Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 Partial Review

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

APPENDIX A

Introduction - Duty to co-operate From a strategic planning perspective we welcome the assurances given in para 44 on the duty to co-operate. We look forward to continuing work with Purbeck District Council and other stakeholders and to assist the District Council in achieving a sound plan that addresses the objectively assessed needs of the population.

Issue 1: Plan Period Option 1 proposes a time frame for the Plan of 16 years which will tie in with the plans of neighbouring authorities. This a reasonable approach and is supported.

Issue 2: Preferred Option 2 Meeting objectively assessed housing needs. We welcome the approach taken by Purbeck to assess housing need, which aims to align potential job growth and population growth. Allowing the Partial Review to have a timescale to 2033 and therefore taking into account the shortfall of 118 homes per annum to 2027 and the need to plan for 238 homes to 2033, provides a robust basis on which to base the plan.

There are significant environmental constraints in the District, a housing delivery rate of around 238 dwellings per annum (dpa) to 2033, is an increase on its current planned level. Subject to the impact of this level of development on; infrastructure generally and particularly education, heathlands and highways this would seem to provide a reasonable starting point to plan for.

It will also be necessary to coordinate the Council’s strategy for future development in the District with that of neighbouring Authorities, particularly Poole and West Dorset. This will undoubtedly evolve as work on these Plans progress and realigning the plan period will also assist.

Issue 3: Preferred Development Strategy

The strategy of concentrating development, including a mix of uses, to enable more self-contained development opportunities as identified in PLP1 is supported. The review helpfully takes on board many of the observations made by DCC through the development to this stage of the plan and this is welcomed.

The County Council as Highway Authority is keen to ensure that the spatial distribution and quantum of development supports sustainable travel choices Opportunities for focussed development at Wool, Lytchett Minster and/ or the Moreton Station/Redbridge area may, with suitable mitigation measures, provide for a more sustainable travel option for future development than simply increasing development pro-rata on the existing settlement pattern. This approach is supported.

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

The detailed comments below highlight the issues for individual sites. It should be noted that these are high level comments based on the principle of the location of development and are not based on any detailed assessment of individual proposals.

From DCC’s perspective as provider of Children's Services, additional housing is likely to generate additional pupil numbers, which in some areas will be unable to be accommodated in existing schools.

Some schools may need to be expanded and in some areas new schools may be required. The County Council will therefore wish to seek developer contributions to fund both new schools and extensions where necessary. As well as primary schools for the younger children in most of the locations, the number of older pupils attending the area’s secondary schools will need to be considered. These would need to be looked at in individual cases.

In respect of secondary school provision, given the variation of potential housing figures, it is difficult to assess the likely impact on the Purbeck School. Although the school does have some surplus capacity, the accumulative effect of developments across Purbeck could require further work here.

These needs have been identified in relation to specific sites. This is welcomed.

Developments in Sandford, Lytchett and Lytchett Matravers will attract the need for secondary and “Post 16” contributions as Lytchett Minster is already full.

As the Minerals and Waste Authority the County Council also has detailed comments to make about several of the proposed options. These are set out below against the individual site.

From DCC’s perspective County’s Ecologist observes:

In general SANG provision appears in line with the SANG guidelines contained within the Dorset Heathland Framework SPD. However, there are two sites where the SANGs are not directly linked to the development site as below:

We suggest a SANG masterplan for each SANG be developed through the review.

Comments from Community Services and Adult Services are being sought and will be forwarded as soon as possible.

Flood Risk Management

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

s20 – acknowledges PDC’s first consultation was undertaken between January and March 2015. We highlight that this consultation did not include DCC’s FRM function, which did not adopt a (surface water) consultee role until April 2015. s32 – reference is made to an evidence base to inform the Purbeck Local Plan (PLP), including externally produced studies. We highlight that an Environment Agency (EA) commissioned Flood Study is anticipated for Lytchett Minster (Site 2), which will improve understanding of the prevailing flood risk/s to this community. This will be specifically referenced within our response to Site 2. s34/35 – acknowledges previous input of the EA into earlier consultation, and compilation of a supporting Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report, although this document is not thought to have been site specific. s43 – refers to duty of care in accordance with para 156 of the NPPF, and lists flood risk, waste water (point 3) and climate change (point 5), but excludes surface water management. Therefore we request that surface water management be added to point 3. s45 – we highlight that DCC’s FRM function have not previously been invited to contribute to the Dorset Strategic Planning Forum. s69 – we reiterate that the consultation undertaken during the issues and options stage of the review, did not include DCC’s FRM function. S78 Table – final column (carried forward..) to be amended for the following sites; Lytchett Minster – Yes, but could be ruled out on surface water grounds. West of Wool – Yes, but could be ruled out on surface water grounds.

Site Specific Comments. Option 1 –Wool

Residential development at Wool is inextricably linked to the Enterprise Zone. Whilst the EZ will function without the proposed residential development there are significant benefits which could be achieved in combination. Highways Issues Indicative transport impact assessments confirmed that the sites could be developed satisfactorily from a transport perspective, including impacts on the Wool level crossing, subject to provision of appropriate mitigation. The details of such mitigation must be informed by more detailed assessment of development scenarios both in Wool together with any wider impact ie from site 4.

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

The policy for Wool suggests that part of the mitigation strategy may include a Wool Bypass.

This is a legacy from most recently The Purbeck Transportation Study and Strategy (Buro Happold Feb 2004 and Jan 2005) which proposed a Wool Bypass or effective alternative as part of an integrated transport strategy in the District

There is no scheme currently included in the Local Plan or the LTP although the scheme has never been abandoned. The historic alignment of the previously promoted scheme would sterilise a significant part of the land identified for development.

Bearing this in mind, and the significant degree of uncertainty for funding and delivery, DCC will seek Cabinet approval to formally abandon this scheme and develop more deliverable contemporary solutions including the options in conjunction with NR such as relocating the railway station in conjunction with development. Abandonment of the bypass will enable existing developer contributions to be used for other transport provision in Wool.

A masterplan for the whole area including the EZ should be initiated to inform this.

Minerals Issues There are a number of current operational mineral sites along with potential mineral sites in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan located in the general area. A small part of the northern extent of the potential development area is within the Minerals Safeguarding Area (MSA) and Minerals Consultation Area (MCA) as designated by Policies SG1 and SG2 of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014. In accordance with these policies, developers would likely be required to undertake an assessment of the potential for mineral development on this site and depending on the outcome of the assessment the Mineral Planning Authority may seek to achieve some level of prior extraction on this site prior to any built development.

Education Issues There is currently spare capacity within the Wool schools for some additional primary school pupils, but capacity issues would need to be considered if 1000 new homes were to be built which would include the need for a new school. Recognition of this is welcomed.

SANG

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

This SANG has no obvious means of access which means it is less likely to be used by local residents as they won’t be able to walk to the SANG. Research has shown that this means people will still choose to drive to known local greenspace (including designated heathlands) with the net result that the SANG will not achieve its aim of mitigating impacts on the European heathlands. It is therefore important that access to the SANG is secured as part of the SANG allocation. The land between the proposed development boundary and the SANG is a Scheduled Ancient Monument. If this was secured as access to the SANG and therefore removed from agriculture and converted to permanent grassland this would not only benefit wildlife but also help protect the SAM. The layout and design of the SANG, taking into account these recommendations, needs to be clearly shown in a comprehensive and agreed 'SANG Master plan' which will in turn be integrated into the new development green infrastructure plan

Flood Risk Management Site 1 – Wool. The summary provided excludes reference to either DCC as LLFA, flood risk or specifically to surface water management. It is important that further consideration of this site and individual plots, adequately consider the prevailing risk to adjacent property & infrastructure, and ensures that no off site worsening results. Plots to the west should consider recent flood events, the limited capacity of the existing drainage systems / watercourse and failure of infiltration structures in this area.

We therefore request that the following paragraph be added;

'Dorset County Council’s Flood Risk Management function have confirmed that the northern sites, located closer to the railway line, and adjacent areas are at risk of flooding. Any development proposals must offer adequate mitigation measures and an appropriate strategy of surface water management to prevent both on site risk and any off site worsening. The capacity of receiving systems, including watercourse/s which flow north, and infiltration rates of intended soakaways are to be fully substantiated.'

Site 2 - Lytchett Minster

Highways Issues Significant development around Lytchett Minster could provide an opportunity to support sustainable development principles close to the Bournemouth- Poole conurbation. The benefit of locating development here would be that people living there could travel a relatively short distance in and out of an urban area with a greater selection of services and facilities than in the rest of Purbeck, without encouraging increased use of the A351 in the peak times. There is also a greater likelihood of being able to encourage people to use alternatives to the car (bus, bicycle) due to the shorter distances involved.

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

Nevertheless highways improvements which are likely to be required include provision of pedestrian, cycle and public transport links to and through Upton, Hamworthy and Poole town centre. There may also be requirements for improvements to Bakers Arms roundabout, measures to improve visibility at Huntick Road / Randalls Hill junction, and pedestrian / cycle access into Upton over the bypass (Watery Lane link). The high level identification of these is acknowledged. Development in this area would benefit from being planned comprehensively through a masterplan / development brief process.

Minerals Issues There are a number of current operational mineral sites in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan located in the general area. Further information can be supplied on specific sites as required. Just the south-western part of this potential development area is within the Minerals Safeguarding Area (MSA) and Minerals Consultation Area (MCA) as designated by Policies SG1 and SG2 of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014. In accordance with these policies, developers would be likely to be required to undertake an assessment of the potential for mineral development on this site and depending on the outcome of the assessment the Mineral Planning Authority may seek to achieve some level of prior extraction on this site prior to any built development.

Education Issues A development of 500 or more houses would create the need for additional school spaces, possibly towards provision of a new primary school. Existing primary schools at Upton and Lytchett Matravers are already at or near capacity. Lytchett Minster’s secondary school is already on a constrained site and would need additional accommodation and playing fields. The site identified to the east of the school has planning permission for provision of a playing field, on land rented for a short period from the local estate. However, this is not likely to be progressed at present due to its location.

Land to the north-east of the school site would be the ideal location for playing fields, which would be essential if pupil numbers were to rise. This site would lend itself to playing fields near the school and housing nearer to the highway.

Flood Risk Management

Site 2 – Lytchett Minster. The summary provided makes reference to both DCC as Lead Local Flood Authority and the Environment Agency (EA), in terms of future consultation and intention to seek betterment over the prevailing flooding issues that impact upon the existing community. However

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

only ground water flooding is specifically cited as a flood mechanism. Whilst the proposed development site is understood to be elevated and at low risk of either fluvial or tidal flooding, and with theoretical surface water flooding limited to defined overland flow paths aligned north-south, it is critical that all sources of potential flooding within the wider area are understood and are mitigated against, if no off site worsening is to be created. We would encourage the planning authority to seek betterment for the wider community and to draw upon all relevant documents, including a Flood Study soon to be released by the EA, to put the nature and scale of the complex flood mechanisms that impact upon adjacent areas into context. The smaller satellite site located to the east of the main village area is to be considered separately in terms of surface water management and potential impact upon adjacent properties. Given the above we request that the following be added to the relevant paragraph (5);

'Dorset County Council’s Flood Risk Management function have confirmed that the wider community is at significant risk of flooding from various sources, including fluvial, tidal, surface and ground water flooding. To this end it is critical that any development proposals offer appropriate surface water management to prevent either on site risk or off site worsening, and should seek betterment to the prevailing risk affecting the wider community.'

Option 3 & 6 - West and North Wareham

Education Issues – These relate to Wareham generally so also apply to Site 6 Development to the north of Northmoor Park, Wareham, would generate additional pupils through the (205) housing units. Wareham St Mary Primary School could be expanded on its existing site. Development to the west of the bypass at Worgret (500 units) will also require expansion of the existing school or the provision of a new school, depending on numbers of houses involved. Pedestrian access from Worgret into Wareham would be essential if the existing school were to be expanded, and also for the access to the Purbeck School. There would also be an impact on numbers at Purbeck School at either of these sites. Acknowledgment that additional school provision will be necessary is welcomed.

Highways issues

At this stage officers have no objections in principle to development in these locations subject to improvements to pedestrian, cycle and public transport links into Wareham town centre. A Transport Assessment will be required to assess the traffic impact of development.

These sites could be developed satisfactorily in transport terms and their impact on particularly the A351, severance across the bypass to the town centre facilities and school, pedestrian and cycle links along Worgret Road to the town centre will need careful assessment with appropriate mitigation measures as identified:

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

Public transport improvements, footpath and cycle links to the existing network and town centre, Purbeck School and the railway station, and creation of a new 30mph gateway into Wareham.

Minerals issues There are a number of current operational mineral sites along with potential mineral sites in Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan located around Wareham. Further information can be supplied on specific sites as required. Of this potential development area, land to the south of the A352 and land to the north-west of the railway is within the Minerals Safeguarding Area (MSA) and Minerals Consultation Area (MCA) as designated by Policies SG1 and SG2 of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014. The area south-east of the railway but north of the A352 is not safeguarded. In accordance with these policies, on the safeguarded areas developers would be required to undertake an assessment of the potential for mineral development on this site and depending on the outcome of the assessment the Mineral Planning Authority may seek to achieve some level of prior extraction on this site prior to any built development. Flood Risk Management Site 3 – West Wareham. The summary provided excludes reference to DCC as LLFA, flood risk or specifically to surface water management. It is a requirement of the NPPF that any further consideration of this site adequately addresses these issues. We therefore request that the following statement be added;

Site4 – Moreton Station/ Redbridge Road Pit

Minerals Issues There are a number of current operational mineral sites in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan located in this area. Specifically, Station Road (AS25), Woodsford Extension (AS19) and Hurst Farm (AS26) sites are in close proximity. Further information can be supplied on specific sites as required. In accordance with these policies, developers would be required to undertake an assessment of the potential for mineral development on this site and depending on the outcome of the assessment the Mineral Planning Authority may seek to achieve some level of prior extraction on this site prior to any built development.

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

Moreton Pit off Redbridge Road, now known as Redbridge Road Quarry, incorporates much of the potential development area and SANG, has extant planning permission for sand and gravel working (Planning Permission 300317) and for phased restoration of approximately 20 hectares of the quarry to include the importation of inert materials to achieve a mixture of agriculture, woodlands and nature conservation use (Planning Permission 6/2013/0577). Extraction of minerals is required to cease on or before 31 December 2018 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the mineral planning authority and the restoration is required to be complete by 31 December 2022. The approved restoration requires an estimated 244,400m3 (circa 366,600 tonnes) of material, of which an estimated 189,400m3 (circa 282,100 tonnes) would be imported to the site. Planning permission 6/2013/0577 also provides for the continued temporary use of approximately 2.5 hectares of land in the southern part of the quarry adjacent to the main quarry access for inert waste recycling and the retention and use of an adjacent waste storage and treatment building. The approved restoration provides for the removal of all plant, buildings, hard standing, access tracks and stockpiled materials Education Issues There would be a need for additional school places if 200-900 homes were to be built at Moreton Station and/or Redbridge Pit. Younger children currently attend Frome Valley School at Crossways with transfer to the Dorchester pyramid for the older pupils. Developer contributions would be needed towards further expansion of Frome Valley St. Mary’s Middle School, Puddletown is currently at capacity and there are significant access issues to the site. Children from Moreton would be catchment for St. Mary’s Puddletown and would have to be bused. An increase in the number of bused children will require extensive road network developments to allow the school to expand while also needing school building work as well. Acknowledgment that additional school provision will be necessary is welcomed.

Highways issues

Development in this area needs to be planned comprehensively through a masterplan process in conjunction with West Dorset District Council’s proposals for development around Crossways. Moreton and Crossways needs to become more self-contained and sustainable and therefore development should be mixed use to provide a better balance of homes, work, and facilities. The benefit of locating development here is the opportunity for people to use the train for quick, short distance travel to Dorchester (8 minutes approx) and Weymouth (18 minutes approx) or further afield to London (2hrs 30mins approx).

At this stage officers have no objections in principle to mixed use development subject to significant improvements to pedestrian, cycle and public transport links including to Crossways facilities, Moreton station and

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

Dorchester town centre. A Transport Assessment will be required to assess the traffic impact of development. From a spatial distribution aspect it may be preferable to also allocate development on the south side of the B3390 towards the railway line as this would facilitate improved access to the station.

The Highways Agency may require improvements at Max Gate (A35 Trunk Road, Dorchester) and improvements to links with the West Stafford bypass. Consideration should be given to an extension of the West Stafford bypass south of the railway to avoid Lewell Bridge and level crossings of the railway. Level crossings of the railway are of concern to Network Rail.

The following areas of concern may require mitigation measures:

 Rail service frequency  B3390 Affpuddle traffic impact  B3390 Warmwell traffic impact  B3390 Moreton Level Crossing  B3390 Hurst Bridges safety  B3390 Waddock Cross junction safety  Dick o' th' Banks Road, Crossways  Fiveways junction – B3390, Dick o' th' Banks Road, Redbridge Road, Moreton Road  Lewell Bridge constraint (railway under bridge at West Stafford end of the bypass)

Flood Risk Management

Site 4 – Moreton Station. The summary provided excludes reference to DCC as LLFA, flood risk or specifically to surface water management. It is a requirement of the NPPF that any further consideration of this site adequately addresses these issues. We therefore request that the following statement be added;

'Dorset County Council’s Flood Risk Management function have confirmed that surface water management is to be fully considered within any subsequent proposals to prevent flood risk to the site and any off site worsening.'

Site 5 Lychett Matravers Highways At this stage officers have no objections in principle to development in this location subject to improvements to pedestrian, cycle and public transport links into Lytchett Minster, Lytchett Minster school, Upton and Poole town centre. A Transport Assessment will be required to assess the traffic impact of development. Education Issues

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

Acknowledgement that the development will contribute to the new school in Lytchett Minster, as well as to the Lytchett Minster School is welcomed.

Site 7 Upton

Highways At this early stage officers have no objections in principle to development in this location subject to improvements to pedestrian, cycle and public transport links into Hamworthy and Poole town centre. A Transport Assessment will be required to assess the traffic impact of development.

(This also relates to Option 2)

Education Issues

The land identified for release of green belt, and for potential employment land, has previously been identified by DCC as a site for a new primary school to replace the existing infant and junior schools, which occupy small sites with limited facilities. A new school would be needed to accommodate additional pupils generated from development in Lytchett Minster or Upton. We acknowledge as noted the ongoing discussions

Flood Risk Management Site 7- Upton. The summary provided excludes reference to DCC as LLFA, flood risk or specifically to surface water management. It is a requirement of the NPPF that any further consideration of these sites adequately addresses these issues. Although it is understood that a surface water strategy has previously been agreed for the western site, adjoining the A35 Upton Bypass, the above will apply to the eastern site. We therefore request that the following statement be added;

Dorset County Council’s Flood Risk Management function have confirmed that surface water management is to be fully considered within any subsequent proposals to prevent flood risk to the site and any off site worsening Site 8 North of Langton Matravers Minerals Issues There are a number of current operational mineral sites in the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan located in the general area. Further information can be supplied on specific sites as required.

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

This potential development area is within the Minerals Safeguarding Area (MSA) and Minerals Consultation Area (MCA) as designated by Policies SG1 and SG2 of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014. In accordance with these policies, developers would be required to undertake an assessment of the potential for mineral development on this site and depending on the outcome of the assessment the Mineral Planning Authority may seek to achieve some level of prior extraction on this site prior to any built development.

Education Issues St George’s – a development of 40 houses in Langton Matravers will generate a pressure on the Primary School which has no capacity to expand on its current site. Capacity would have to be found in Swanage if the school could not accept all its catchment children.

Highways issues

At this stage officers have no objections in principle to development in this location subject to improvements to pedestrian, cycle and public transport links into Swanage, Corfe Castle and Wareham centres. A Transport Assessment will be required to assess the traffic impact of development. Site 8 – Langton Matravers. The summary provided excludes reference to DCC as LLFA, flood risk or specifically to surface water management. It is a requirement of the NPPF that any further consideration of these sites adequately addresses these issues. We would highlight that the proposed site is immediately adjacent to, and above, an area known to be at significant risk of both surface and ground water flooding. We therefore request that the following statement be added;

Site 9 Harmans Cross

Highways

At this early stage officers have no objections in principle to development in this location subject to improvements to pedestrian, cycle and public transport links into Swanage, Corfe Castle and Wareham centres. A Transport Assessment will be required to assess the traffic impact of development.

Site 9 – Harmans Cross. The summary provided excludes reference to DCC as LLFA, flood risk or specifically to surface water management. It is a requirement of the NPPF that any further consideration of this site adequately

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

addresses these issues. We therefore request that the following statement be added;

Site 10 – Alternative Option 2: Moreton. Response as per Site 4.

Site 11 - Alternative Option 2: Lytchett Matravers. Response as per Site 5.

Site 12 - Alternative Option 2: Lytchett Matravers. Response as per Sites 5 & 11.

Site 13 - Alternative Option 3: Langton Matravers. Response as per Site 8.

Site 14 – Possible Alternative Site: Issues largely as per Site 2; The summary provided should make reference to DCC as Lead Local Flood Authority, future consultation and prevailing flood risk to the wider community. The alternative site is understood to be elevated and at low risk of either fluvial or tidal flooding, but does have theoretical surface water flooding following overland flow paths aligned north-south. As stated in respect of Site 2, it is important that all sources of potential flooding within the wider area are understood and are mitigated against if no off site worsening is to be created. Reference should be made to all relevant documents, including a Flood Study soon to be released by the EA, to improve understanding of the complex flood mechanisms that impact upon adjacent areas. Given the above we request that the following be added to the relevant summary;

Issue 6 – Meeting Employment Needs

Minerals Issues Without knowing exactly which areas are proposed for development / redevelopment for employment purposes, it is impossible to comment definitively on possible impacts on safeguarded mineral land. However, please note that safeguarded land exists around or in the vicinity of the sites identified under this issue. The Mineral Planning Authority would be pleased to supply further information on potential mineral sterilisation or other impacts, as required. In addition, Purbeck District Council has been sent a GIS copy of the mineral safeguarding layer, which can be applied directly. Where potential impacts

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

are noted, the Mineral Planning Authority would be pleased to advise on further action.

Site 15 - Expansion of Holton Heath Trading Park

Highways Potential impact on A351. Keep HGV traffic using main access from A351 into industrial estate (Blackhill Road) and maintain no HGV access via Station Road. Some staff could use rail to commute to site. Transport Assessment and Travel Plan would be required.

Site 16 - Expansion of Sandford Lane Industrial Estate

Highways Potential impact on A351. Site is fairly close to Wareham station so potential for some rail commuting. Improve cycle links and public transport to site. Transport Assessment and Travel Plan would be required.

Site 17 - Corfe Castle Depot Inclusion of this site is acknowledged and supported

Site 18– Dorset EZ & Option 6b – Holton Heath The boundary amendments are welcomed. A masterplan for the whole area including the EZ should be initiated to inform development in the wider Wool area as noted above.

Preferred option 7 Norden P & R

Norden P & R: Generally supportive of extending the site if this means that more visitors will use the Swanage railway or improved bus services to travel to Swanage and Studland and help to take traffic off local roads including the A351, but they still have to drive down the A351 to get to the site so not improving the situation to the north of Norden. Also within walking distance of Corfe Castle

Waste issues As part of the preparation of the emerging Waste Plan, officers are undertaking a site search exercise to identify sites that could have potential for waste management facilities. DGTP and the existing Holton Heath industrial estate are key locations where there may be opportunities that are worth exploring through the Waste Plan for a waste transfer facility and/or vehicle depot. All waste site options will need to be subject to sustainability appraisal and endorsement by Bournemouth, Dorset & Poole’s relevant committees, followed by public consultation later this year, before any decision as to their suitability for the above mentioned uses is made. It is not

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

considered that the above mentioned uses would conflict with B1, B2 and B8 uses however further discussion on this matter would be welcomed.

Bovington Middle School Site 19

The former middle school has been designated for employment land / care home. Allocating this previously developed land for further development is welcomed

Flood Risk Management

Site 15 – Expansion of Holton Heath Trading Park; The summary provided excludes reference to DCC as LLFA, flood risk or specifically to surface water management. It is a requirement of the NPPF that any further consideration of this site adequately addresses these issues. We therefore request that the following statement be added;

Site 16 - Expansion of Sandford Lane Industrial Estate; The summary provided excludes reference to DCC as LLFA, or surface water management, although we acknowledge the reference made to prevailing flood risk at this location. It is a requirement of the NPPF that any development proposals address all sources of flood risk . We therefore request that the following statement be added;

Site 17 – Corfe Castle Depot; No comment

Site 18 – Amendment / Dorset Green; The summary provided excludes reference to DCC as LLFA, flood risk or surface water management. It is a requirement of the NPPF that any development proposals address these issues. We therefore request that the following statement be added;

Site 19 – Bovington Middle School; No Comment FRM

Site 20 – Keysworth Drive, Sandford: No Comment FRM

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

S216 Policy – Sustainable Drainage Systems / SuDS; Whilst we accept that SuDS, as defined, may not be appropriate in some circumstances, it should be clarified that appropriate surface water management is a requirement in accordance with the NPPF. DCC as relevant LLFA are a statutory consultee for surface water management associated with major development proposals. The current wording of this policy is ambiguous. If infiltration methodologies are inappropriate other means of managing surface water should be incorporated. To this end we suggest that this policy is amended. As a minimum the first sentence should read;

Where the Council considers SuDS techniques reliant upon infiltration to be inappropriate, such as the examples listed below, alternative methods of surface water management offering attenuation and regulated discharge, should be considered.

Issue 10 - Boundaries - Amended Settlement Boundaries

Minerals Issues It is likely that extensions of settlement boundaries will conflict in a number of cases with the MSA/MCA. The Mineral Planning Authority would be pleased to discuss these in detail with Purbeck District Council and offer further advice as may be needed.

Alternative Option 2

Omitting 240 homes to the south of Lytchett Matravers in favour of increasing the allocation at Moreton Station from 350 homes in the preferred option to 600. Sites 10 and 11 Initial high level transport study shows that Moreton could cope with 600 new homes without having a severe impact on the highway network, subject to all the usual mitigation measures, Transport Assessment, Travel Plan etc.., but omitting development at Lytchett Matravers in favour of Moreton makes less sense in transport terms as LM is closer to the conurbation and will have less impact on the already congested A351. Both developments would be preferred.

Response of Dorset County Council to the Purbeck Local Plan Partial Review – August 2016.

Alternative Option 3 upto 600 at Lychett Matravers but none at Moreton or Harmans Cross, and Langton Matravers reduced. Makes sense in terms of taking the pressure off the A351, but Moreton development fits well with the whole sustainable development picture in terms of proximity to station and large development at Crossways - overarching mixed use development through Masterplanning should be developd.

Site 14

650 homes Lytchett Minster. Makes sense in sustainable transport terms in terms of proximity to the conurbation and less impact on the A351.

Issue 16 – Country Park and Tourist Accommodation at Morden

Impacts on A35 at Morden Park Corner junction would need mitigation. Further impact assessment on highway network would be required and presumably part of the planning process for holiday chalets would require a Transport Assessment of the site. TDM team would need to get involved at an early stage in any planning proposals and further consideration of trip generation from this land use would need to be looked at or shuttle bus could be provided for less mobile to reduce amount of traffic through the village.

12/08/2016