Minutes - Planning Committee

This page was last updated on Monday, August 25, 2008

• Back to the previous page

• Planning Committee Minutes - (PDF file 31 kB)

Present:                    

Councillors: Peter Warrener [Vice-Chairman]
Dawn-Marie Cox
Ian Gordon
Neil Pidduck
Rosemary Sign
Dennis Welstead                    

Clerk: Colin Arnett

Public: 0

P/08/47 Apologies for Absence

Apologies for absence had been received from Cllr James.

P/08/48 Public Question Time

Cllr Gordon as a member of the public outlined his concerns to members regarding the proposed developments at 155 Springvale Road and 50 Willis Waye.

P/08/49 Minutes of the Meeting held on the 28 May 2008

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

P/08/50 Matters Arising from the Meeting of the 28 May 2008

• P/08/41 Springvale Road – WCC have indicated that the shelter should be moved during the first week in July.

• P/08/41 Land at Tudor Way – Cllr Pidduck outlined the Inspector’s report. Members were encouraged by the decision.
  

P/08/51 Planning Applications received since the last meeting

Case Reference	Address	Comment
08/00980/FUL	89A Springvale Road Conversion of integral garage	Comment Only

The distance of 9.6m from the bay window to the road should be checked to ensure that there is sufficient parking

 

Case Reference	Address	Comment
08/00875/FUL	10 The Pastures Pitched roof over front extension	No Comment
08/00940/FUL	Salcombe St Mary’s Close Single storey front extension	No Comment
08/00849/FUL	East Willow St Mary’s Close Erection of detached garage	No Comment
08/01171/FUL	46 The Pastures Formation of one bedroom flat	Comment Only

The application appeared to be contradictory and members were not clear as to the intended use of the building

 

Case Reference	Address	Comment
08/00904/FUL	Woodhams Farm Springvale Road Erection of detached dwelling	Comment Only

Assurances should be sought to ensure that the house will always be retained for the equestrian manager. Additionally any new build should incorporate water harvesting and permeable hard-standing within the specification.

 

We ask you to note that, contrary to Section 8 of the Application Form, the applicant has not consulted with the Parish Council. Receipt of the application details from WCC was our first knowledge of the proposal.

 

Case Reference	Address	Comment
08/01114/FUL	Homelea Legion Lane Loft conversion	No Comment
08/01255/FUL	Sunnylands 21 Boyne Mead Road Single storey side extension	No Comment
08/01437/FUL	11 Cloverbank Single storey extension	Comment Only

Members had concerns regarding the proximity of the extension to the northern boundary.

 P/08/51 Planning Applications received since the last meeting

Under the Code of Conduct Cllr Gordon declared a prejudicial interest in the following applications and left the room

Case Reference	Address	Comment
08/01051/OUT	Land at the Rear of 155 Springvale Rd Erection of 62 dwellings	Object

 

In the Application Form, we note that approval is being sought only in respect of Access and none of the other reserved matters. However, the application includes comprehensive documentation on all matters.

 

It is our understanding that any response should embrace all proposals even though they are illustrative. Our objection is, therefore, on that basis.
 
Although the proposals lie predominantly within the boundaries of Headbourne Worthy, they have a number of significant and unacceptable impacts on our Parish, and we object strongly to the application for the reasons to follow.
 
Headbourne Parish Council emailed to us a copy of their letter of objection of 18 June 2008 that had been sent to Winchester City Council. We are in complete agreement with the comments and objections in it and ask that you take them as the core of our objection.
 
We draw to your attention issues that directly affect Kings Worthy as follows (reasons/background are well documented elsewhere in other submissions):
 
Willis Waye
· we can confirm that the response to an earlier consultation exercise with local residents carried out by this PC as part of its normal procedures, yielded a very substantial majority who did not want any change to the use of, or facilities on, the Green

· the provision of Open Space must be within the boundaries of the development site itself in accordance with WCC policy

· there would be an undesirable loss of garage amenity with potential for exacerbating the current parking problems

· disruption of established footpath usage

 

Mount Pleasant (and Merrydale, Church Lane)
· the proposals for emergency, pedestrian and cycle access are totally inappropriate and put safety at risk when taking into account the width and nature of the road and the disposition of houses relative to the road

· some of the tallest dwellings proposed are located at the highest point of the development site and, at nominally 2.5-storeys high (but effectively 3-storeys) and would be overbearing and out of scale with neighbouring properties

· Merrydale would be adversely affected to the disadvantage of the children who benefit from the facility

Springvale Road 
· the proposed access/egress, with its restricted width, would generate hazardous situations in its interaction with Springvale Road

· the current view from Springvale Road, and its environs, is one of lightly wooded appearance with vegetation that contributes to its verdant character, contributing to the semi-rural appearance of this part of the Village. The proposed removal of so much of the trees and vegetation, to be replaced by the proposed significant scale and intensity of housing, means that the development would fail to respond positively to the character and appearance of the local environment.

Church Lane
· the significant amount of traffic from the site forecast in the Traffic Statement that would use Church Lane would unacceptably exacerbate the growing problems on this busy bus route. The road is narrow throughout its length and in places is not wide enough for two vehicles. A footpath is provided on only one side of the road and that in places is of minimal width.

 

Case Reference	Address	Comment
08/01289/FUL	50 Willis Waye Erection of 2 no. dwellings	Object

Members considered this to be an over development and not in keeping with the character and street scene of the area. The building bulk would be particularly overbearing to the adjacent properties.

 

Additionally any new build should incorporate water harvesting and permeable hard-standing within the specification.

P/08/52 Planning Decisions advised since the 28 May 2008

P/08/53 Clerk’s Notices

• Review of Sub-Regional Allocation of Primary Land-won Aggregates in the South East – had been received from the SE Regional Assembly. Cllr Welstead agreed to complete the enclosed questionnaire.
  Action – Cllr Welstead

• South East Regional Sustainability Framework – had also been received from the SE Regional Assembly.

• Waiting Restriction – the proposed new waiting restrictions within the village had been received from WCC. Members agreed that this should be discussed at PC. Prior to this, the Traffic Review Group will be including this on their agenda for the meeting on Monday 7 July 2008.
  Action – Cllr Warrener/clerk
  

P/08/54 Chairman’s Notices

• None

P/08/55 Date of next meeting

• The next meeting was arranged for 7.30 pm on the 30 July 2008.
  

The meeting closed at 9.48 pm

Signed…………………………………

Date…………………………………….

• Top of page

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

• Hampshire County Council
• Winchester City Council