Eastleigh Borough Council Bursledon, Hamble-le-Rice and Hound Local Area Committee Meeting

There were no declarations of interest in relation to items of business on the agenda.

Hound Parish Councillor, Maureen Queen, queried when Poppy Place would be provided with a road sign as there currently was not one in place.

The Local Area Manager and Assistant Local Area Manager agreed to look into what was happening with the road sign and provide a response directly.

Councillor Holes queried whether there had been a response from Hampshire County Council regarding the Lowford Crossing.

The Local Area Manager confirmed that they had received an email from the Safer Roads Traffic Team. The email was read to the Committee.

The Committee felt that the email was vague and did not provide an adequate response.

The Local Area Manager agreed to continue to correspond with the Safer Roads Traffic Team to see if anything could be done.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 26 January 2023 be approved as correct.

The Chair thanked Councillor Rich and Councillor Manning for all their work on the Committee over the years. She stated that it would be a sad loss as their passion for their work in the community was clear.

The Vice-Chair echoed the Chair’s comments.

Councillor Rich thanked all officers and colleagues for all their support, and work, over the years.

Councillor Manning echoed Councillor Rich’s comments and added that it had been a privilege and honour to work for the community.

Consideration was given to the report of the Local Area Manager (Agenda Item 6) that contained recommendations for expenditure from the Committee’s developer contributions.

Councillor Holes praised the Local Area Manager for the work that had gone into the Local Area Plan.

RESOLVED –

That the Committee:

(1)  Approved the allocation of £103,359 in Public Art Developers Contributions to the Coralent public art project;

(2)  Approved the allocation of £1,730 to install four standard floor mounted Broxap Derby 120L dual waste bins. Three in the Latitude Estate and one at the bottom of Hungerford, close to the bridge by the stream;

(3)  Noted the change in allocation of developer contributions against the Kestrel Park play area, as previously approved at Committee in March 2021;

(4)  Approved the allocation of £15,000 from reserves to fund the Spring Clean event at three locations in Bursledon, Hamble and Hound;

(5)  Approved the Bursledon, Hamble, and Hound (BHH) Local Area Action Plan 2023/24, shown in Appendix 1 for adoption and publication and;

(6)  Noted the achievements in the local area supported by the LAC, highlighted in appendix 2.

The Planning Officer gave a short presentation on guidelines that had to be taken into account when determining planning applications; in particular the issues that could, and could not, be taken into account.  This was set against the broader policy framework.

The Committee considered the report of the Executive Head of Planning and Economy (Agenda Item 8) concerning the erection of a porch, replacement of existing uPVC double glazed windows with wooden sash windows, replacement of existing rainwater goods with moulded metal guttering to front elevation and installation of a dormer window to rear, insertion of a new window to first floor rear elevation and roof-lights to existing mono-pitch roof on ground floor rear extension at 4 Station Road, Netley Abbey, SO31 5DT (H/22/93164).

The Committee was updated that:

Following the completion of the committee report several points had been raised and required further clarification:

-  Planning permission was not required for the conversion of the attic room to a bedroom (without a dormer window) in a property located within a Conservation Area.

-  Building Regulation Approval was required for the conversion/associated works and an application had been lodged and was being assessed by the Building Control Service.

-  The planning application could be determined without Building Regulations Approval, which was covered by separate legislation to the Planning Act and not a material planning consideration.

-  The committee report, accompanying existing floor plans and Heritage Significance Statement (page 18) identify the attic room as a  3^rd bedroom. For clarification purposes the attic room cannot be classed as a habitable bedroom at present. As such the existing property should be described as a 2 bedroom property and this should be noted in relation to paragraphs 3, 28 and 38 of the committee report.

-  The increase in bedrooms from 2 - 3 does not materially affect the number of parking spaces required in accordance with the Council’s adopted parking standards.

-  The increase in bedrooms from 2 – 3 does not affect any other material planning consideration/planning policy in relation to the assessment of the planning application

Received another neighbour objection – highlighting points already raised.

Update to condition 4 - The first floor bathroom window on the north east elevation shall be obscure glazed to Pilkington’s level 3 or equivalent with no more than a top opening toplight. Once installed the window shall be permanently maintained in that condition. Reason: To protect the amenity and privacy of the adjoining residential properties.

There was debate around the size of the Dorma window in the plans, the lack of detail about the Conservation Area Policy and the impact it would have on the street and the look of the cottages currently.

RESOLVED -

That permission be REFUSED due to the bulk, size, design and scale of the dormer window and its impact on the streetscene and Conservation Area.

(NOTE: Four people spoke in objection of the application citing concerns, that included but were not limited to, noise inside adjoining properties, disturbance in neighbouring property whilst work is carried out, whether correct policies would be followed, the design of the Dorma, non-sympathetic design in a conservation area, concerns that bats would be displaced, current property does not meet building regulations  or permitted development in a conservation area, parking, changes to the street scene, and the domineering presence of the roof space on the designs.

The applicant spoke in support of the application stating that the house had been unloved and uncharacteristic of the coastguard cottages and in need of renovation. She stated they had a passion to enhance and improve the house, which they had hoped would be their forever home.)

The Legal Services Manager reported:-

(a)  That the following appeals had been lodged:

Myrtle Cottage, Lands End Road, Bursledon, SO31 8DN

Appealed against the Council’s refusal of planning permission for a sunken side extension (H/22/92624).

This was a delegated decision.

Myrtle Cottage, Lands End Road, Bursledon, SO31 8DN

Appealed against the Council’s refusal of listed building consent (L/22/92773).

This was a delegated decision.

(b)  That the following appeals had been dismissed:

Fairport House, Lands End Road, Bursledon, SO31 8DN

Appealed against the Council’s refusal of planning permission for proposed use of existing home office building by non-resident of the property (F/22/92564).

This was a delegated decision.

RESOLVED -

That the report be noted.