Issue - meetings

Construction of four houses with associated access, parking and landscaping; demotion of the existing building

RECOMMENDED:

Delegated Authority be given to the Executive Head of Planning, Regeneration and Economy to GRANT PERMISSION subject to:

i)                 the completion of the landowner of a planning obligation entered into by way of a Section 106 Agreement (or unilateral undertaking) to secure appropriate contributions with respect to habitats mitigation (as set out in the officer report to Committee); and

ii)                the imposition of the conditions set out in the report.

Details:

Construction of four houses with associated access, parking and landscaping; demotion of the existing building

Public Participants:

Matt Holmes, Spruce Town Planning Ltd (Agent)

Tracey Wyeth (Objector)

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

Cllr Crisell disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Totton and Eling Town Council which had commented on the application. She concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent her from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

The Case Officer reported an update had been submitted in relation to the ecological survey.  As part of this, a scheme of mitigation and enhancement for biodiversity net gain was proposed and this was considered to be acceptable.  An amendment to condition 10 was proposed due to this additional submission.  This had been included in the update note circulated prior to the meeting.

The Committee felt that the proposed development would result in a cramped form of development and therefore would constitute overdevelopment.  They felt it would be detrimental to the amenity of the area, noting that there were existing parking issues along this road.

Cllrs Corbridge and Holding were not present for this item.

Decision:

Refuse

Reasons for Refusal:

1.    The proposed development would result in an unsuitably cramped form of development and would constitute an overdevelopment of the site, to the detriment of amenity and the existing character of the area, located off of a narrow cul-de-sac with existing localised parking issues. Consequently, it is considered the proposal is discordant with provisions of local plan Policy ENV3, which requires all development to achieve high quality design that contributes positively to local distinctiveness, quality of life and enhances the character and identity of the locality.

2.    The recreational impacts of the proposed development on the New Forest Special Area of Conservation, the New Forest Special Protection Area, the New Forest Ramsar site, the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area, the Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar site, the Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation and the Solent and Dorset Coast Special Protection Area would not be adequately mitigated and the proposed development would therefore unacceptably increase recreational pressures on these sensitive European nature conservation sites. In addition, the air quality impacts of the proposed development on the aforementioned New Forest sites would not be adequately mitigated, and the proposed development would therefore unacceptably increase air quality impacts on these sensitive European nature conservation sites. As such, the proposal would be contrary to Policy ENV1 of the New Forest District Local Plan 2016-2036 Part 1 and Policy DM2 of the Local Plan Part 2 Sites and Development Management Development Plan Document and the Supplementary Planning Document - Mitigation for Recreational Impacts on New Forest European Sites.

Construction of four houses with associated access, parking and landscaping; demotion of the existing building

RECOMMENDED:

Delegated Authority be given to the Executive Head of Planning, Regeneration and Economy to GRANT PERMISSION subject to:

i)                 the completion of the landowner of a planning obligation entered into by way of a Section 106 Agreement (or unilateral undertaking) to secure appropriate contributions with respect to habitats mitigation (as set out in the officer report to Committee); and

ii)                the imposition of the conditions set out in the report.