Agenda item

Talbot and Branksome Woods Ward

 

APP/22/01455/F

 

Major hybrid application for: Full application for the construction of a new 11,606 sq. metre Nuffield Health Hospital with provision of access, servicing and car parking, cycle and pedestrian provision and landscaping, Outline planning application for the provision of 13,394 sq. metre of employment, healthcare and university-related floorspace, including ancillary uses and a Growing Hub, and Change of Use of 12 hectares of grazing land to create a Heathland Support Area for the lifetime of the Innovation Quarter.

 

Background papers can be found on the BCP Council website. Please contact the Planning Officer named on the report for further information.

Talbot and Branksome Woods Ward

 

APP/22/01455/F

 

Major hybrid application for: Full application for the construction of a new 11,606 sq. metre Nuffield Health Hospital with provision of access, servicing and car parking, cycle and pedestrian provision and landscaping, Outline planning application for the provision of 13,394 sq. metre of employment, healthcare and university-related floorspace, including ancillary uses and a Growing Hub, and Change of Use of 12 hectares of grazing land to create a Heathland Support Area for the lifetime of the Innovation Quarter.

 

Public Representations

Objectors

v  Stephen Chappell

v  Dr Martin Price, representing East Dorset Friends of the Earth

v  Sheila Warner, representing Talbot and Branksome Woods Residents Association

v  Jo Keeling, Chairman of Talbot Village Residents Association

v  Nick Dobbs

 

Applicant/Supporters

v  Nick Ashley Cooper, Chairman of Talbot Village Trust

v  David McNair, Nuffield Health

 

Ward Councillors (in objection)

v  Cllr Philip Broadhead

v  Cllr Matthew Gillett

v  Cllr Karen Rampton

 

Other Councillors (in objection)

v  Cllr Olivia Brown

v  Cllr Richard Herrett

v  Cllr Tony Trent

 

RESOLVED that planning permission be REFUSED contrary to the Officer’s recommendation for the following reasons (final wording of reasons to be delegated to the Head of Planning to agree in consultation with the Chair):

 

Contrary to the following Policies of the Poole Local Plan (2018):

 

PP32 Poole’s nationally, European and internationally important sites

which states that ‘Development will only be permitted where it would not lead to an adverse effect upon the integrity, either alone or in combination, directly or indirectly, on nationally, European and internationally important sites’.

 

The Committee was concerned that the development could attract new people to/within close range of the protected heathland. 

 

PP35 A safe, connected and accessible transport network

There is an overprovision of car parking to that stated in the current adopted BCP Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and thereby the development is not in accordance with Policy PP35 which requires that developments accord with the Parking & Highway Layout in New Development SPD. The Parking SPD is a material consideration and a departure needs to be justified.

 

The Committee did not find that there was adequate justification for departing from the SPD in relation to this application.

 

PP24 (2) (b) and (c) Green infrastructure

‘(2) New development

New development should protect and strengthen the green infrastructure network by:

(b) connecting together and enrich biodiversity and wildlife habitats;

(c) improving connections, green corridors and links between different components of the green infrastructure network;’

 

The Committee agreed that the development did not sufficiently protect green infrastructure in relation to the above sections of the Policy.

 

PP21 3(c) Talbot Village

3) Transport

Development at Talbot Village will help to deliver significant improvement of transport and movement to the area by, where appropriate:

(c) providing a level of car parking designed to encourage access to the campus by walking, cycling and public transport

 

The Committee agreed that the development did not encourage this section of the policy

 

The Committee agreed that there should also be included reasons for refusal to address the absence of any s106 agreement to secure the planning obligations identified as necessary in the report.

 

Voting:

 

At the request of the required number of members the Committee took a recorded vote on the above resolution which was carried as follows:

 

For: 8

Cllrs P Canavan, S Carr-Brown, B Dove, B Hitchcock, Dr F Rice, K Salmon, P Sidaway, L Williams

 

Against: 4

Cllrs J Clements, D Flagg, P Hilliard and M Le Poidevin

 

Abstain: 0

 

 

Notes:

 

A proposal to grant the application was moved and seconded prior to the resolution to refuse the application. At the request of the required number of members the Committee took a recorded vote which was NOT carried as follows:

 

Voting:

 

For: 4

Cllrs J Clements, D Flagg, P Hilliard and M Le Poidevin

 

Against: 8

Cllrs P Canavan, S Carr-Brown, B Dove, B Hitchcock, Dr F Rice, K Salmon, P Sidaway, L Williams

 

Abstain: 0

 

 

At the end of this item, Cllrs B Dove, K Salmon, P Sidaway and L Williams left the meeting and Cllrs M Gillett and M Tarling rejoined for the following item.