Agenda and minutes

Venue: the Council Chamber, Appletree Court, Lyndhurst

Contact: 023 8028 5588 - ask for Karen Wardle  email:  karen.wardle@nfdc.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

Apologies

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Carpenter and R Clark.

10.

Minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meetings held on 31 May and 12 June 2019 as correct records.

 

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED:

 

That the minutes of the meetings held on 31 May and 12 June 2019 be agreed as correct records and signed by the Chairman.

11.

Declarations of Interest

To note any declarations of interest made by members in connection with an agenda item.  The nature of the interest must also be specified.

 

Members are asked to discuss any possible interests with Democratic Services prior to the meeting.

 

 

Minutes:

Cllrs Hawkins and C Ward disclosed a non-pecuniary interest in application 19/10584 as members of New Milton Town Council which had commented on the application.

 

Cllr Ring disclosed a non-pecuniary interest in application 19/10233 as a member of the Planning Committee of Ringwood Town Council.  He also disclosed a pecuniary interest in application 19/10378 in relation to a financial matter with the applicant.

 

Cllr Thorne disclosed a non-pecuniary interest in application 19/10500 as a member of Fawley Parish Council which had commented on the application.

 

12.

Planning Applications for Committee Decision

To determine the applications set out below:

 

 

12a

Ringwood Social Club, 19 West Street, Ringwood (Application 19/10223) pdf icon PDF 478 KB

Removal of conditions 22 & 28 of 16/11254 to allow all residential units to be occupied before external works to the Listed Building are completed

 

RECOMMENDED:

 

Grant the variation of condition

Minutes:

Details:

 

Removal of conditions 22 & 28 of 16/11254 to allow all residential units to be occupied before external works to the Listed Building are completed

 

Public Participants:

 

Mr Adam Bennett, Ken Parke Planning Consultants (Agent)

 

Additional Representations:

 

None.

 

Comment:

 

Cllr Ring disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of the Planning Committee of Ringwood Town Council which had commented on the application.  Cllr Ring did not vote on the application but was present during the consideration of the item.

 

Cllr J Heron, Ward Councillor addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.

 

The Committee was advised that some further information had been submitted from the applicant regarding works implemented on site and some amendments to the report, as set out in the update circulated prior to the meeting.

 

The Case Officer also reported that Condition 27 should cross refer to condition 18, not 16 as cited in the report.

 

Members understood that it was not possible for the works to continue to deliver the residential units without the removal of the conditions relating to the external works to the listed building.

 

The Committee were disappointed to note that no works had been carried out to the Grade II Listed Building as part of planning permission 15/11824.  The Case Officer reported that there were mechanisms outside the remit of the Planning Committee which could address the condition of the listed building.

 

Cllr Glass was not present for this item.

 

Decision:

 

Grant the variation of condition

 

Conditions / Reasons:

 

As per report (Item 3a).

12b

Flanders Farm, Silver Street, Sway, Hordle (Application 19/10378) pdf icon PDF 319 KB

Erection of a dwelling with detached garage; office with staff accommodation in association with private equestrian centre; livery barn with tack/wash & feed store; private stables; stables; indoor & outdoor riding school; demolition of existing

 

RECOMMENDED:

 

Refuse

Minutes:

Details:

 

Erection of a dwelling with detached garage; office with staff accommodation in association with private equestrian centre; livery barn with tack/wash & feed store; private stables; stables; indoor & outdoor riding school; demolition of existing

 

Public Participants:

 

Mr McCarthy (Applicant)

 

Additional Representations:

 

Environmental Health had provided comments on the application, which raised no objection in principle but requested conditions, should the application be granted.  This had been set out in the update note circulated prior to the meeting.

 

An additional letter of support had also been received from a veterinary surgeon who worked for the applicant regarding the welfare of the horses and the need for the horse owners to be able to reside on site.

 

Comment:

 

Cllr Ring disclosed a pecuniary interest in application 19/10378 in relation to a financial matter with the applicant.  Cllr Ring did not vote on this application but was present during the consideration of this item.

 

A note from Cllr Carpenter was read out in relation to this application.

 

Cllr Reid, Ward Councillor addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

The Committee noted that the concern raised in the report was the size of the proposed dwelling.  Policy DM20 was applicable to the application.  This allowed dwellings in the countryside to be replaced, subject to them being of an appropriate design, scale and appearance for the rural area and providing that the increase in floorspace does not exceed more than 30% of the original dwelling.  The application sought a floorspace increase of 78%. 

 

Members expressed the view that the equestrian centre would be a benefit to the area and that the scale of the facilities was such that it could accommodate a larger home.  They felt that the dwelling being located within a 33 acre site would not appear to be out of context in this location.  The proposed dwelling was also not substantially larger than other dwellings in the immediate area, as set out in paragraph 11.9. 

 

The Committee also noted that the overall built form footprint of the proposed development would be of benefit to the impact on the Green Belt as buildings would be consolidated.

 

Cllr Holding was unable to vote on this application as she had been absent for part of the consideration of this item.

 

Cllr M Wade was not present for this item.

 

Decision:

 

Chief Planning Officer authorised to grant permission.

 

Conditions / Reasons:

 

The proposed dwelling although larger than the policy restrictions, would not appear out of context in this location in terms of impact on the character of the countryside and extent of the holding.

 

12c

Land adj 3 Kivernall Road (Rear of 10 Park Lane), Milford-on-Sea (Application 19/10465) pdf icon PDF 389 KB

House; parking; access onto Kivernall road; landscaping

 

RECOMMENDED:

 

Refuse

Minutes:

Details:

 

House; parking; access onto Kivernall Road; landscaping

 

Public Participants:

 

Mr John Gatley, Savills (Agent)

Mr B Clitheroe (Applicant)

Miss Susan Wood (Objector)

Cllr Sue Whitlock (Milford on Sea Parish Council)

 

Additional Representations:

 

None.

 

Comment:

 

The Case Officer highlighted that in 2011 an appeal decision for a house on the site had been dismissed.  This was due to the impact of the proposals on the character and appearance of the area, specifically how the proposed dwelling related to the plot. 

 

Members noted that the applicant had in part addressed this issue by proposing to excavate the building down so that from the road the two-storey dwelling would appear to be at a lower level than other properties.

 

The Committee noted that there was no objection to the design of the proposed dwelling and that there were other examples of modern design in the area.  The design was supported by Milford Parish Council.  Members felt that the proposed building would add to the character of the area and that the design of the property was unique.

 

Decision:

 

Chief Planning Officer authorised to grant permission.

 

Conditions / Reasons:

 

The proposed dwelling had been designed to minimise its impact due to its design and siting and it would add to the character of the area, which also includes other modern designs.

 

12d

7 Hursley Drive, Langley, Fawley (Application 19/10500) pdf icon PDF 312 KB

Two-storey rear extension

 

RECOMMENDED:

 

Refuse

Minutes:

Details:

 

Two-storey rear extension

 

Public Participants:

 

None.

 

Additional Representations:

 

Additional letter of support from the applicant’s agent, as per update note circulated prior to the meeting.

 

Comment:

 

Cllr Thorne disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Fawley Parish 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.

 

Councillor Glass was not present for this item.

 

Decision:

 

Refuse

 

Conditions / Reasons:

 

As per report (Item 3d)

 

12e

21 The Fallows, Ashley, New Milton (Application 19/10584) pdf icon PDF 371 KB

Roof alternations and first floor extension, raise ridge height in association with new first floor; chimney

 

RECOMMENDED:

 

Refuse

Minutes:

Details:

 

Roof alterations and first floor extension; raise ridge height in association with new first floor; chimney

 

Public Participants:

 

Mrs Amy Curtis (Applicant)

Cllr Alvin Reid (New Milton Town Council)

 

Additional Representations:

 

An additional comment had been received from the applicant, as per the update note circulated prior to the meeting.

 

Comment:

 

Cllr Hawkins disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of the Planning Committee of New Milton Town Council which had commented on the application.  Cllr Hawkins did not vote on this application but was present during the consideration of the item.

 

Cllr C Ward disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of New Milton Town Council.  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 amendment to paragraph 11.1 of the report, as per update note circulated prior to the meeting.

 

Members noted that a previous application had been refused for a similar development on the grounds that it would be a large dwelling which would be out of scale with neighbouring properties. The design proposed in the application had addressed some of the issues.

 

The view was expressed amongst some Members that the proposed application would fit in with the character of the area and the streetscene.  The design of the property had been improved since the previous application and it was noted that the proposed materials would not be out of context in this area.

 

Cllr M Wade was unable to vote on this application as he had been absent for part of the consideration of this item.

 

Decision:

 

Chief Planning Officer authorised to grant permission.

 

Conditions / Reasons:

 

The current proposals were considered to be acceptable within the street scene and did not detract from the character of the area.

 

12f

Land rear of the White Horse, Keyhaven Road, Milford-on-Sea (Application 18/11614) pdf icon PDF 385 KB

Erection of 1 pair of semi-detached houses; 2 detached houses; access; parking & landscaping

 

RECOMMENDED:

 

Grant subject to conditions

Minutes:

Details:

 

Erection of 1 pair of semi-detached houses; 2 detached houses; access; parking & landscaping

 

Public Participants:

 

Mr Adam Bennett, Ken Parke Planning Consultants (Agent)

Mrs Brushwood on behalf of residents (Objector)

Cllr Sue Whitlock (Milford on Sea Parish Council)

 

Additional Representations:

 

The Case Officer reported that the Parish Council had updated their comments on the revised plans.  5 letters of objection, including a petition had also been received.  These had been included in the update note circulated prior to the meeting.

 

Comment:

 

Members noted that the Highway Authority had not objected to the application.  Concern was however expressed about the access arrangements through Grebe Close.

 

The Committee felt that this was an unacceptable form of development.  It was a cramped site, with small plot sizes.  The proposals would provide a poor quality development in the area. 

 

Cllr Glass was not present for this item.

 

Decision:

 

Refuse

 

Conditions / Reasons:

 

The proposed development would result in an unacceptably cramped and congested form of development, with inadequate plot sizes and a lack of space around the buildings that would lead to a poor quality development to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area. As such, the proposed development would be inappropriate to its context and would be detrimental to local distinctiveness that would also provide an unsatisfactory and unacceptable living environment for future occupiers, contrary to Policy CS2 of the Core Strategy for the New Forest District outside the National Park.