BRAMSHOTT & PARISH COUNCIL www.bramshottandliphook-pc.gov.uk

Mr P J STANLEY THE PARISH OFFICE EXECUTIVE OFFICER HASKELL CENTRE HASKELL CENTRE Tel: 01428 722988 MIDHURST ROAD MIDHURST ROAD Fax: 01428 727335 LIPHOOK LIPHOOK e-mail : [email protected] GU30 7TN

A MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE TOOK PLACE AT 7.30PM IN THE HASKELL CENTRE, MIDHURST ROAD, LIPHOOK ON MONDAY 13 JUNE 2016.

PRESENT WERE: Cllr Mrs B Easton (Chairman), Cllr Mrs T Jourdan, Cllr Mrs J Kirby (for part of the meeting), Cllr T Maroney, Cllr Ms J Poole & Cllr E Trotter. Mrs G Spencer (Administration Officer) & one member of the press also attended, together with Chris Webb & Jim Avenell (National Trust Wardens) for part of the meeting.

62/16 CHAIRMAN’S ANNOUNCEMENTS The Chairman asked for mobile phones to be switched to silent & pointed out the fire exits.

63/16 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Cllr M Croucher, Cllr D Jerrard & Mr S Thomas (Parish Tree Warden).

64/16 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Cllr Mrs Kirby & Cllr Ms Poole were acquainted with the applicant for 50 London Rd, Liphook (Minute 69/16.11).

65/16 MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON 9 MAY 2016 These were confirmed & signed as being a true record of the meeting.

66/16 MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES Cllr Mrs Kirby reported that the change of use application for Carla, 1 The Square, Liphook (Minute53/16.7) was not proceeded with as EHDC had incorrectly advised the applicant that a change of use application was required, when this was not the case as they were not preparing food on the premises; the new coffee shop venture was now open to the public.

67/16 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SESSION Public Questions (items not on the agenda). None. Public Participation. None.

1

68/16 PROPOSAL TO REINTRODUCE GRAZING TO LUDSHOTT COMMON Chris Webb (National Trust Head Warden in ) advised that the National Trust were responsible for three commons in the East Hampshire area; namely , Passfield & Ludshott Common. They were currently undertaking consultations on the future long-term management of Ludshott Common & were proposing to re-introduce grazing in order to protect the landscape & maintain the heathland habitat to protect a range of important & rare plant, animal & bird species. Ludshott Common was a registered common, SSSI, SPA & was comprised of heathland & wood pasture. It had been a common since the 13th century, when commoners first exercised commoner’s rights, & grazing ended in the 1930’s. The amount of heathland in East Hampshire had declined by over 75% in the past two centuries, from 11,500 acres in c.1800 to around 2,000 acres now. Heathland was important to sustain a range of birds, animals & plants, as well as for recreation. The last big fire on Ludshott Common was in 1980 & a great deal of work had been conducted since to keep the heathland open & clear of scrub & gorse, including “mechanical grazing”, which had not been that successful. Grazing still occurred on Selborne & other commons; the New Forest being the best model of what the National Trust would like to achieve. To reintroducing grazing, a stock-proof boundary fence would be required & the National Trust would need to apply for permission from the Secretary of State, having first conducted a common-purpose consultation as set out by DEFRA. Q: Would it affect deer? A: Mainly roe deer which can easily jump a stock fence, so it would not inhibit them. Q: Common is fenced? A: Parts were already fenced prior to the new 2006 Commons Act; it is MOD land, not National Trust. Q: Would it affect horse-riders? A: The British Horse Riding Society supported the idea provided horse-friendly gates were used. Q: Whose cattle would graze there? A: One commoner had expressed interest; however it would take a considerable time to obtain permission. The stocking density would be similar to that of the New Forest where there is heavy recreational use. Cattle would be selected to ensure that they were quiet/placid & compatible with people/dogs. Cllr Mrs Kirby was fully supportive & pointed out that it was important as Liphook was surrounded by heathland. Cllr Mrs Easton proposed sending a letter of support & it was agreed to consider this at the next meeting.

2

69/16 PLANNING APPLICATIONS APPLICANT

69/16.1

20027/007 Residential development comprising six dwellings with Abava Cllr Mrs B Easton associated access, car parking & landscaping, following Developments demolition of 105 Midhurst Rd/all other buildings on site Ltd - Orange Lodge, 105 Midhurst Rd, Liphook Cllr Mrs Easton had spoken to the Case Officer, who thought that the application was likely to be withdrawn. She read out a letter, which had been posted on EHDC’s website, from the Case Officer to the applicant which outlined their objections & recommended that the application be withdrawn. Cllr Mrs Easton stated that the application clearly contravened H9 policies & she recommended objecting strongly on these grounds. A vote was taken (all in favour). Decision: Strongly object as would violate H9 policy.

69/16.2

22115/032 Variation to 22115/031 to allow substitution of two semi- Aquinna Homes Cllr Mrs T Jourdan detached houses in place of one detached house - land at plc Beaver Industrial Estate, Midhurst Rd, Liphook Cllr Mrs Jourdan reported that there had been an earlier application to change the approved layout, to which the Parish Council had objected; however it was granted permission. This application was to change one of the proposed houses into two smaller ones, with two parking spaces. She considered that there was no reason to object. Decision: No objections.

69/16.3

24836/022 Two detached dwellings - Woolmer Croft, Longmoor Rd, Mr Foot Cllr T Maroney Liphook Cllr Maroney advised that a proposal to build two houses on the site was accepted by the Parish Council in 2008 & permission was granted, but had now expired. The current proposal was to build two detached houses in tandem, both with double garages, on the strip of land to the west of the existing house. The existing entrance would be closed & a new shared drive created for all three houses. Cllr Maroney saw no reason to object as there was sufficient room to accommodate the houses, which would be attractive & blend in well with the surroundings, an arboricultural report demonstrated that there would be no damage to trees & the neighbour had no objections. A vote was taken (all in favour). Decision: No objections.

3

69/16.4

29129/005 Semi-detached dwelling - 30 Hazelbank Close, Liphook Mr Burrows Cllr Mrs J Kirby Cllr Mrs Kirby explained that the original application was for an extension, but once planning permission was granted the applicant had submitted another application to use the extension as a separate dwelling. The neighbours had objected, but as the extension had been approved the Parish Council did not object. However, EHDC arranged a site visit & then refused the application on highway/parking grounds. The applicant was now proposing to demolish the garage as it was too narrow to use, & provide two parking spaces in tandem at the bottom of the garden. She recommended objecting as it was garden grabbing & unsustainable. A vote was taken (all in favour). Decision: Object on the following grounds: 1. tandem parking would be inconvenient & would most likely result in on-street parking; 2. use of neighbour’s garden (30 Hazelbank Close) for parking would constitute ‘garden grabbing’, would lead to loss of amenity for the neighbour & would be out-of-character for the close.

69/16.5

35774/005 Change of use from B1 (office) to C2 (care home) - Passfield OAA Developments Cllr Mrs J Kirby Oak, Passfield Rd, Passfield Ltd Cllr Mrs Kirby explained that the site was currently used as offices & the proposal was to provide a 12- bed care home for people with severe learning difficulties, & use the barn at the rear as an admin office. She had visited the site with Cllr Ms Poole, & discussed the application with a neighbour who had raised a number of concerns that could impact on the wider community: the care home would operate 24 hours per day; the clients might be aggressive/noisy; the entrance drive was shared with houses; difficult for cars to pull out into the busy Passfield Rd; limited public transport; would require specialist workers so unlikely to be local (no provision for carers to live in); extremely close to the SPA (light/noise pollution). Cllr Mrs Kirby recommended objecting for all these reasons. Cllr Mrs Jourdan objected to the loss of office space & pointed out that there were many care homes in the area. Cllr Maroney claimed that he would not object if there was a sufficiently large car park & could see no grounds to object apart from the loss of office space. Cllr Mrs Kirby suggested objecting on the grounds of loss of office space. A vote was taken (five in favour; one abstention). Decision: Object to change of use/loss of office employment.

69/16.6

35980/009 Lawful Development Certificate of an existing use (running Mr Clutterbuck Cllr E Trotter of carpentry business/manufacture of bespoke wooden furniture) - Penally Farm, Hewshott Lane, Liphook Cllr Trotter explained that the application had been made by new owners trying to legalise the business which had been in place on & off for many years. The business had started in 2001 & was still operating, but under different ownership. He saw no reason to object as the business occupied just one building & the application included numerous receipts from previous years. Decision: No objections.

4

69/16.7

54599/005 Single-storey extension & external refuse area - Holdenbury Helical (Liphook) Cllr Mrs T Jourdan House, 18 King George’s Drive, Liphook Ltd Cllr Mrs Jourdan advised that this would be a small extension to the main building to house a bin area & staff toilets. She had spoken to nearby residents, none of whom objected. Cllr Maroney added that it had been discussed with residents a couple of years ago & none had objected. He considered that it would tidy the area up. Decision: No objections.

69/16.8

54891/001 Alterations to fenestration & rear entrance, replacement Mr & Mrs Cllr T Maroney porches & conservatory - Cerysbrooke House, Seven Wickham Thorns Lane, Bramshott Chase Cllr Maroney reported that the property was originally 1A Chase Villas, which together with 1 Chase Villas, was split into flats. There was permission for a large extension & the property was made into a separate house. The applicant now wanted to restore the rear & front entrances to make entrances to the house. They had obtained pre-planning advice & had been told that an application would need to be made as all permitted development rights were removed when the extension was built. EHDC agreed that the proposal would improve the appearance of the house; the application was supported by photographs showing the poor condition of the existing porches & conservatory. Cllr Maroney considered that the plans were very poor & did not show clearly what the extensions would look like in terms of size, scale & appearance, & recommended objecting on these grounds. Decision: Object as plans inadequate in that they lack sufficient detail to assess the application.

69/16.9

55200/006 Retention of raised patio area to rear - Southlands, Limes Mr Prisgrove Cllr Mrs J Kirby Close, Bramshott Cllr Mrs Kirby reported that this was a retrospective application following a complaint from a neighbour that they were overlooked. The applicant had obtained pre-planning advice & was proposing new planting to the boundary & a privacy screen. Decision: No objections.

69/16.10

56671/001 Change of use of attached office building to living Mrs Rudd Cllr E Trotter accommodation - 28A Haslemere Rd, Liphook Cllr Trotter stated that this was a derelict building with a small single-storey extension, which was currently designated as office space, & the applicant wanted to convert it into a wet room. There was no reason to object as the extension was too small to use as an office. Decision: No objections.

5

69/16.11

56681 Single-storey extension to rear & enlargement of dormer Mr & Mrs Cllr Ms J Poole window to front, following demolition of conservatory Millard - 50 London Rd, Liphook Cllr Ms Poole reported that this was a detached house in a fairly secluded plot, set back from the road along a passageway. The applicant was changing the layout of the house to create an extra bedroom. There was no reason to object as it would not affect any neighbours. Decision: No objections.

70/16 ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS There were none.

71/16 RESULTS OF PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS (see Appendix 1).

72/16 TREE WORK APPLICATIONS The Tree Warden’s report was noted & agreed (see Appendix 2).

73/16 LAWFUL DEVELOPMENT CERTIFICATE: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 9 Erles Rd, Liphook (56725) It was noted that an application had been made to ascertain whether planning permission was required for a single-storey extension to the rear, a side extension & conversion of the garage to habitable accommodation.

74/16 PLANNING APPEAL Land at Lowsley Farm, Lark Rise, Liphook (34310/022) It was noted that Easterton had withdrawn the appeal (re: refusal of outline planning permission for 155 dwellings & 175 dwellings (330 in total) with associated access, car parking & public open space, following demolition of five dwellings).

CONCLUSIONS This concluded the business of the meeting & the meeting closed at 9.20pm. Confirmed at the meeting held on 18 July 2016.

Signed ...... Presiding Chairman

6