the impact the proposals may 

have on their residential amenity in terms of car parking in the rear garden 

and a loss of privacy. They are also concerned about the sub-division of the 

78

plot. Again these are matters which would be considered in the determination 

of the planning application but are not relevant to this listed building 

application. 


11.1 It is considered that the proposed alterations and extension would not have 

any significant adverse impact on the character and appearance of this listed 

building. Hence the proposal accords with Policy CD8 of the adopted local 

plan. 


12.1 Approve 

i. Materials 

ii. Timber painted windows and submission of section details 

iii. Conservation rooflights 

79



1/E/2003/002255 ITEM NUMBER 08 



Application Site: UNIT 4, COLLEGIATE HOUSE, GREENHILL, SHERBORNE 

Proposal: Demolish existing timber framed building & erect extension to 

dwelling 

Applicant: Mrs J A Hellyar 




1.1 Approve subject to conditions. 


2.1 Planning permission is being sought to replace an existing timber boarded 

single storey section of the building with a stone and slate single storey 

extension. 

2.2 Collegiate House is a grade II listed building in the Sherborne Conservation 

Area and the defined development boundary for the town. The section of the 

building to which this relates is the single storey projection at the rear of the 

main house which is closer to Priestlands Lane than Greenhill. There are 

properties to either side of Collegiate House and a property known as 

"Ransam" is to the rear of Collegiate House parallel to the single storey 

projection. The gable end of Ransam is 6.9m from the gable end of the 

proposed extension. On the northern boundary of the site is the gable end of 

Ransam and a 2.7m high stone wall surrounding the garden of the property. 

There is a relatively small circular window in the gable end of Ransam which 

looks towards Collegiate House and serves a bedroom. 

2.3 Planning permission and listed building consent have already been granted in 

2002 to alter the building from 10 flats to 4 dwellings. At that time consent 

was given to replace the existing timber boarded section of the building with a 

single storey stone extension which had the same ridge height as that of the 

existing single storey projection at the rear of Collegiate House. 

2.4 There have been 2 further planning applications since the approved scheme 

in 2002. Those applications differ from that now being considered in that the 

ridge height had been increased and projecting gable ends used to allow for 

the creation of residential accommodation in the roof space. The applications 

were refused as it was considered that the designs would be detrimental to 

the character and appearance of the listed buildings contrary to Policy CD8 of 

the adopted local plan and would have been detrimental to the residential 

amenity of the property known as Ransam. 

2.5 This application proposes erecting a single storey stone extension to replace 

80

the timber boarded section. The ridge height would be the same as the 

existing single storey projection at the rear to which it would be attached. A 

circular window in the gable end and the use of 2 conservation rooflights 

would enable accommodation in the form of a bedroom, landing and 

bathroom to be created in the roof space. A pair of glazed doors would open 

out onto a small garden area for the dwelling. 


• Impact on the character and appearance of the listed building. 

• Impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area. 

• Impact on residential amenity. 


Town Council 





5.1 None. 









Date 

1/N/2002/1390 LB Mrs J A Hellyar 

Demolish outbuildings and 

chimney stack. Erect single 

storey extension and carry out 

internal and external 

alterations. 

1/N/2002/1391 Mrs J A Hellyar Make alterations and erect 

single storey extension to 

convert existing ten suites of 

rooms to 4 attached dwelling 

units together with revised 

parking arrangements. 

1/N/2003/410 Mrs J A Hellyar Conversion of existing building 

and erection of extension to 

form one dwelling unit. 


Demolish timber framed & 

boarded building, erect 

extension and carry out 


alterations. 

Approved 

18/12/02 

Approved 

18/12/02 



1/N/2003/1420 Mrs J A Hellyar Demolish existing timber Refused 3/10/03 

81

framed building and erect 

extension to dwelling unit no. 

4. 

1/N/2003/1421 Mrs J A Hellyar Partial demolition to remove 

timber framed & boarded 

building and erect extension to 

dwelling unit no. 4. 

1/E/2003/2254 Mrs J A Hellyar Demolish existing timber 


extension to dwelling. 




the committee 

agenda 





CD1 - Design Standards 

CD5 - Protection of character of conservation areas 



SS1 - Development within Defined Development Boundaries 


SA21 - Protection of character or appearance of conservation areas 





10.1 None. 


11.1 One of the main determining issues is the impact of the proposed 

development on the character and appearance of the listed building and 

whether the proposals accord with Policy CD8 of the adopted local plan. 

11.2 A number of minor changes have been made to the original plans submitted 

resulting in amended plans which the Council's conservation and listed 

buildings officer considers to be acceptable. It is therefore considered that the 

proposed extension would not have any adverse impact on the character and 

appearance of this grade II listed building and therefore the proposal accords 

with Policy CD8. 

11.3 The site is in the Conservation Area for Sherborne but is not readily visible to 

the public as it can only be glimpsed through the arch in the stone boundary 

wall which forms the vehicular access onto Priestlands Lane. The 

replacement of a timber boarded section of the building with a natural stone 

and slate roofed extension is considered to be a visual improvement and is 

more typical of this part of the Conservation Area. The ridge line will follow 

that of the existing building and therefore the extension would not be visually 

intrusive in terms of size, mass or scale. Therefore it is considered that the 

proposed development would not have any significant adverse impact on 

either the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. Hence the 

proposal accords with Policy CD5 of the adopted local plan. 

82

11.4 The Town Council have objected to the application as they consider that the 

proposals would result in a loss of amenity to the neighbouring properties. A 

number of representations have been received from the occupiers of 

neighbouring properties who are also concerned about the impact of the 

development on their privacy and a loss of light to their gardens. The Priory 

House is to the north east of the site and is concerned about a loss of privacy 

and light to their garden. However members should note that the rooflight in 

the north east facing roof slope is an existing rooflight and there are no 

additional rooflights proposed for that roof slope as part of this application. 

Therefore there would not be any overlooking of The Priory House as a result 

of this application. With regards to the light to the garden the eaves level for 

the extension will be at the same height as the top of the boundary wall 

between Collegiate House and The Priory House. The pitched roof will slope 

away from the garden to The Priory House and the ridge line of the extension 

will only be 0.4m higher than the existing ridge line of the timber boarded 

section of the building. Therefore the increase in the height of the ridge would 

not have any significant adverse impact on the light to the garden of The 

Priory House. 

11.5 The occupiers of Abbots Fee are concerned about a loss of privacy to their 

garden which is to the south west of the site. Two rooflights are proposed for 

the south west roof slope serving a bathroom and bedroom. There is however 

a distance of 10m between the proposed extension and the boundary wall 

between the two properties. Abbots Fee has a garden which is over 25m in 

length and the rooflights face only the very end of that garden. Therefore 

given that the rooflights are 10m from the boundary and only look towards the 

very end of the garden, it is considered that there would not be any significant 

overlooking and loss of privacy to the garden of Abbots Fee. 

1.6 The occupiers of Ransam which is the dwelling to the north of the site are 

concerned about the overlooking of their property and garden. There would 

be a distance of 6.8m between the gable end of the extension and the gable 

end of Ransam. In the gable end of ransam there is a first floor small circular 

window. On the remainder of the boundary there is a 2.7m high stone wall 

separating the parking area at the rear of Collegiate House from the garden of 

Ransam. The proposed circular window in the gable end of the extension is to 

be obscure glazed and non - opening and therefore there would not be any 

significant overlooking of either the garden or the first floor window in the 

gable end of Ransam. 

11.7 There has also been concerns expressed by local people that the proposal 

could result in the over development of the site. However the extension is 

replacing part of the existing building, albeit that the ridge line would be 

slightly higher to match the rest of the single storey section and the overall 

length of the single storey rear projection would be increased from 19.5m to 

20m. Therefore given that in size there is very little difference between the 

existing timber boarded section and the proposed stone extension, it is 

considered that the proposal would not result in the over development of the 

site. 


12.1 It is considered that the proposed extension would not have an adverse 

impact on the character and appearance of either the listed building or the 

Conservation Area. Nor would the extension, associated windows and 

rooflights have any significant adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring 

properties. Hence the proposal accords with the policies of the adopted local 

plan. 

83


13.1 Approve subject to the following conditions: 

i. Materials 

ii. Timber painted windows 


v. Obscure glazed fixed (non-opening) circular window 

84



1/E/2003/002254 ITEM NUMBER 09 



Application Site: UNIT 4, COLLEGIATE HOUSE, GREENHILL, SHERBORNE 

Proposal: Partial demolition to remove timber framed building & erect 

extension to dwelling. Make internal & external alterations 

Applicant: Mrs J A Hellyar 




1.1 Grant subject to conditions 


2.1 Listed building consent is being sought to replace an existing timber boarded 

single storey section of the building with a stone and slate single storey 

extension. 

2.2 Collegiate House is a grade II listed building. The section of the building to 

which this application relates is the single storey projection at the rear of the 

main house which is closer to Priestlands Lane than Greenhill. 

2.3 Planning permission and listed building consent have already been granted in 

2002 to alter the building from 10 flats to 4 dwellings. At that time consent 

was given to replace the existing timber boarded section of the building with a 

single storey stone extension which had the same ridge height as that of the 

existing single storey projection at the rear of Collegiate House. 

2.4 There have been 2 further applications for listed building consent to replace 

the timber boarded section since that approved in 2002. Those applications 

differ from that now being considered in that the ridge height had been 

increased and projecting gable ends used to allow for the creation of 

residential accommodation in the roof space. The applications were refused 

as it was considered that the designs would be detrimental to the character 

and appearance of the listed buildings contrary to Policy CD8 of the adopted 

local plan.. 

2.5 This application proposes erecting a single storey stone extension to replace 

the timber boarded section. The ridge height would be the same as the 

existing single storey projection at the rear to which it would be attached. A 

circular window in the gable end and the use of 2 conservation rooflights 

would enable accommodation in the form of a bedroom, landing and 

bathroom to be created in the roof space. A pair of glazed doors would open 

out onto a small garden area for the dwelling. 


85

• Impact on the character and appearance of the listed building. 


Town Council 





5.1 None. 









Date 


Demolish outbuilding and 

chimney stack. Erect single 

storey extension and carry out 


alterations. 

1/N/2002/1391 Mrs J A Hellyar Make alterations and erect 

single storey extension to 

convert existing ten suites of 

rooms to 4 attached dwelling 

units together with revised 

parking arrangements. 

1N/2003/410 Mrs J A Hellyar Conversion of existing building 

and erection of extension to 

form one dwelling unit. 


Demolish timber framed & 

boarded building, erect 

extension and carry out 


alterations. 

1/N/2003/1420 Mrs J A Hellyar Demolish existing timber 


extension to dwelling unit no.4. 


Partial demolition to remove 

timber framed & boarded 

building and erect extension to 

dwelling unit no. 4. 

1/N/2003/2255 Mrs J A Hellyar Demolish existing timber 


extension to dwelling. 

Approved 

18/12/02 

Approved 

18/12/02 






Committee 

agenda. 

86



Environment Policy Q - Built heritage 






10.1 None. 


11.1 The determining issue is the impact of the proposals on the character and 

appearance of the listed building. 

11.2 The current application differs very little to the scheme already approved for 

the replacement of the timber section of building. The only differences are that 

a circular obscure glazed window in the gable end is now proposed as are 

two rooflights in the north east facing roof slope. 

11.3 A number of minor changes have been made to the original plans submitted 

resulting in amended plans which the Council's conservation and listed 

building officer consider to be acceptable. 

11.4 The Town Council have objected to the application as they consider that the 

proposals would result in a loss of amenity to the neighbouring properties. 

Such a matter is a material consideration in the determination of the planning 

application but not for this application for listed building consent. 

11.5 A number of letters of representation have been received from the occupiers 

of neighbouring properties. They have expressed concerns about the 

proposals resulting in a loss of privacy and a loss of light to the gardens of 

neighbouring properties. Again these are not material considerations in the 

determination of this application for listed building consent. There is also 

concern that the proposal would result in the over development of the site. 

However the extension is replacing part of the existing building, albeit that the 

ridge line would be slightly higher to match that of the rest of the single storey 

section and the overall length of the single storey rear projection would be 

increased from 19.5m to 20m. Therefore given that in size there is very little 

difference between the existing timber boarded section and the proposed 

stone extension, it is considered that the proposal would not result in the over 

development of the site. 


12.1 The proposed extension differs very little from one already approved in 2002 

in terms of its size and design. It is considered that the proposals would not 

have any significant adverse impact on the character or appearance of the 

listed building. Hence the proposal accords with policy CD8 of the adopted 

local plan. 

87


13.1 Approve subject to the following conditions: 

i. Materials 

ii. Timber painted windows 


88



1/E/2003/002026 ITEM NUMBER 10 


Registration Date: 29 October, 2003 

Application Site: Land at Brook Farm, CHESELBOURNE 

Proposal: Demolish existing outbuilding & erect 4No cottages with 

garages. Construct new vehicular & pedestrian access & 

sewage treatment plant 

Applicant: Mr A Turner 

Ward Members: Cllr Pearce 


This application has been called to Committee by Cllr Pearce. 




2.1 Planning permission is being sought to erect 4 dwellings on land to the north 

east of Brook cottage. The proposal consists of 2 semi-detached dwellings 

which would each have 3 bedrooms, 1 detached house with 3 bedrooms and 

a detached house with 4 bedrooms. The existing vehicular access to Rose 

cottage and brook cottage would be closed off and a new access and road 

created to serve the existing and proposed dwellings. A block of 3 single 

garages is proposed to serve the three 3 bedroom houses, whilst a double 

garage is proposed for the 4 bedroom dwelling. Also proposed for the site is 

a Klargester BioDisc sewage treatment plant. 

2.2 The site is adjacent to the village hall and on the opposite side of the road to 

the village school. However it is not immediately adjacent to the road but 

rather set back behind the existing stream and therefore some 20m from the 

road. The land is however, clearly visible from the road, village hall car park 

and the public footpath to the east of the site. At present there are a number 

of trees on the grass verge beside the road, 1 of which, an Ash would have to 

be removed to allow for the proposed vehicular access. A section of mature 

hedgerow would also be removed to enable the creation of the vehicular 

access. There is then an open paddock area in front of the stream and a 

bank at the rear of the stream constructed in stone. There is an overgrown 

hedgerow along the stream which would also be affected by the removal of a 

number of trees. Behind the hedge and trees the site is currently a paddock 

with a number of fairly small and old agricultural buildings. The land rises 

steeply to the east of the site where at the top of the bank behind a hedgerow 

there is a public footpath which runs north south. 

2.3 The site is within the Defined Development Boundary for Cheselborne and 

the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty in the adopted local plan. However in 

89

the First Deposit Plan of the Local Plan Review (January 2003) the site is 

outside of the DDB and proposed as Land of Local Landscape Importance 

(LLLI) within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

2.4 The applicant has suggested that the paddock to the west of the site adjacent 

to the road is "deeded" to the Village Hall for communal use. The land could 

also be used by the village school. Furthermore the applicant is proposing a 

footpath link between the road, village hall and the public footpath to the east 

of the site and a footpath link between the public footpath and the existing 

children's play area in the village. Although the applicant has suggested 

these elements as being of possible community benefit they are not included 

within the red line for the application site. 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Impact on visual amenity and the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

Impact on the amenity of the adjacent Public Right of Way. 

Policy context - Proposed as LLLI in First Deposit Plan of Local Plan Review 

and outside DDB for Cheselborne. 

Impact on residential amenity 

Highway safety 

Flooding 







5.1 Environment Agency - No objection subject to conditions and finished floor 

levels being 300mm above existing ground levels. 

5.2 Wessex Water - No objection. 








8.1 None. 



Settlement Policy G - Housing development in villages 

Settlement Policy H - Scale and form of development 

Environment Policy F - Maintaining the quality of the landscape 

Environment Policy G - Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty 

Environment Policy Q - Built heritage 

90



H3 - Residential development within defined development boundaries 

H7 - Local needs housing within defined development boundary 

L1 - Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 

CD1 - Design standards 

CD2 - Retention and planting of trees 



SA1 - Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 

SA6 - Land of Local Landscape Importance 

SA19 - ALterations, extensions and changes of use of listed buildings 

SS3 - Development outside the defined development boundaries 

TRAN5 - Parking provision 

DA1 - Retention of trees, hedgerows and other important landscape features 

DA3 -The scale and form of settlements and the pattern of streets and spaces 





10.1 None. 


11.1 The site is within the DDB in the adopted local plan and therefore in principle 

residential development may be acceptable. However one of the material 

planning considerations in determining the application is the visual impact of 

the proposed development on the character of the village and the designated 

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Policy SP1 of the adopted local plan 

states that development will only be permitted if it meets amongst others the 

following 3 criteria: 

(a) The scale and nature of the development is in character with the 

settlement and its surroundings. 

(b) The amenities of the surroundings areas are safeguarded. 

(c) The development does not involve the loss of an important area of open 

space or feature which is an essential part of the character of the settlement. 

11.2 The proposed development consists of cottage style dwellings which would 

be constructed in stone, flint, render and thatch. The dwellings themselves 

reflect the local vernacular character however that does not necessarily make 

the development acceptable in terms of its visual impact on the character of 

the village and the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

11.3 The site is considered to be an important open area in the centre of the 

village, contributing significantly to its character. The site is quite open with 

existing hedgerows and trees and is clearly visible from the road, village hall 

and public footpath to the east. Existing landscape features on the site would 

be seriously affected by the proposed development. To create the proposed 

vehicular access would involve the removal of a considerable stretch of 

mature hedgerow, which is currently a strong landscape feature of amenity 

value to the village and an established habitat for wildlife. A replacement 

hedge would take many years to reach this level of maturity. The overgrown 

hedgerow along the stream would also be affected through the removal of a 

number of trees. Whilst this feature has become overgrown it still provides at 

present a vertical element to the valley floor and is likely to be of wildlife 

value. Overall the proposals would reshape this important open space and 

91

have a significant adverse impact on the visual amenity value it affords. 

11.4 The visual importance of this site to the character of this village is emphasised 

by its exclusion from the DDB for Cheselborne in the first deposit plan and its 

proposed designation as Land of Local Landscape Importance. The land is 

described in the inset map for Chesleborne in the following manner: 

"Land between the northern and central DDBs is also designated as Land of 

Local Landscape Importance as it contributes positively to the valley setting of 

the village, provides an important link between the built and natural 

environment and the fields are attractive landscape features in their own 

right". The land is already within the designated Area of Outstanding Natural 

Beauty. 

11.5 An application was submitted in 1999 to erect a dwelling on land adjacent to 

Homestill, Cheselborne which is a site further south in the village to that now 

being considered. The site is adjacent to the road within the DDB. Planning 

permission was refused for the rendered clay tiled two storey dwelling for two 

reasons. One of those reasons related to the detrimental impact of the 

development on the street scene and unacceptable harm to the visual 

amenity of the AONB. The applicant's appeal against the Council's decision 

was subsequently dismissed. A copy of the Inspector's decision is in the 

correspondence appendix because it bears testament to the importance of 

the open spaces to the intrinsic character of this particular village. In particular 

he says that Cheselborne is "loosely knit, and could be easily spoiled by too 

much consolidation. Cottages and houses along the lane are interspersed 

with fields and gardens, so the open spaces within the village contribute much 

of its character". 

11.6 It is therefore considered that the proposed development of this site would be 

detrimental to the character of Cheselborne and the visual amenity of the 

AONB. The importance of the openness and undeveloped nature of the site is 

reflected in its exclusion from the DDB in the first deposit plan and its 

proposed designation as LLLI. The character of the site would be completely 

changed when viewed from the road, village hall and public footpath to the 

detriment of visual amenity. Hence the proposal is considered to be contrary 

to Policies SP1 and L1 of the adopted Local Plan. 

11.7 It is considered that in respect of highway safety the proposed development is 

acceptable and the Highway Authority have not objected to the application 

subject to a number of conditions. 

11.8 The closest residential properties to the site are Brook Cottage and Rose 

Cottage, the latter is a grade II listed building. Brook cottage is in the 

ownership of the applicant, but it is considered anyway that the proposed 

development would not have any adverse impact on the amenity of the 

property. The nearest proposed dwelling to the cottage is the proposed 4 

bedroom detached dwelling with is gable end on to Brook Cottage and 

parallel with it. The detached 3 bedroom dwelling would be some 16m from 

Brook Cottage and set at an angle to it. It is therefore considered that the 

proposed development would not result in any significant overlooking or loss 

of light to the property. Rose Cottage which is virtually parallel to Brook 

Cottage is some 36m from the nearest of the proposed dwellings. The 

vehicular access Rose Cottage, Brook Cottage and the proposed dwellings 

would actually be further from the cottage than the existing vehicular access. 

Provision of a vehicular access to Rose Cottage would be made from the 

proposed new vehicular access to the application site. The owner of Rose 

Cottage is concerned that the proposed development would adversely impact 

on the setting of the cottage. However this is not considered to be the case 

given that the proposed dwellings are some distance to the north east of Rose 

Cottage. Although there would be the creation of a new vehicular access it 

92

would be replacing an existing access and therefore it is considered that it 

would not adversely impact on the setting of the listed building. The owner is 

also concerned that the plans indicate the closing off of the existing access to 

Rose Cottage. Whether the applicant has the legal right to do this should 

planning permission be granted for the development is a civil matter and not a 

material planning consideration. 


12.1 It is considered that the proposed development does not accord with the 

policies of the local plan. Whilst it is considered that the proposed 

development is acceptable in terms of highway safety and residential amenity, 

the development would have a detrimental impact on the character of the 

village and the visual amenity of the AONB. The site forms an important open 

space in the village and its significant contribution to the character of the 

village is emphasised by its exclusion from the DDB in the first deposit plan 

and the fact that it is proposed as LLLI. 



i. The proposed development would result in the loss of an important open 

space which contributes significantly to the character of the village and 

would cause unacceptable harm to the visual amenity of the Area of 

Outstanding Natural Beauty. Furthermore the proposed development 

would adversely impact on the openess of views of the site from the Public 

Right of Way to the north east of the site and harm the special features 

and qualities of the site which is proposed as Land of Local Landscape 

Importance in the First Deposit Plan of the Local Plan Review. The visual 

importance of the site to the character of this village is emphasised as it is 

excluded from the Defined Development boundary in the First Deposit 

Plan. Hence the proposal is contrary to Environment Policy G of the 

Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Structure Plan, policies SP1, H3, L1 and 

L4 of the adopted West Dorset District Local Plan and policies SS3, SA1 

and SA6 of the First Deposit Plan of the Local Plan Review (published 

January 2003). 

93



1/E/2003/002375 ITEM NUMBER 11 



Application Site: MANOR FARMHOUSE, HIGH STREET, YETMINSTER, 

SHERBORNE, DT9 6LF 

Proposal: Erect 4No two storey terraced dwellings with courtyard parking 

& sitting/amenity area to the rear, modify existing vehicular 

access (AFFECTING SETTING OF LISTED BUILDING) 

Applicant: Mr & Mrs J F Partridge 

Ward Members: Cllr House 

Case Officer: Darren Rogers 

This application has been called in to Committee at the request of Councillor House. 


1.1 Refuse 


2.1 The application site comprises open land at the rear of the applicants guest 

house two-storey premises which front High Street. There is a high stone wall 

enclosing the site around the Bower Court cul-de-sac where vehicular access 

is gained off the radii of the cul-de-sac to an open parking area for the guest 

house premises. 

2.2 The site is just within the Defined Development Boundary of the village and 

within a Conservation Area. 

2.3 It is proposed to construct 4 x 2 storey dwellings on the land with the first 

floor accommodation essentially within the roof element of the development. 

A 3 bedroomed property would be located on Plot 1, 2 beds for Plot 2, 2 beds 

for Plot 3 and 2 beds for Plot 4. Plots 1 and 4 would incorporate a 

conservatory (at the rear for Plot 1 and on the front for Plot 4. Vehicular 

access is proposed via a tunnelled access to a rear car parking area for 5 

cars. 

2.4 The scheme would essentially be a terrace of dwellings wrapping around the 

corner of the site. Materials are proposed to be a combination of handmade 

and reclaimed brickwork, reclaimed and natural stone and masonry painted 

render with a plain clay tiled roof. 


• Effect on the character and appearance of the Conservartion Area and 

94

• 

• 

setting of nearby Listed buildings 

Impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers 

Adequacy of car parking and impact on highway safety and amenity of 

neighbours 


Parish/Town Council 

4.1 Objects - see correspondence appendix 


4.2 Recommends refusal for 2 reasons: 

1. The proposed development does not make adequate provisions for the 

parking of vehicles within the site and would therefore be likely to encourage 

parking on the highway with consequent risk to all road users; 

2. The proposal would result in the loss of on site vehicle parking facilities for 

Manor Farmhouse Guest House and would therefore be likely to encourage 

parking on the highway with consequent risk of danger to all road users. 


5.1 None 







8. Relevant Planning History - None relating to this site but see body of report for 

history of adajcent sites. 



Settlement Policy G, H, Housing Policy B, C Environment Policy F, Q 


SP1 (DEVELOPMENT WITHIN DEFINED DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES) 

H3 (RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN DEFINED DEVELOPMENT 

BOUNDARIES) 

CD1 (DESIGN STANDARDS) 

CD5 (PROTECTION OF CHARACTER OF CONSERVATION AREAS) 

CD8 (PROPOSALS AFFECTING LISTED BUILDINGS) 

TR19 (PARKING PROVISION) 


SA20 (SETTINGS OF LISTED BUILDINGS) 

SA21 (PROTECTION OF CHARACTER OR APPEARANCE OF 

95

CONSERVATION AREAS) 

AH14 (ROAD SAFETY) 

SS1 (DEVELOPMENT WITHIN DEFINED DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES) 

HS2 (RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN DEFINED DEVELOPMENT 

BOUNDARIES) 

TRAN5 (PARKING PROVISION) 

DA3 (THE SCALE AND FORM OF SETTLEMENTS AND THE PATTERN OF 

STREETS AND SPACES) 

DA5 (THE SCALE AND POSITIONING OF BUILDINGS) 

DA6 (PRIVACY, DAYLIGHT AND GENERAL AMENITY) 

DA7 (DETAILED DESIGN AND MATERIALS) 


9.1 None 


10.1 A two-storey dwelling was refused permission at the rear of Clare Cottage 

(further to the west of the application site) in April 1999 for the following 

reasons ref 99/38: 

"1. The siting and design of the proposed dwelling are out of keeping with the 

form and character of the Conservation Area and as such would be contrary 

to CD1 and CDS of the West Dorset District Local Plan. 

2. The indicated garage location represents an inappropriate and contrived 

parking provision which is not readily accessible from the proposed dwelling 

and would be inconvenient and detrimental to residential amenity for 

occupiers of the development - contrary to policy SP1 of the Local Plan. 

3. No provision is included for any on-site parking for the proposed dwelling, 

which will further exacerbate the problems of on-street parking in the 

HighStreet". 

10.2 An appeal against the above decision was dismissed on grounds of remote 

parking and while the location of a dwelling found favour with the Inspector he 

also dismissed it on design grounds and use of materials as not enhancing or 

preserving the Conservation Area. 

10.3 An application for a dwelling at that site was also dismissed on appeal in 

1994. 

10.4 This current scheme is also considered unacceptable. 

10.5 It would result in the loss of car parking for the existing guest house business 

and while local planning authority's are advised under Government guidance 

to be flexible with regard to parking, there are only 5 spaces for the 4 

dwellings. Visitors would have to park on street in the cul-de-sac turning area 

96

and this would detract from the amenity of neighbouring dwellings and would 

result in on street car parking in an area which should be kept clear for the 

turning of vehicles. 

10.6 From a design point of view there is a general spaciousness/openness at the 

rear of the High Street properties which contributes to the grain of 

development and character and appearance of the Conservation Area 

particularly when viewed from the Bower Court properties towards the rear of 

the High Street properties. It is considered that the design and mass of the 

dwellings as proposed would detract from the character and appearance of 

the Conservation Area (and setting of adjacent Listed Buildings) and thereby 

do little to enhance or preserve the Conservation Area setting. In addition 

approval of this development could set an undesirable precedent leading to 

other similar schemes on adjacent sites to the west of the application site 

which could then further erode the open aspect at the rear of the High Street 

to the further detriment of the Conservation Area. 


11.1 The scheme is considered unacceptable on parking, design and impact upon 

the Conservation Area grounds. 


12.1 Refuse for the following reasons: 

i. The siting and design of the proposed development would be out of 

keeping with the form and character of the Conservation Area and would 

detract from the setting of nearby Listed Buildings. As such the proposal 

would be contrary to; 

SETTLEMENT POLICY H and ENVIRONMENT POLICY Q of the Adopted 

Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Structure Plan; 

SP1 (DEVELOPMENT WITHIN DEFINED DEVELOPMENT 

BOUNDARIES), H3 (RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN DEFINED 

DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES), CD1 (DESIGN STANDARDS), CD5 

(PROTECTION OF CHARACTER OF CONSERVATION AREAS), and 

CD8 (PROPOSALS AFFECTING LISTED BUILDINGS) of the Adopted 

West Dorset District Council Local Plan; and 

ii. 

POLICIES SA20 (SETTINGS OF LISTED BUILDINGS), SA21 

(PROTECTION OF CHARACTER OR APPEARANCE OF 

CONSERVATION AREAS), SS1 (DEVELOPMENT WITHIN DEFINED 

DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES), HS2 (RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 

WITHIN DEFINED DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES), 

DA3 (THE SCALE AND FORM OF SETTLEMENTS AND THE PATTERN 

OF STREETS AND SPACES), DA5 (THE SCALE AND POSITIONING OF 

BUILDINGS),and DA7 (DETAILED DESIGN AND MATERIALS ) of the 

Emerging West Dorset District Council Local Plan. 

The proposed development would result in the loss of existing rear car 

parking facilities for Manor Farmhouse and as a consequence of the 

proposed development there would be inadequate car parking resulting in 

on street car parking in and around the Bower Court cul-de-sac to the 

detriment of the amenity of neighbouring occupiers and to the safety and 

97

convenience of users of the highway. As such the proposal would be 

contrary to: 

POLICIES SP1 (DEVELOPMENT WITHIN DEFINED DEVELOPMENT 

BOUNDARIES) and TR19 (PARKING PROVISION) of the Adopted West 

Dorset District Council Local Plan; and 

POLICIES AH14 (ROAD SAFETY), SS1 (DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 

DEFINED DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARIES), TRAN5 (PARKING 

PROVISION), DA6 (PRIVACY, DAYLIGHT AND GENERAL AMENITY) 

and DA7 (DETAILED DESIGN AND MATERIALS) of the Emerging West 

Dorset District Council Local Plan 

98



1/E/2003/002291 ITEM NUMBER 12 

Application Number: 1/E/2003/002291 Change of Use 


Application Site: CAMELOT HOUSE, THREE LANES END, PUDDLETOWN, 

DORCHESTER, DT2 8RR 

Proposal: Change of use of building to Auction Room 

Applicant: Acanthus Auctions 

Ward Members: Cllr Pearce 



1.1 Approve subject to conditions 


2.1 This application relates to existing commercial premises on the western edge 

of the village of Puddletown. The site adjoins but is outside the Defined 

Development Boundary of the village but are long established commercial 

premises. 

2.2 The site comprises a two-storey detached building at the site entrance 

adjacent to a bridleway with large outbuildings at the rear. To the north is a 

recently constructed residential development. To the south is a car parking 

area for visitors to the adjacent playing field and public park. 

2.3 This is a retrospective application for the retention of an Auction use (a 

unclassified use - sui generis - in the Use Classes Order 1987) which has 

been trading for some time at the site. The applicants' agent states the use 

has operated since 1996, but the planning history reveals a planning 

application for a change of use of the building from a former workshop (B8 

storage and distribution use) to a B1 use, approved subject to conditions in 

April 2000. 

2.4 The applicant states that auctions are held fortnightly on Saturdays between 

11am and 2pm and auctions are of specialist goods with an average 

attendance of the public between 15 and 30 people. 

2.5 Car parking is indicated within the curtilage of the site in front of the auction 

building and in the public car park adjacent to the south of the site. 


• Effect on residential amenity 

• Effect on highway safety 

• Acceptability of the use outside the DDB 


99


4.1 Objects - see correspondence appendix 


4.2 No objections subject to allocated car parking being provided. 


5.1 Environmental Health - no objections given no complaints of noise and 

disturbance from the use. 









Date 

1/E/1999/0321 E Amey Change of use of stores and Approved 17th 

former builders workshop (B8) April 2000 

to Business use (B1) and 

provide car parking 



Settlement Policy G, I, Economy Policy B, Community Facilities Policy B, 


SP3 (Development Outside Defined Development Boundaries), SP4 (General 

Criteria for the Change of Use or Adaptation of Rural Buildings), E3 

(Employment Uses in Villages), E4 (Retention of Employment Sites), E5 (The 

Use of Rural Buildings for Employment Purposes), TR19 (Parking Provision) 


AH12 (Development Generating Noise or Vibration), AH14 (Road Safety), SS3 

(Development Outside Defined Development Boundaries), SS4 (Adaptation 

and Change of Use of Rural Buildings), ET4 (Employment Uses Outside 

Defined Development Boundaries), TRAN 5 (Parking Provision), DA6 (Privacy 

Daylight and General Amenity), 


9.1 None 


10.1 The application site while outside the DDB of the village is clearly an 

established commercial employment site. The use as an Auction in Policy 

terms is not therefore considered to be objectionable as the main thrust of 

Policy (given the sites location outside but adjoining the DDB) is to ensure 

that it has no adverse effect upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or 

on highway safety. Indeed the proposal is supported given the content of 

100

Policy E5 and SP4 of the Adopted Local Plan. 

10.2 It is clear that the use has operated for some time on the site given that this is 

a retrospective application. However consultations have taken place with the 

Council's Environmental Health officer who has confirmed that there have 

been no complaints about noise in particular, from the use. 

10.3 While the frontage of the site is used for car parking this is carried out in a 

haphazard way leading to occasions when vehicles are parked directly at the 

junction with the main road which is clearly unacceptable in terms of highways 

safety. However parking is identified within the application site and there is an 

available public car parking area adjacent to the south. If permission is 

granted it is recommended that a condition be attached to any permission 

requiring parking space to be provide and clearly marked within a period of 

say 2 months. 


11.1 The use has been in operation for some time. The proposal is considered 

acceptable particularly given the comments from Environmental Health and is 

recommended for approval. 


12.1 Approval subject to the following conditions 

i. parking to be laid out and clearly white lined within the curtilage of the site 

within 2 months 

ii. Use restricted to Saturday use only 

iii. No open storage 

iv. 

Temporary permission (18 months) 

101



1/E/2003/001237 ITEM NUMBER 13 


Registration Date: 14 July, 2003 

Application Site: Dorford Baptist Church, Bridport Road, DORCHESTER 

Proposal: Demolish part of existing building, erect extensions and make 

alterations to building. Construct new vehicular access. 

Applicant: Dorford Baptist Church 

Ward Members: Cllr Canning, Cllr Beard 

Case Officer: Mrs Melanie Young 


1.1 Approve subject to conditions. 


2.1 This application relates to the Dorford Baptist Church built in 1914 which is 

situated on the south western corner of the roundabout junction with Bridport 

Road, The Grove, High West Street, and Albert Road. 

2.2 The building is not Listed but there are Listed Buildings on each of the other 

three corners that make up the roundabout junction. 

2.3 Adjoining the site to the west is a pair of semi-detached 2-storey properties 

(no.2 adjacent to the application site appears vacant and no.4 is a dentists) 

beyond which are terraced housing in Cornwall Road, and to the south is The 

Gables - a 2-storey Victorian detached building as well as 2 x 2-storey 

Cottages which are built up to the church site but at a lower level. 

2.4 The application site comprises the main church building occupying a 

prominent corner location with the church hall and other ancillary facilities set 

at the rear and adjoining the properties to the west and Cottages to the south. 

2.5 The site itself is within the Defined Development Boundary (DDB) for 

Dorchester and is within a Conservation Area. One of the features of the 

area adjacent to the site are 4 notable trees (2 limes and 2 horsechestnuts) 

running along the southern boundary adjacent to The Gables, as well as the 

remnants of the Old Roman Wall. 

2.6 This current application has been submitted following discussions with 

officers about the acceptability or otherwise of extending and improving 

accommodation at the church and follows the submission and subsequent 

102

withdrawal of a planning application submitted towards the end of 2002 (Ref 

No: 1/E/2002/1822). 

2.7 Submitted with the current application is a letter by the Church explaining the 

reasons for the proposals. A summary of the letter is as follows:- 

• The exterior of the buildings are in much need of renovation and 

restoration; 

• the design proposed would considerably enhance the appearance of the 

site; 

• The Church has one of the largest congregations in the town and 

therefore plays a vital role in the spiritual life of Dorchester; 

in excess of 200 people use the inadequate existing buildings; 

• 80 children attend the Sunday School facility and there are only 2 rooms 

purpose built for children; 

• the ad hoc extensions previously built render the hall of little practical use 

and there is inadequate storage facilities; 

• a purpose built hall / gymnasium would provide adequate facilities for 

children and storage; 

• a purposely designed Youth Centre would provide accommodation for the 

recently appointed Youth Warden and for teenagers; 

• the existing kitchen and toilet facilities would be improved; 

• proper office accommodation for staff would be provided as well as car 

parking; 

• the extensions will mean that access can be achieved for disabled access 

right through the church complex; and 

• the new facilities would provide a new community use for the benefit of 

the whole town. 

2.8 The above improvements are proposed via the following alterations. 

2.9 The existing large single-storey building adjacent to Nos 2 and 4 Bridport 

Road would be demolished and a new 2-storey domestic scale building 

would be erected. This would at ground floor level provide accommodation 

for a Pastor's office, Youth pastor's office, a church office and reception area, 

with toilets at the rear. At first floor level would be an office / Sunday School / 

meeting room area, a Leader's office / meeting area, with storage and toilets 

at the rear. This building would be built about 1.5m from the boundary with 

No 2 Bridport Road. 

2.10 Beyond the building outlined in para 2.9m would be an Activity Hall 

essentially accommodating a single Badminton Court. This would be built 

about 1.6m from the boundary with No 2 Bridport Road and about 1.5m from 

the rear wall of the Cottages along the southern boundary. 

103

2.11 Also along the southern boundary , adjoining the Cottages, it is proposed to 

construct a part 2-storey/part single-storey extension which would comprise a 

coffee lounge / meeting room / creche areas with ancillary kitchen and 

storage areas at ground floor with a Youth Meeting area above. This 

extension would be part single-storey in that it would wrap around the 

southern part of the main church building in order that the main church 

building could effectively accommodate a larger congregation area. 

2.12 Within the existing grassed / amenity area off Albert Road, it is proposed to 

provide a cloister activity courtyard area within a timber decking area together 

with cycle parking facilities. 

2.13 Car parking is proposed via Albert Road close to the existing zebra crossing 

via a 4m wide vehicular access leading to 6 car parking spaces including 1 

disabled space. This parking area would be located adjacent to the southern 

boundary which would be cleaned, repaired and repainted (part of the Roman 

Wall) and the timber decking area would be created via a retaining wall, 

designed and constructed in such a way as to safeguard the boundary trees. 

2.14 A new pedestrian entrance would be provided on the eastern side of the main 

church building almost next to the zebra crossing. 

2.15 Along the Bridport Road frontage it is proposed to provide a large singlestorey 

extension which would comprise a drop-in lounge and meeting area as 

an extension of the proposed reception and foyer area. This extension would 

be built within 0.8m of the existing boundary wall and would be constructed 

from a feature brickwork band with colour coated double glazed windows with 

a feature horizontal capping. The roof would incorporate a mono pitched tiled 

roof sloping at the same angle and of the same tiles as the church roof. 

2.16 Also fronting Bridport Road would be a 2-storey entrance foyer which at 

ground floor level would pick up the detailed elements of the main church 

building and be constructed with similar materials as to the single-storey 

extension. 

2.17 Finally, also fronting Bridport Road is proposed a temporary parking area for 

delivery vehicles including disabled, funeral and wedding vehicles, together 

with additional cycle parking facilities. 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Impact of the development on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 

Impact upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 

Adequacy of car parking facilities. 

Impact of the development on adjacent trees. 

Impact of the development on the setting of the nearby Listed Buildings. 

Impact of the design of the extensions on the main church building and 

neighbouring properties. 

104


Dorchester Town Council 

4.1 Recommends refusal given concerns over the number of trees likely to be 

felled and concern over the impact on the properties in Albert Road. The 

Town Council were also of the view that the proposal was insensitive and 

would not enhance the Conservation Area. 


4.2 No objections subject to conditions. 

5. Other consultations - None 









Date 

1/E/2002/1822 Dorford Baptist Church Demolish part of existing 

building, erect extensions and 

carry out alterations. 

Construct new vehicular and 

pedestrian access. 

Withdrawn 



• Settlement Policies B & H; 

• Community Facilities Policies A & B; 

• Environment Policies F, H, Q & S; 


• SP1 

• CD1 

• CD2 

• CD3 

• CD5 

(Development within Defined Development Boundaries 


(Retention and Planting of Trees); 

(Landscaping Schemes); 

(Protection and Character of Conservation Areas) 

105

• CD8 

(Proposals affecting Listed Buildings) 

• CD16B (Area of Local Archeological Significance) 

• CD18 (Development Affecting Archaeological Sites); 

• R6 

• TR19 

(Provision of Facilities); 

(Parking Provision). 


• SA20 (Settings of Listed Buildings); 

• SA21 (Protection of Character or Appearance of Conservation Areas); 

• SA24 (Sites of Regional or County Archaeological Significance); 

• AH12 (Development Generating Noise and Vibration); 

• AH13 (Developments Sensitive to Noise or Vibration); 

• AH14 (Road Safety); 

• SS1 

• C6 

• TRAN 5 (Parking Provision); 

• TRAN 8 (Cyclists and Pedestrians); 

• TRAN 11(Cycle Paring Facilities); 

• DA1 (Retention of Trees, Hedgerows and other Important Landscaping 

Features); 

• DA2 

• DA3 (The Scale and Form of Settlements and the Pattern of Streets 

and Spaces); 

• DA5 

• DA6 

• DA7 

• SU1 

(Development within Defined Development Boundaries); 

(Retention of Local Community Facilities); 

(Landscape Schemes); 

(The Scale and Positioning of Buildings); 

(Privacy, Daylight and General Amenity); 

(Detailed Design and Materials); 

(Energy Efficiency). 



10.1 There is no doubt that the proposed extensions / alterations would result in a 

significant change in the appearance of the existing church site. The question 

to be answered, however, is whether these changes would result in a 

development that would warrant a refusal of planning permission. 

10.2 It is therefore considered important to consider each of the alterations / 

extensions in turn as well as assessing the whole development . 

10.3 Firstly there is no doubt that the appearance of the existing church is currently 

looking somewhat jaded and, in particular, the existing extensions to the side 

106

and rear of the main church building. These alterations have taken place over 

the years in an ad hoc and unplanned way resulting in the use of the buildings 

being somewhat uncoordinated for modern church practices. The singlestorey 

buildings at the rear in particular do little to enhance the wider 

Conservation Area and are poor in design terms. 

10.4 The proposed 2-storey extension between the main church building and Nos 

2 & 4 Bridport Road has been designed in such a way as to provide a 

transition from the domestic appearance of No 2 & 4 to the community facility 

that is the church itself. In this respect it is considered that the design and 

external appearance are satisfactory and incorporate and pick up elements of 

the main church building in particular the stone arch lintels above proposed 

ground floor windows. 

10.5 The proposed 2-storey entrance foyer and single-storey drop in lounge area 

fronting Bridport Road could be considered as being prominent and dominant 

features in their own right along this particular elevation. However, given the 

use of materials proposed, it is considered that this would result in a 

'transparent' building to some degree affording some views of the original 

windows and the main building. The use of glass to express light along this 

frontage is welcome, given that a solid brick building would give the 

impression of an unduly dominating building. 

10.6 The single-storey building at the rear of the main church building has been so 

designed to incorporate features of a cloister nature with almost floor to eaves 

windows with false pitched and mono pitched tiled roofs. This is to be 

repeated where the single-storey element is intended to be part of the 2- 

storey element adjacent to the sports hall facility 

10.7 The above mentioned extensions are considered to improve and enhance the 

appearance of the building and the Conservation Area and have been so 

designed following discussions with the Council's District Architect , to provide 

extensions that in detail pick up elements and are sympathetic to the 

architectural detailing of the main building. 

10.8 However, it could be argued that the main contentious element of the scheme 

is the large sports hall facility proposed at the rear of the site adjacent to the 

2-storey Cottages; and the impact of such construction and the car parking 

area on the adjacent trees. 

10.9 Discussions have therefore taken place with the applicant and the Council's 

District Architect in an attempt to ensure that the impact of the sports hall 

facility on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers is minimised. The height 

of the sports hall has been reduced since originally submitted to a height of 

7.3m maximum (typically 5.5m to eaves). Given the differences in levels 

between the site and the adjacent Cottages (about 1.8m) the sports hall 

would still be a dominating building in relation to the Cottages. However, a 

hipped roof is proposed to the sports hall in order to 'soften' its impact and it 

would be built 1.8m from the rear wall of the Cottages , whereas at present 

the single-storey rear extensions of the church are within 0.5m of the 

Cottages. In addition officers have secured architectural detailing at eaves 

level to coincide with the detailing of eaves of the existing church building and 

have secured recessed areas within the elevation details. High level windows 

are proposed on the western elevation. 

107

10.10 It is considered that the relationship with the cottages is reasonable given that 

there are no windows at all in the rear elevation of the Cottages. The sports 

hall would present a substatial building when viewed from the rear gardens of 

Nos 2 & 4 Bridport Road, No 4 is currently in use as a dentists surgery. 

However it is only the very rear part of the sports hall that would result in an 

additional mass of building, given the mass of the existing building along this 

boundary. 

10.11 There has been extensive dialogue with the applicants with regards to the 

impact upon the 4 trees along the southern boundary of this site and the 

effect of the whole of the scheme upon archaeological issues. This has led to 

the applicant submitting an Arboricultural Method Statement as well as an 

Archeological Evaluation. 

10.12 With regards to the aboricultural matters the findings of the survey work lead 

to the fact that the 4 trees are mature specimens but are in decline. They 

represent a medium risk to both property and people and would benefit from 

full climbing inspections and remedial surgery. However, they are also worthy 

of retention. As a result, there are various recommendations outlined in the 

Arboricultural Report including climbing inspections and remedial tree surgery 

work; protective fencing in accordance with BS5837; construction of car 

parking in accordance with guidelines as outlined in Practice Note 1 

(Driveways Close to Trees) and the construction of the new building adjacent 

to tree 1 will be executed in accordance with Structural Engineer 

specifications to avoid damage to roots, transfer the load to ground and to 

protect the building from potential tree exacerbated seasonal movement. 

10.13 The Arboricultural Report has been considered in detail by the Council's 

Landscape Officer who states that the Report is thorough and, provided that 

conditions are attached to any permission requiring the implementation of its 

recommendations including site monitoring, then the tree matters are 

satisfied. 

10.14 With regards to archeological matters, the County Council has been consulted 

and the County Council's Archaeologist states: " the evaluation has been a 

valuable exercise not only in identifying remains of Dorchester's Roman 

defences on site but also in defining the impact of the proposed development 

on them. Although the remains of the defences are very significant and the 

foundations would have quite an impact upon them the evaluation has 

recorded a good sample of them. Hence I would now advise that the 

appropriate archeological mitigation for the proposed development would be 

archaeological monitoring of groundworks with the particular intention of 

gaining more information on the extent of the features identified during the 

evaluation. To secure this work, I advise that the following condition should 

be attached to any grant of consent: 

The applicant shall make arrangement for archeological observation and 

recording to take place during groundworks. Details of these arrangements 

shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning 

Authority at least 1 month before any work commences on the development 

site." 

10.15 With regard to highway matters the County Council, as Highway Authority, 

has no objections given the town centre location and the availability of public 

car parks nearby, particularly during evenings and Sundays. 

108

10.16 With regards to noise matters, particularly from the sports hall, this should not 

prove to be a problem to the occupiers of the Cottages given the distance 

from the boundary of the sports hall and the likely significant construction of 

that building. 


11.1 Given the above issues the development is not considered to be contrary to 

the Adopted or Emerging Planning Policies. There is no doubt that the 

proposals are a significant addition to the existing building, but it is also 

considered that with appropriate safeguarding conditions the development 

can be approved. 


12.1 Approve subject to the following conditions:- 

i. External materials; 

ii. 

iii. 

iv 

vi 

vii 

Landscaping Scheme; 

Highways; 

Provision and retention of parking; 

Provision of cycling facilities; 

Implementation of the recommendations as contained in the Arboricultural 

and Archaeological Reports. 

109



1/E/2003/002314 ITEM NUMBER 14 



Application Site: HEATHFIELD, 6 WARMWELL ROAD, CROSSWAYS, 

DORCHESTER, DT2 8BS 

Proposal: Erect 3No barn style "work at home" dwellings with garages. 

Construct new vehicular & pedestrian access and modify 

existing vehicular and pedestrian access 

Applicant: Parsec Engineering Ltd 

Ward Members: Cllr Mrs Seall, Cllr Smy 


This application has been called to Committee at the request of Councillor Smy 




2.1 This application relates to a roughly rectangular site on the south side of 

Warmwell Road almost opposite Mount Skippet Way. The site has a 35m 

frontage to Warmwell Road and an average depth of 60m. 

2.2 The site is occupied by a single dwelling and the application site incorporates 

the dwellings curtilage. The site has a vehicular access off Warmwell Road 

and is in a dilapidated and overgrown state. Adjoining the site to the south is 

a relatively new business park (Hybris) occupied by industrial units. 

2.3 This is a full application to construct a further 3 dwellings on the site including 

the retention/refurbishment of the existing dwelling. A new vehicular access 

would be provided off Warmwell Road leading to a turning circle/cul-de-sac 

arrangement with the 4 dwellings located in each of their own individual Plots. 

The turning circle/cul-de-sac arrangement would result in a horse chesnut 

tree being retained. 

2.4 The design of the dwellings would be in a chalet/barn style with double 

detached garages and construction from stained timber weatherboarding, 

portland stone plinths and a combination of thatched roof to the existing 

dwelling, plain concrete tiles, cambrian slates and double roman profile tiles. 

2.5 Each Plot would incorporate an office/workshop element in the roof space 

above each garage. 

2.6 Each Plot would incorporate 3 bedrooms and a large kitchen/diner and 

lounge at ground floor. 


• Acceptability of the principle of the development given the sites location 

outside the Defined Development Boundary. 

110

• 

• 

• 

Effect on highway safety. 

Compliance with the Government Policy; Adopted Structure and Local Plan 

Policy and Emerging Local Plan Policy with respect to sustainable 

development 

Acceptability of Design 



4.1 Object - see correspondence appendix 


4.2 Object - see correspondence appendix 









8. Relevant Planning History - None with relevance to the determination of this 

application 



Settlement Policy B (Crossways will provide a focus for Economic 

Regeneration), 

Settlement Policy D (Housing Growth to be concentrated in Crossways, 

amongst other areas), 

Settlement Policy G (Villages as self contained communities will be 

encouraged and strengthened by allowing housing and other development to 

help community facilities; provide affordable housing or employment 

opportunities), 

Settlement Policy H (Built development in all settlements should be of a scale 

and design which respects and reflects the character of each settlement) 

Settlement Policy I (Development in the countryside outside settlements 

should be permitted only where essentially required) 

Economy Policy B (New employment opportunities should be directed to 

locations well related to residential and associated facilities and with good 

accessibility to public transport including good road and rail access) 

Housing Policy B (A mix of housing should be provided to ensure balanced 

communities) 

111

Housing Policy C (New housing should be directed to locations well served to 

services and other facilities including public transport) 

Environment Policy F (Quality and diversity of the Dorset landscape should be 

maintained and enhanced via amongst other things good design) 


POLICY SP3 (DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE DEFINED DEVELOPMENT 

BOUNDARIES) 

POLICY H6 (REPLACEMENT DWELLINGS) 

POLICY E3 (EMPLOYMENT USES IN VILLAGES) 

POLICY CD1 (DESIGN STANDARDS) 

POLICY CD2 (RETENTION AND PLANTING OF TREES) 

POLICY CU3 (SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE) 

POLICY TR19 (PARKING PROVISION) 


POLICY AH14 (ROAD SAFETY) 

POLICY SS3 (DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE DEFINED DEVELOPMENT 

BOUNDARIES) 

TRAN 5 (Parking Provision) 

DA3 (The Scale and Form of Settlements and the Pattern of Streets and 

Spaces) 

DA5 (The Scale and Positioning of Buildings) 

DA7 (Detailed Design and Materials) 

SU1 (Energy Efficiency) 

SU2 (Resilience and Flexibility in Design) 


9.1 None 


10.1 In determining the application the applicants' agent points out that Members 

should consider the following matters; 

• the site is surrounded on 3 sides by existing development and itself 

constitutes previously developed within the definition of PPG 3 Housing; 

• that the development is compliant with Local Plan Policy SP3 (para v) 

112

which allows for small scale employment developments on suitable sites 

adjacent to Crossways and in accordance with Policy E3; 

• the scheme allows for residential and employment elements in a 

sustainable way complying with all 5 criteria of policy E3; 

• the site is itself in a highly sustainable loaction within walking distance of 

public transport including a main line railway station; 

• the sites location outside the DDB is the subject of representations in the 

Emerging Local Plan 

• there is a shortfall of this type of accommodation; 

• the scheme will help improve the viability of Crossways as a settlement; 

• access is satisfactory in terms of visibility; 

• modest support will be given to the new First School opening in Sept 05; 

and 

• a mix of housing will be provided at Crossways. 

10.2 Notwithstanding the comments made by the applicants agent in para 10.1, the 

development is considered unacceptable for a number of reasons. The whole 

thrust of the Governments Planning Policy Guidance Notes and in particular 

nos 1 (Guiding Principles and Policy), 3 (Housing) and 13 (Transport) relates 

to the principle of sustainable development and that new development should 

be first directed to urban areas where there are good links to all services 

(employment, recreation, shopping and other services) including good links to 

public transport networks and to provide for development that reduces 

reliance on the private car. In addition to this, Government Planning Policy 

stresses a Development Plan-led approach to decision making on planning 

applications given that Section 54A of the Planning Act 1990 states that 

applications should be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless 

other material considerations indicate otherwise. 

10.3 The Adopted Structure Plan and Local Plan Policies outlined above mean that 

there can only be one recommendation for this application and that is one of 

refusal. The Structure Plan Housing Policies serve to provide for such 

development primarily in urban settings where access to wider services can 

be gained for occupiers (essentially following the sustainable development 

Policy of the Government). Although there are Structure Plan Policies listed 

above that would appear on the face of it to encourage settlements to grow 

and strengthen, the more detailed Local Plan Policies also point against the 

proposed development. 

10.4 With regards to Local Plan Policy, the site is outside of the DDB for 

Crossways. This in itself means that the development would be contrary to 

Adopted Policy (SP3) and would provide a development that (notwithstanding 

the existing and established residential nature of the site) would encroach and 

provide a further urbanising effect into the countryside. It should also be 

pointed out that the applicant has made representations that the site should 

be included and not excluded from the DDB for Crossways in the Emerging 

Local Plan. Given that the UK operates a Plan-led Planning system whereby 

Development Control decisions then stem from the Adopted Development 

Plan Policies (unless material considerations indicate otherwise), then it 

would be inappropriate for this application to be approved pending the Public 

Inquiry into the Emerging Local Plan as to whether this site should be within 

or outside the DDB. To do so would prejudice the proper outcome of the Local 

Plan process given that it is not the Development Control system where such 

decisions should be made. 

113

10.5 The applicant states that the scheme provides small scale employment 

opportunities. However Policy E3 of the Adopted Local Plan essentially 

relates to employment uses per se such as small industrial type workshops 

and not a mix of residential and workspace use. In any event this scheme 

cannot reasonably be considered to be an employment generating 

development given the size of the workspace element proposed as part of 

the development. The total workspace floor area for each Plot only equates to 

around 40 sq metres and this would be provided above each detached 

garage space. This also needs to be compared to the total floor space of the 

dwellings (around 200 sq metres excluding the garage space). 

10.6 In the event that the Council did consider that this site was acceptable in 

Policy terms and could be developed for some form of mixed 

residential/workshop development the scheme as proposed would also be 

contrary to the Government PPG 3 aim of maximising the best and efficient 

use of land. This scheme is low density and this further emphasises the fact 

that permission should be refused. The design and layout of the development 

is out of keeping with existing development patterns in the locality. With 

regard to the agents assertion that the site constitutes previously developed 

land, the definition of previously developed land in Annex C of PPG 3 does 

include the curtilage of buildings but specifically excludes “land that was 

previously developed but where the remains of any structure or activity have 

blended into the landscape…(to the extent that it can be reasonably 

considered as part of the natural surroundings) ..” In addition, footnote 2 to 

Annex C makes it clear that the inclusion of the curtilage of buildings does not 

mean that the whole of the curtilage should be developed, for example where 

the footprint of a building only occupies a proportion of a site. The LPA must 

have regard to other planning considerations such as development in the 

countryside. 

10.7 With regards to access the Highway Authority point out that the layout as 

submitted is not acceptable for the following reasons: 

• the access should provide a simultaneous entry/exit (5.5m over the first 

6m); and 

• provision should be made for visitor parking/passing on the loop of the 

cul-de-sac 

none of which are incorporated into the scheme. 

10.8 Finally it should be pointed out that there are 5 letters of support for the 

scheme from third parties as well as a letter of objection. The support letters 

consider that the scheme has the benefit of providing a different type and 

style of residential accommodation for Crossways that would be of benefit to 

the community. In addition the proposed construction of the dwellings is 

considered by third parties to be environmentally sensitive particularly with 

regards to the use of materials. However notwithstanding these comments 

the principle of the development is considered unacceptable for the above 

reasons. 


11.1 • The development is considered to be contrary to Adopted and Emerging 

Local Plan and Structure Plan Policy given the sites location outside of the 

DDB for Crossways; 

• Notwithstanding the in principle objections, the scheme does not make 

114

effective and efficient use of land contrary to Government Policy; 

• The proposed access would detract from the safety and convenience of 

users of the highway; 

• The design and layout would detract from the character and appearance 

of the area. 


12.1 Refusal is recommended on the following grounds 

i. 

The proposed development falls outside the DDB for Crossways and as 

such would be contrary to: 

Adopted Structure Plan Housing Policy C (New housing should be directed 

to locations well served to services and other facilities including public 

transport); Settlement Policy I (Development in the countryside outside 

settlements should be permitted only where essentially required); 

Adopted Local Plan Policy SP3 (Development Outside Development 

Boundaries); and 

Emerging Local Plan Policy SS3 (Development Outside Development 

Boundaries) 

ii. 

iii. 

Notwithstanding reason i) the proposed development is considered to be 

contrary to Planning Policy Guidance Notes 1, 3 and 13 with particular 

emphasis on the unsustainable location and nature of the development 

and the inefficient and ineffective use of land 

The proposed design and layout of the development is out of keeping with 

existing development patterns in the locality and as such would be 

contrary to: 

Adopted Settlement Policy H (Built development in all settlements should 

be of a scale and design which respects and reflects the character of each 

settlement); 

Adopted Local Plan Policy CD1 (DESIGN STANDARDS); and 

Emerging Local Plan Policies DA3 (The Scale and Form of Settlements 

and the Pattern of Streets and Spaces); DA5 (The Scale and Positioning of 

Buildings); DA7 (Detailed Design and Materials) 

v. The proposed access would detract from the safety and convenience of 

users of the highway and as such would be contrary to: 

Adopted Local Plan Policy TR19 (PARKING PROVISION) and 

Emerging Local Plan Policy AH14 (ROAD SAFETY) and TRAN 5 (Parking 

Provision). 

115



1/E/2003/002270 ITEM NUMBER 15 



Application Site: CORNFIELDS, CHURCH LANE, FRAMPTON, 

DORCHESTER, DT2 9NL 

Proposal: Erect lean-to extension to existing agricultural building 

Applicant: R G Eversdon 

Ward Members: Cllr Mrs Penfold 



1.1 Approve subject to conditions 


2.1 The application site relates to part of the applicants agricultural land holding 

on the west side of Church Lane. 

2.2 It is proposed to extend an existing agricultural storage building. The 

proposed building would be built between the existing building and a hedge 

fronting Church Lane and would be set at a lower level than another existing 

agricultural building to the north which is located between the building 

proposed to be extended and an existing dwelling. 

2.3 The proposed building would measure 24.6m long x 18.4m wide x 7.5 m max 

high and would be constructed from brown profiled sheeting roof to match the 

existing building with a mono pitched sloping roof. 

2.4 An existing embankment would be supplanted with landscaping as well as 

the existing hedge alongside Church Lane. 


• Effect on the landscape designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 

• Effect on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers 

• Impact of design 

• Need for the development 



4.1 Recommend refusal and to any further development on this site. This 

development started with a house for the security of the site opposite and 

was a greenfield in an AONB. The residents of North Park have already 

complained about the size of the exsitng buildings which bring increased 

traffic to Church Lane. It is general opinion that it is time to call a halt to any 

further development 

116


4.2 No objections 


5.1 None 








App. Ref. Applicant Proposal Decision 

1/E/1994/0275 R.G. Eversden Erect farmhouse and construct Approved 

new vehicular access and 


1/E/2002/0353 R.G. Eversden Erect hay barn Approved 

1/E/2001/2270 R.G. Eversden Erect hay/straw barn Refused 

following a 

Committee site 

visit 24/7/01 



Settlement Policy H, I, Environment Policy F, G, 


SP3 (Development Outside Defined Development Boundaries), 

L1 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty), 

CD1 (Design Standards), 

CD2 (Retention and Planting of Trees), 

CD3 (Landscaping Schemes), 


SA1 (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty), 

SS3 (Development Outside Defined Development Boundaries), 

ET6 (New Agricultural Buildings), 

DA1 (Retention of Trees, Hedgerows, and other Important Landscape 

Features), 

DA2 (Landscape Schemes), 

DA5 (The Scale and Positioning of Buildings), 

DA7 (Detailed Design and Materials), 


9.1 None 


10.1 The first consideration when assessing application proposals in Areas of 

Outstanding Natural Beauty is to give prime consideration to the conservation 

117

and preservation of the landscape. This is outlined in Structure Plan Policy G 

and Adopted Local Plan Policy L1 and the emerging Policy SA1. 

10.2 However the Policy basis also has to be balanced against the very fact that it 

is in such areas that farming takes place and where farm buildings are part of 

that rural landscape. That is not to say however that the impact upon the 

landscape should be ignored when farmers require accommodation to erect 

farm buildings. Such buildings have to be assessed with regards to siting, 

appearance and impact on neighbours etc. 

10.3 In this regard the applicant has been requested to provide additional 

information with regard to the need for the building. In reply his agent has 

stated that the additional space is required to meet various agricultural 

requirements of the farm operations including as follows: 

• 

to provide further storage for hay/straw given that last years produce was 

in excess of the capacity of the existing structure; 

to provide a store for fertilizer requirements for the holding; and 

to provide undercover/secure storage for agricultural equipment. 

• 

• 

10.4 In addition the applicant points out that existing lean-to structures either side 

of the original General Agricultural building and workshop are used for 

storage purposes but will soon be vacated and used for his Commercial 

Worm Farming enterprise and additional storage, hence the proposed 

building will be required. 

10.5 Given the above information and the location of the additional lean-to element 

it is not considered that the extension would have a serious impact upon the 

AONB given the existence of buildings at this site. The extension would be 

located adjacent to the hedge line and set behind this and the road and with 

additional landscaping this will help to assimilate the building into the 

landscape. Likewise with appropriate conditions the building is unlikely to 

harm the amenities of neighbouring occupiers particularly those in North Park 

to the south beyond the nearby railway line. 

10.6 Members may recall visiting the site in connection with app no. 1/E/2001/11 

(see history) for a hay straw barn which was finally refused on grounds of 

detriment to the AONB . This was for a new building further to the south of 

this existing site just north of the adjacent railway line as opposed to an 

extension of an existing building which this application now proposes. 


11.1 The proposed building is considered acceptable bearing in mind the location 

of the development adjacent to the hedge line and given the existing buildings 

adjacent to it. 


12.1 Approval subject to the following conditions 

i. a detailed landscaping scheme including implementation 

118



1/E/2003/002326 ITEM NUMBER 16 



Application Site: LYON'S HILL, LYON'S GATE, MINTERNE MAGNA, DT2 7BD 

Proposal: Use of land for stationing of an agricultural workers mobile 

home retain garden shed, greenhouse, poultry pen & two 

avairies 

Applicant: Mr & Mrs J A Fry 

Ward Members: Cllr Mrs East, Cllr Horsington 

Case Officer: Robert Burden 




Background information: 

2.1 In October 2001 The Development Control North Committee refused outline 

planning permission for a permanent dwelling on this site due to lack of 

evidence of essential agricultural need and visual impact. An unauthorised 

mobile home had been stationed at the time in an existing barn on the site. 

The Committee also authorised enforcement action to remove this mobile 

home. 

2.2 The applicants however indicated their intention to submit an application 

seeking to regularise the mobile home. Given this stated intention, formal 

Enforcement Notice Service was deferred to allow the merits of the mobile 

home application to be considered. 

2.3 The application to retain the mobile home was registered in July 2002 

(1/N/2002/1117) and was recommended for a temporary (3 year) approval. 

However the Development Control North Committee resolved to refuse 

planning permission at its meeting in November 2002. The reason for refusal 

was based on adverse impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

2.4 In the light of this an Enforcement Notice has been served in respect of the 

unauthorised mobile home and domestic paraphernalia (sheds, aviaries, etc) 

referred to in the application. The notice was served on 23rd October, taking 

effect on 23rd December 2003; the period for compliance being 6 months. 

2.5 The applicants have however lodged an appeal against that Notice and this is 

119

currently scheduled to be the subject of an appeal Hearing in May 2004. In 

the light of this background the applicants have decided to submit a further 

planning application (to retain the mobile home and ancillary sheds etc) in an 

attempt to persuade the Committee that this proposal is acceptable. They 

have also taken the opportunity to update the agricultural need case. 

2.6 This proposal seeks to regularise the use of land for a mobile home in 

connection with an alpaca-related agricultural enterprise, with some beef 

cattle, and the retention of five small domestic-related buildings/sheds. 

2.7 The site is located on a holding of 3.7ha (9.3 acres) owned by the applicant 

and is approached from an existing vehicular access off a lane near Lyons 

Gate. The mobile home has been located within an existing partially opensided 

and corrugated agricultural pole barn, with the 2 aviaries behind; the 

shed and greenhouse outside but nearby, and the poultry pen across the 

open yard area to the south. 


• 

• 

Whether there is an essential agricultural need for a mobile home. 

Effect on visual amenity of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). 


Minterne Magna & High Stoy Parish Council 



4.2 No objection 


5.1 Reading Agricultural Consultants - see correspondence appendix 



(A code of animal welfare was also submitted by the applicant which can be 

inspected on the working file) 







Date 

1/N/2001/1042 Mr J Fry Develop land by the erection Refused 

120

of an agricultural workers 

dwelling 

1/N/2002/1117 Mr J Fry Use of land for stationing of 

agricultural workers mobile 

home, retain garden shed, 

greenhouse, poultry pen & 2 

aviaries (Retrospective 

planning application) 

18/10/2001 


23/12/2002 



• Environment Policy G (Protection of AONB) 


• H5 (Agricultural/forestry workers dwelling) 

• L1 (Protection of AONB) 

The West Dorset District Local Plan (First Deposit) 


• HS6 (Agricultural/forestry workers dwelling) 

• SA1(Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) 

10.1 In essence, the intention of the enterprise is to develop a small-scale, but 

specialist, alpaca breeding unit, managing both breeding females and also 

providing a stud service for others. This is on a 3.7 hectare (9.3 acre) site. It 

is therefore an unusual type of agricultural enterprise on a relatively small 

land area. When the Councils agricultural consultant visited on 13th 

September 2002 the site was being grazed by 7 alpacas. A recent site visit 

by the case officer noted the presence of about 22 alpacas on site. 

10.2 The applicants appraisal and supporting information is included with the 

correspondence. This information has been referred to Reading Agricultural 

Consultants (RAC) and their comments are also included. (As relevant 

background information the RAC report obtained in relation to the previous 

mobile home application is also copied). 

10.3 In order to establish whether there is an essential agricultural need for a 

worker to live on site the relevant tests of Annex I (PPG7) are applied. Five 

tests (Annex I 14) are applied in relation to applications for temporary 

agricultural dwellings such as this. These are described in the RAC Report 

carried out in September 2002. 

In considering the agricultural need case in November 2002, the Committee 

were mindful of the advice given by Reading Agricultural Consultants who 

were of the opinion that the alpaca enterprise was capable of developing an 

essential agricultural need over a five year period. 

121

10.4 Reading Agricultural Consultants have now reviewed the current position 

(about 18 months since the first appraisal for the mobile home on site). Their 

February 2004 letter is copied for the Committee. 

10.5 Regarding the financial test, PPG7 Annex I requires that there is "clear 

evidence that the proposed enterprise has been planned on a sound financial 

basis" 

The onus of proof lies very firmly with the applicant. 

The Reading Agricultural Consultant letter considers the submitted financial 

information from which it seems there are searching questions over the 

soundness of the financial principles, and that there has been complete lack 

of stock or fleece sales over the past 4 years. 

This results in considerable doubt as to whether this enterprise can achieve 

the forecast levels of profitability. 

10.6 Turning to the visual issue the site lies within the Area of Outstanding Natural 

Beauty, on a relatively level site which is positioned on a tract of landscape 

which rises in a southerly direction. The cream-coloured mobile home is 

located within a partly open-sided mono-pitch roofed modern agricultural 

building mainly of darkish green painted corrugated iron. The two aviaries are 

also inside tucked at the back of the mobile home. The greenhouse, garden 

shed and poultry pen are of a modest size and are positioned outside the 

barn. 

10.7 The building containing the mobile home, together with the extended northerly 

"wing" and the free-standing barn adjacent are all visible from the public rights 

of way to the north/east of the site, albeit at some distance. Dense black 

plastic netting has been erected along the north-eastern (open) side of the 

building containing the mobile home, such that a clear view of the mobile 

home itself cannot be readily viewed from the public rights of way. 

The positioning of the mobile home within the existing building, together with 

the black netting alongside it to some extent reduces the visual impact when 

otherwise it would 'stand-out' visually. The aviaries are hidden from public 

view at the rear of the mobile home. The greenhouse and timber shed, 

together with the c 3 x 3 metre grey corrugated iron poultry pen are buildings 

which, although relatively small, are structures more appropriate to a 

residential housing area rather than a tract of agricultural landscape in the 

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 


11.1 This is a re-submission of an application refused (against recommendation) 

by the Development Control North Committee in November 2002 based on 

visual harm to the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 

11.2 The applicants have up-dated the agricultural need position and, from an 

analysis of the submitted financial information there is considerable doubt 

over the sustainability of this enterprise. The proposal includes, development 

which, in the absence of a proven agricultural case, would be more 

appropriate to an urban area. (If the Committee are minded to refuse this 

application they should consider whether they wish to add the harmful visual 

impact reason which was previously imposed). 

122



i. Having regard to the length of time the business has existed, together with 

the submitted financial information the Local Planning Authority is not 

convinced that the enterprise is planned on a sound financial basis. 

Consequently, it is considered that the proposal fails to meet the financial 

text in PPG7 Annex I and would therefore be contrary to policies SP3 and 

H5 of the adopted West Dorset District Local Plan and Policy HS6 of the 

emerging First Deposit Local Plan. 

123

Our Ref: - Dorsetforyou.com

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?