Agenda and minutes

Details:

2 retail units; 3 flats; balconies; roof terraces; cycle and bin store (Outline Application with details only of appearance, layout and scale)

Public Participants:

None

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

Cllr Armstrong disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Hythe and Dibden Parish Council which had commented on the application.  He concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent him from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

The Committee was advised that the Informative Note should be amended to refer to Condition 9.

Decision:

Planning consent.

Conditions:

As per report (Item 3(a)).

Details:

Development of 8 houses comprised: conversion and part demolition of existing buildings to create 1 terrace of 3 houses; 1 terrace of 4 houses; detached bungalow; associated parking

Public Participants:

Mr Saunders – Applicant’s Agent

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

Cllr Wappet disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Fawley Parish Council which had commented on the application.  He concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent him from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

The recommendation was amended by a request to authorise the Head of Planning and Transportation to rationalise the conditions to be applied.

Decision:

Head of Planning and Transportation authorised to grant planning consent.

Conditions/

Agreements/

Negotiations:

As per report (Item 3(b)), but with the conditions to be simplified to the satisfaction of the Head of Planning and Transportation.

Details:

24 houses; office; open space (Outline Application with details only of access and layout)

Public Participants:

Mr Holtham – Supporter of the application.

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

Cllr Wappet disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Fawley Parish Council which had commented on the application.  He concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent him from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

Cllr Wyeth disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of the New Forest National Park Authority 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.

Decision:

Refused

Refusal Reasons:

As per report (Item 3(c)).

Details:

First-floor rear extension; rear dormer with Juliet balcony

Public Participants:

None

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

None

Decision:

Refused

Refusal Reasons:

As per report (Item 3(d)).

Details:

Bin store; entrance gates; railings; fenestration alterations

Public Participants:

Mr Warwick – Applicant’s Agent.

Additional Representations:

None.

Comment:

Cllrs Penson, White and Rostand disclosed non-pecuniary interests as members of Lymington and Pennington Town Council which had commented on the application.  Cllr Penson disclosed a further non-pecuniary interest on the grounds that he knew the applicant’s agent from previous business negotiations. Cllrs Rostand and White concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent them from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote. Cllr Penson concluded that the degree of acquaintance was sufficient to potentially give the impression that he was biased and consequently abstained from voting.

Decision:

Planning consent

Conditions:

As per report (Item 3(e)).

Details:

Single-storey side and rear extension

Public Participants:

Mr Fairbairn – Applicant.

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

Cllrs Penson, Rostand and White disclosed non-pecuniary interests as members of Lymington and Pennington Town Council which had commented on the application.  They concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent them from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

Decision:

Refused.

Refusal Reasons:

As per report (Item 3(f)).

Details:

Single-storey rear extension; rooflights and fenestration alterations; porch

Public Participants:

None

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

Cllrs Penson, Rostand and White disclosed non-pecuniary interests as members of Lymington and Pennington Town Council which had commented on the application.  They concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent them from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

Decision:

Planning consent

Conditions:

As per report (Item 3(g)).

Details:

Two-storey front and rear extensions; Juliet balconies; roof lights; fenestration alterations; flue, detached double garage

Public Participants:

None

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

Cllrs Penson, Rostand and White disclosed non-pecuniary interests as members of Lymington and Pennington Town Council which had commented on the application.  They concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent them from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

The recommendation was amended by deleting condition 3, as the purpose of this condition was already covered by condition 2.

Decision:

Planning consent

Conditions:

As per report (Item 3(h)), with condition 3 deleted.

Details:

Use as dental practice; rear porch canopy; permeable hard surfacing; parking and cycle racks; low level boundary wall

Public Participants:

Town Cllr Treleaven – Ringwood Town Council

Additional Representations:

None.

Comment:

Cllr Rippon-Swaine disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Ringwood Town Council which had commented on the application.  He concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent him from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

Decision:

Planning consent

Conditions:

As per report (Item 3(i)).