Agenda item

Merley Court Touring Park, Wimborne, BH21 3AA

(Bearwood and Merley)

 

APP/19/01586/C

 

Change of use of land for the stationing of 99 static caravans for permanent residential occupation.

Minutes:

(Bearwood and Merley)

 

APP/19/01586/C

 

Change of use of land for the stationing of 99 static caravans for permanent residential occupation.

 

Ø   IN OBJECTION -

 

Marion Pope

 

Philip Hammick

 

 

 Ø   IN SUPPORT -

 

 Ken Parke

 

 

 Ø    VERBAL STATEMENTS –

 

Cllr D Brown

 

Cllr R Burton (statement was read out by the Democratic Officer)

 

 

 

RESOLVED that the application be refused, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation for the following reasons:

 

1.       The application site is within the South East Dorset Green Belt and is currently largely open in character. The use of the land to site caravans for permanent residential occupation would introduce a use which has not been identified as appropriate development in the Green Belt and which would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the 'existing development'. The proposals would therefore be contrary to the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy PP2 (6) of the Poole Local Plan (November 2018).

 

2.       The proposals would result in new homes with access to the wider highway network off Merley House Lane. Merley House Lane does not incorporate pedestrian footways and this is likely to result in increased conflict between vehicles and other highway users, most particularly pedestrians, to do the detriment of their safety. The proposals would not therefore provide safe and sustainable access for residents and therefore do not meet the requirements of Policies PP2 and PP35 of the Poole Local Plan (Adopted November 2018) and Section 9 (Promoting Sustainable Transport) of the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019)

 

3.       The proposals would result in the loss of an established and active Holiday Site, which currently supports Poole's tourism sector, without it having been demonstrated that this use is no longer financially viable. The proposals are therefore contrary to the provisions of Policy PP23 of the Poole Local Plan (November 2018).

 

4.       The application site is within 5Km of a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).  This SSSI is also part of the designated Dorset Heathlands SPA (Special Protection Area) and Ramsar site, and is also part of the Dorset Heaths SAC (Special Area of Conservation).  The proximity of these European sites (SPA and SAC) means that determination of the application should be undertaken with regard to the requirements of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.  The applicant has failed to demonstrate in accordance with the Habitat Regulations that the proposals will cause no harm to the SPA and SAC heathland.  It is clear, on the basis of advice from Natural England that, in 5the absence of any CIL contribution, no avoidance or mitigation of adverse effects through Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) or Heathland Infrastructure Projects (HIPs) has been secured. In the absence of any form of acceptable mitigation it is likely to have an adverse effect on the heathland special features including those which are SPA and SAC features.  Having regard to the Waddenzee judgement (ECJ case C-127/02) the Council is not in a position to be convinced that there is no reasonable scientific doubt to the contrary.  For these reasons, and without needing to conclude the appropriate assessment, the proposal is considered contrary to the recommendations of the Berne Convention Standing Committee on urban development adjacent to the Dorset Heathlands, and Policy PP32 and PP39 of the Poole Local Plan (November 2018).

 

5.       The application site is within close proximity to Poole Harbour which is a Special Protection Area (SPA), Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Ramsar site and the determination of the application should be undertaken with regard to these European designations and the requirements of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.  The applicant has failed to demonstrate in accordance with the Habitat Regulations that the proposals will cause no harm to the SPA.  It is clear, on the basis of advice from Natural England that, in he absence of any CIL contribution, no avoidance or mitigation of adverse effects through Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) has been secured. In the absence of any form of acceptable mitigation it is likely to have an adverse effect on the special features of Poole Harbour including those which are SPA features.  Having regard to the Waddenzee judgement (ECJ case C-127/02) the Council is not in a position to be convinced that there is no reasonable scientific doubt to the contrary.  For these reasons, and without needing to conclude the appropriate assessment, the proposal is considered contrary to the recommendations of the Berne Convention Standing Committee on urban development adjacent to Poole Harbour, and Policy PP32 and PP39 of the Poole Local Plan (November 2018). 

 

 

 

Voting:

 

For – 10          Against – 3           Abstain – 1

 

Cllr T Trent explained that, due to technical issues and therefore missing sections of the presentation and debate, he would abstain from voting.

Supporting documents: