Minutes - Planning Committee Meeting

This page was last updated on Wednesday, August 13, 2008

• Back to the previous page
• Planning Committee Minutes - (PDF file 20 kb)

Present:

Councillors:Liz James [Chairman]
Nick Culhane
Mike Lomas
Neil Pidduck
Rosemary Sign
Peter Warrener
Denis Welstead

Clerk: Colin Arnett

Public: 9

P/07/57 Apologies for Absence

None

P/07/58 Public Question Time

• Prince’s Mead School - Richard White, the Bursar at Prince’s Mead School, spoke of their wish to extend the use of the Sports Hall to the local community in order to meet the School’s public benefit obligations under the new Charities Act 2006. This involved the lifting of the planning restriction that the hall should be used solely by the School.
  
  
• North Winchester Farm – Jonathan Humphrey spoke on his proposals to demolish two of the Poultry Units on North Winchester Farm and to convert the building into light industrial and storage/distribution units with associated car parking and landscaping.
  
  
• Tudor Way – Members of the public shared with members their concerns regarding the development of 74 dwellings on Tudor Way. They were particularly apprehensive on the overall affect on the village and the increase in traffic on Springvale Road.
  
  

P/07/59 Minutes of the Meeting held on the 18 July 2007.

The minutes were agreed as a true record of the meeting and were signed by Cllr James.

P/07/60 Matters Arising from the Meeting of the 18 July 2007

P/07/51 Court Road – Cllr Pidduck reported on the public inquiry which he had attended.

P/07/61 Planning Applications received since the last meeting

Members only comment on this application was that due consideration had been given to the visibility splays at the vehicle entrance/exit of the development onto Lovedon Lane

Members wish to object to this development as the proposals do not conform to the Winchester District Local Plan DP3 [para’s 2, 5, 7, 8, & 9]

The PC has no comment to make on the proposed new dwelling and single storey garage. 
 
As with 07/02167/FUL, the application needs clarification regarding parking spaces. The application form lists 4 proposed car spaces. It has had to be assumed, for this application there are actually to be two, that this, the garage and the parking space shown on this plot. If this is the case we have no comment.  We have had to assume that the other two, making the total of 4, will actually be on the plot of the existing bungalow.

We have commented that the two spaces for the existing bungalow must be constructed before the start of work on this application.

The PC has no comment to make on the proposed extension and reinstatement of steps and retaining walls. However, the application needs clarification regarding parking provision.
 
Drawing Number 1212/11 shows two proposed parking spaces between the existing bungalow and the garage to Number 2. There is no reference to parking provision on the form. If these spaces are to be provided for the existing bungalow our only comment is that they must be constructed before the start of construction of the new dwelling under 07/02150/FUL.
 
If these spaces are not to be provided for the existing bungalow, then we object on the grounds of lack of adequate parking provision.

Councillors were concerned that the visual impact on the surrounding area was unacceptable

P/07/62 Planning Decisions advised since 18 July 2007

The proposed development fails to respect the character and spatial characteristics of the site, street scene and wider context in terms of bulk, layout, massing and landscaping.

The development will have a detrimental impact upon the amenity of nearby properties due to overlooking/loss of privacy.

The proposed extensions would have an intrusive impact upon the local landscape and would prejudice the mix of smaller dwelling units within the countryside.

P/07/63 Clerk’s Notices

The clerk had received the following documents;

• Tesco Car Parking – a letter had been received from a parishioner regarding car parking on the grass verge adjacent to the Tesco Express store in Springvale Road. The clerk had referred the letter to Tesco for comment. They had indicated that more signage and yellow lines were needed. Members asked the clerk to refer the matter to Neville Crisp [WCC].
  Action – the clerk
  
  

P/07/64 Chairman’s Notices

• WCC Enforcement Cases – Cllr Pidduck referred to the bulletin for August, where Woodhams Farm was listed. The clerk was asked to establish more information.
  Action – the clerk
  
  
• Notification of Planning Decisions – Cllr Welstead asked for clarification on the procedure for the notification of planning decisions. These are listed on each Planning Committee Agenda or available from the parish office.

P/07/65 Date of next meeting

The next meeting was arranged for 7.30 pm on the 31 October 2007.

The meeting closed at 9.35 pm

• Top of page

• Headbourne Worthy Parish Council Homepage
• Kings Worthy Parish Council Homepage

• Hampshire County Council
• Winchester City Council