Appendix 1 - Development Brief

Appendix E - A summary of the consultation process
Prior to the East Dorset District Council Planning Committee meeting on 3 November 2009,
the draft development brief was the subject of a limited public consultation exercise involving
individuals and organisations who had commented upon planning application 3/08/1109/FUL
which was refused in March 2009. A summary of the comments received is set out below.
Wessex Water
The 400 metre buffer zone which surrounds the Wimborne sewage treatment
works indicates that development within this area could suffer from nuisance
arising from noise, odour and flies. Once aware of proposed development within
these buffer zones, further studies can be undertaken by specialists to predict
more accurately perceived nuisance based upon weather patterns and processes at
the treatment works.
A study was previously undertaken by Entec for this location in 2006. Their
study clearly indicated that the eastern part of the riverside site was located
within an area unsuitable for residential development. Wessex Water would
object through the planning process to any residential development proposed in
this location.
We understand that advice has already been sought from the Environmental
Health Officer regarding the development and he is unlikely to oppose the
residential development of the western part of the site. If the site were to
proceed, we would appreciate input at an early stage to discuss site layout and
other design factors which may reduce any impact from the treatment works for
the riverside site. Mitigation measures have been considered at the treatment
works itself but were considered too expensive and relatively ineffective.
It is unlikely that the proposed development will drain by gravity to the existing
public sewers in Brook Road. Initial desktop appraisal suggests two options to
resolve the issues of capacity and the need for pumping.
Option 1 comprises the relocation / reconstruction / upgrading of the existing
public foul water pumping station in Brook Road. Further appraisal would be
required to cost this option. If the pumping station is to be relocated, this will
most likely need to be positioned at the Brook Road end of the site to collect
flows from the proposed development and the existing public sewers. It is likely
that the pumping station will be positioned on Cobham land with transfer to
Wessex Water following adoption.
Option 2 comprises the construction of a new on-site pumping station to transfer
the flows from the site direct to the sewage treatment works. An indicative
budget cost for this solution would be approximately £150k subject to detailed
design. Please find enclosed standard drawing STO/602 which provides
information on layouts for adoptable pumping stations. No dwellings should be
sited within 15m of the site boundary. The site must also have good vehicular
access from the adjacent highway with turning areas suitable for tanker lorries.
EDDC Planning Paragraph 6.9 – The Council does not own all the land to the suspension bridge
but only up to the A31 bridge. However, it would like to see the footpath made
up to the suspension bridge if possible. On reflection the Council would prefer a
2 metre wide footpath / cycleway along the river frontage in order to retain some
of the informality of the character of the water’s edge.
EDDC
Architects Panel
Point 19 on page 20 is misleading as this contradicts paragraph 5.15 with the
statement on swept path analysis
The site characteristics section of the brief requires an expansion of the site
context and an expansion of specific context analysis to explain more about local
building character traits. Having identified the site location at pages 3 and 4,
there is little about Wimborne buildings you might find on a perambulation either
in the central area or on a walk between the centre and the site. Perhaps make the
point that currently much of the town backs on to parts of the watercourses but
here is an opportunity to do something different. A full page picture of the
Minster was not necessary. Add text to expand the value of the recreational use
of the river, where the walks up and down will take you and its value to the
development.
Paragraph 4.3 - Provide a key vision for the housing edge to the river edge,
perhaps introducing a diagram showing front gardens defended by hedging, then
the path and space (with the opportunity of structural planting and then the softer
natural riverside edge to develop a concept and vision for the landscape here).
Add a statement into section 4 about the space between the buildings in the
context of this site being as important, if not more so than the buildings, and that
the river frontage buildings need to be 'calm' and subservient to the general
landscape beyond.
Add at paragraph 4.33 that the choice of materials needs to be incorporated into
the design from an early stage and not left until after the approval, and that if
materials are to depart from the simple pallet as set out then this becomes even
more important.
Amend paragraph 4.5 to indicate that the strategic planting on the east end of the
open space is an option to relieve it and also to increase screening opportunities.
Downgrade the illustrative layout by putting it in an Appendix so as not to stifle
further creative alternatives.
32