Agenda and minutes

Details:

10 houses; access; Public Open Space, parking and landscaping

Public Participants:

Mr Wilden – Applicant’s Agent

Mr Hanson – Objector

Town Cllr Sutherland – Lymington and Pennington Town Council

Additional Representations:

The New Forest National Park Authority supported the proposed mitigation measures, subject to their being secured through the planning permission.

Hampshire County Council’s Countryside Access Development Officer raised no objection, subject to the imposition of condition 14.

Comment:

Cllrs Harrison and Wyeth disclosed non-pecuniary interests as members of the New Forest National Park Authority which was responsible for determining a related application for the access to this site and which had also commented on this application.  Cllrs Penson and White disclosed non-pecuniary interests as members of Lymington and Pennington Town Council which had commented on the application.  They each concluded that there were no grounds under common law to prevent them from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.

Cllr Armstrong disclosed a non-pecuniary interest on the grounds that he was a close personal friend of the neighbour who owned land needed for the access.  He concluded that there was a danger he could be perceived to be biased and consequently took no part in the consideration and did not vote.

The Committee was advised that as the previous employment use of the site had ceased as long as 30 years previously and there was considerable need to provide additional housing in the District a refusal on policy grounds relating to the loss of an employment site would be hard to sustain.

The Committee was advised that the comments of the County Council’s Lead Local Flood Authority had not been received.  As a result the recommendation was revised to include the need to take into consideration the comments of the Lead Local Flood Authority and to include any further conditions that may be required.

Decision:

Service Manager authorised to grant planning permission subject to the completion by 31 January 2018 of the requisite S106 Agreement, and if the Agreement has not been completed by that date, Service Manager Planning and Building Control authorised to refuse permission.

Conditions/

Agreements/

Negotiations:

As per report (Item 3(a)), to include the need to take into consideration the comments of the Lead Local Flood Authority and to include any further conditions that may be required.

Refusal Reasons:

As per report (Item 3(a)).

Details:

Display 1 non-illuminated fascia sign; 1 externally illuminated projecting sign (Application for Advertisement Consent) (retrospective)

Public Participants:

Mr Mears – Applicant’s Agent

Additional Representations:

Additional comments from Ringwood Town Council were set out in the update circulated prior to the meeting.

Comment:

Cllrs Rippon-Swaine and Thierry disclosed non-pecuniary interests as members of Ringwood 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:

Advertisement consent granted

Conditions:

As per report (Item 3(b)).

Details:

Detached house; double garage; parking; demolition of existing

Public Participants:

Mr Bradford – Applicant’s Agent

Dr Miller - Objector

Additional Representations:

1 further letter of objection raising concerns about the CIL form and the removal of vegetation from the rear garden. Further details were set out in the update circulated prior to the meeting.

Comment:

An e-mail from Cllr Carpenter objecting to the proposal was submitted to the meeting.

The Committee was advised that the figures in the CIL Summary Table were not correct. The existing floor space should read 60.66 sq m, the net floor space 184.78 sq m  and therefore the total CIL was £16,260.64

Decision:

Grant planning permission

Conditions:

As per report (Item 3(c)).

Details:

Roof alterations including roof lights in association with new first floor; single-storey side and rear extension; car port; front porch

Public Participants:

Mr Bishop – Applicant.

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

None

Decision:

Refused

Refusal Reasons:

As per report (Item 3(d)).

Details:

Use of land as garden curtilage; 1.2m high boundary fence (retrospective)

Public Participants:

Town Cllr Sutherland – Lymington and Pennington Town Council

Additional Representations:

Two letters of objection raising concerns about the fence looking out of character and the loss of public land.

Comment:

Cllrs Penson 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 Committee was advised that the land that had been enclosed was within the ownership of the applicant, although it was beyond the original fence line of the property.

The Committee considered that the intrusion of the fence into land which was designated to be kept open introduced a visually discordant feature that damaged the pleasant, open character of this area of Marsh Lane.

Decision:

Refused

Refusal Reasons:

The fence has an adverse visual impact on the character and appearance of the area as a result of its height above the carriageway and proximity to the highway in this prominent location on a main green route into Lymington contrary to Policy CS2 of the Core Strategy for the New Forest District outside the National Park.  

Details:

Two-storey rear extension; Conservatory

Public Participants:

Mr Bradford – Applicant’s Agent

Parish Cllr Banks – Milford on Sea Parish Council

Additional Representations:

None

Comment:

None

Decision:

Refused

Refusal Reasons:

As per report (Item 3(f)).