Docstoc

EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL

Document Sample
EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL Powered By Docstoc
					                                         EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL

                                              SOUTH PLANNING COMMITTEE

                                DECISIONS OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING CONTROL

                                               UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

                                                                                                                         PC.35/2003
                                                                                                                    6 February 2003
SECTION IV


Item No.                           001

PROPOSAL:                         RETENTION OF PERGOLA

LOCATION:                         23 Francis Road, Horndean, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0HZ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37708/001/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Trevor Forward

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    21/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           002

PROPOSAL:                         ALTERATIONS TO INCLUDE INTERNAL PARTITIONS AND WALL
                                  CLADDING, NEW SURFACES, FINISHES, CEILINGS AND NEW AIR
                                  CONDITIONING UNITS

LOCATION:                         12 & 14 High Street, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU323JG

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37673/002/LBC/JR                        PARISH:           Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs G Boardman

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    24/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
         Conservation Areas) Act 1990.




                                                                     1
2.       (C36) All new works and works of making good to the retained fabric whether internal or external,
         shall be finished to match the adjacent work with regard to the methods used and to material,
         colour, texture and profile.
         Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the Grade II listed building.

3.       (C38) Before the works hereby approved are commenced, samples of all the materials to be used
         for internal and external finishes and for construction work, shall be submitted to and approved in
         writing by the Planning Authority, and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the
         approved samples.
         Reason To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of the listed building.

4.       (C8) Before any work is undertaken in pursuance of this consent to demolish any part of the
         building, such steps shall be taken and such works shall be carried out as shall, during the
         course of the works permitted by this consent, secure the safety and stability of the remainder of
         the building.
         Reason To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of the building.

5.       (UNQ1) Details of the siting, dimensions and finish of the air conditioning units and ducting to be
         provided shall be permitted and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. The works hereby
         permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
         Reason To protect the character and appearance of the listed building and the Conservation
         Area.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that this permission does not convey consent for advertisements nor full
     planning permission which are dealt with separately. Any external works shall not commence
     until full permission is granted.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           003

PROPOSAL:                         CERTIFICATE OF LAWFUL USE FOR OCCUPATION OF DWELLING
                                  WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH AGRICULTURAL OCCUPANCY CONDITION
                                  (CONDITION 4 OF PRD 2630/3)

LOCATION:                         Penally Farm, Hewshott Lane, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307SS

REFERENCE NO.                      F.35980/002/CLU4/JM                             PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Helical (Liphook) Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Julia Mansi             DATE REGISTERED:                    25/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS – REFUSED for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Having regard to the evidence submitted, Council Records and the Electoral Role, the
      applicant has failed to show that Penally Farm, Hewshott Lane, Liphook has not been occupied
      in accordance with Condition 4 of application PRD.2630/3 for 10 years.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                     2
Item No.                           004

PROPOSAL:                         ALTERATIONS TO REPLACE BAY WINDOW GROUND FLOOR TO REAR
                                  WITH FRENCH DOORS AND STEPS

LOCATION:                         1 Bridge Meadows, Liss, Hampshire, GU337JY

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37735/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Liss

APPLICANT:                         D. Crowe

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    28/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external facing brick to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
     texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           005

PROPOSAL:                         PITCH-ROOFED TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO SIDE (AS AMENDED BY
                                  LETTER DATED 16 DECEMBER 2002 AND PLANS RECEIVED 17
                                  DECEMBER 2002)

LOCATION:                         2 The Close, Langrish, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321RH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22710/002/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Langrish

APPLICANT:                         Mr R. Dudman

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    29/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) The proposal represents the unacceptable enlargement of this dwelling which by virtue of
         its excessive bulk, width, height, extended ridge line and poorly related first floor fenestration is
         of poor design which will create a noticeably dominant, unbalanced and incongruous appearance
         to this pair of dwellings and is detrimental to the character and appearance of the streetscene
         contrary to General Strategy Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan and the
         adopted East Hampshire District Design Guide for Residential Extensions.




                                                                     3
Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   You are advised to contact the case officer regarding the possible resubmission of a reduced
     scheme to extend the property.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           006

PROPOSAL:                         REPLACEMENT GARAGE

LOCATION:                         136 Catherington Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9PB

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37746/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mrs L Harris

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    04/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

3.       (D21) The building hereby permitted shall be used only for purposes incidental to the enjoyment
     of the dwelling house and for no other purpose including business, commercial, residential or
     industrial purposes.
      Reason It is considered that the building is unsuitable because of its location for such uses.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           007

PROPOSAL:                         RE-ROOFING OF GLAZED PORCH AND NEW WINDOW TO WC

LOCATION:                         1 The Mews Idsworth, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0AW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37623/001/LBC/JR                        PARISH:           Rowlands Castle

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs J Stannard

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    22/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:




                                                                     4
1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
      permission.
      Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
      Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           008

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         61 Murray Road, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9JQ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.34077/001/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs T Oliver

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    13/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
         have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.

4.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no windows or doors shall at any time be inserted in the side elevations of the extension
     hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential properties.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                     5
Item No.                           009

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY FRONT EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         29 Harrier Close, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9BZ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37261/001/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs N.A Sholto-Douglas

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    11/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
         have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.

4.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no additional window(s) or door(s) shall at any time be inserted in the first floor or roof
     plane of the east elevation of the extension hereby permitted without the prior written consent of
     the Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential properties.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           010

PROPOSAL:                         SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         3 The Avenue, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314JQ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37782/FUL/SM                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs A Jonas

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    07/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:


                                                                     6
1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

4.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
         (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
         Order) no additional windows or doors shall at any time be inserted in the side elevation of the
         extension hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
         Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that the grant of this permission represents the optimum size of the
     premises and that any further enlargement would constitute an unacceptable over-development
     or intensification of building mass or use and the Planning Authority is not likely to permit any
     further proposals to enlarge the premises.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           011

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION, CONSERVATORY TO REAR AFTER
                                  DEMOLITION OF EXISTING GARAGE

LOCATION:                         72 Drift Road, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0NX

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37770/FUL/PB                       PARISH:          Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Gibbons

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                   05/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reason:

1.       (R5G) The proposal by virtue of its excessive height, front dormer design and bulk abutting the
      adjoining neighbours boundary represents a poorly designed and unacceptable enlargement of
      this dwelling to the detriment of the character and appearance of the street scene and the
      existing amenities of adjoining residents to the south-east contrary to General Strategy Policy
      GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review and the adopted East Hampshire
      District Design Guide for Residential Extensions.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    7
Item No.                           012

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         9 College Street, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314AE

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37771/FUL/SM                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         R Barrett

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    05/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
     have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
      Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
      harmonise with the surroundings.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           013

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         12 Patricks Close, Liss, Hampshire, GU337ER

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37726/FUL/JR                        PARISH:         Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr Robson

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    05/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reason:

1.       (R5I) The proposal would result in excessive building bulk abutting the boundary detrimental to
      the character and appearance of the locality contrary to the General Strategy Policy GS5 of the
      East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                     8
Item No.                           014

PROPOSAL:                         CONSERVATORY TO REAR

LOCATION:                         9 The Ridings, Liss, Hampshire, GU337RP

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37700/FUL/SM                        PARISH:         Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr PJ Hunt

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    04/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
      texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
_______________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           015

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION (AMENDED SCHEME)

LOCATION:                         64 Bulls Copse Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9RA

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37452/001/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mrs H Kabir

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    01/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.




                                                                     9
2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

3.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no windows, rooflights or other openings shall at any time be inserted in the northern side
     elevation of the extension hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning
     Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           016

PROPOSAL:                         CONSERVATORY TO REAR

LOCATION:                         37 Kennet Road, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314LS

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37753/FUL/SM                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr P W Cotton

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    30/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
      texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    10
Item No.                           017

PROPOSAL:                         CONSERVATORY TO REAR

LOCATION:                         3 Burgates Farm Cottages Farnham Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU336JZ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.31791/001/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr N Sprack

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    30/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external facing brick to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
     texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           018

PROPOSAL:                         DOUBLE GARAGE WITH WORKSHOP AND GAMES ROOM OVER

LOCATION:                         Oakwood House, Steep Marsh, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU322BL

REFERENCE NO.                      F.27772/007/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Steep

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs D J Crane

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    29/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.




                                                                    11
3.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
         have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.

4.       (D22) The ground floor of the building hereby permitted shall be used for the parking of private
         motor vehicles and ancillary domestic storage only and for no other purpose.
         Reason To maintain planning control in the interests of amenity.

5.       (UNQ1) The first floor of the building permitted shall be incidental to the enjoyment of the main
         dwelling house. The room shall not provide for separate habitable accommodation and cannot
         be let, sold or severed from the main dwelling.
         Reason In order to retain planning control as the building is located in the countryside where
         additional dwellings are not considered appropriate.

6.       (E7) Before the development commences on site details of the proposed ground levels, ground
         floor slab levels and damp proof courses of the approved development in relation to existing
         ground levels and the boundaries of the site including plans and cross-sections, shall have been
         submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that a satisfactory relationship results between the new development,
         adjacent buildings and surrounding area.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that this represents the optimum size of this building. Further alterations
     or additions are unlikely to be considered favourably by the Planning Authority.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           019

PROPOSAL:                         OUTLINE - 10,011SQ.METRES B1 FLOOR SPACE WITH ASSOCIATED
                                  PARKING AND ACCESS. (DETAILED PLAN IN CONNECTION WITH
                                  EMPLOYMENT BUILDING)

LOCATION:                         Former O S U, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33992/039/OUT/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    24/05/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITHDRAWN for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Withdrawn by the applicants on 16 December 2002 following the disposal of their interest
      in the land.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    12
Item No.                           020

PROPOSAL:                         OUTLINE - 10,011SQ.METRES B1 FLOOR SPACE WITH ASSOCIATED
                                  PARKING AND ACCESS. (DETAILED PLAN IN CONNECTION WITH
                                  EMPLOYMENT BUILDING)(DUPLICATE APPLICATION)

LOCATION:                         Former O S U, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33992/040/OUT/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    24/05/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITHDRAWN for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Withdrawn by the applicants on 16 December 2002 following the disposal of their interest
     in the land.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           021

PROPOSAL:                         225 SQ.METRES OF RETAIL FLOOR SPACE WITH TWO 1-BED FLATS
                                  AND TWO 2-BED FLATS AT FIRST FLOOR LEVEL

LOCATION:                         Former O S U, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33992/041/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd.

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    15/05/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITHDRAWN for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Withdrawn by the applicants on 16 December 2002 following the disposal of their interest
      in the land.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    13
Item No.                           022

PROPOSAL:                         225SQ.METRES OF RETAIL FLOOR SPACE WITH TWO 1-BED FLATS
                                  AND TWO 2-BED FLATS AT FIRST FLOOR LEVEL (DUPLICATE
                                  APPLICATION)

LOCATION:                         Former O S U, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33992/042/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    15/05/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITHDRAWN for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Withdrawn by the applicants on 16 December 2002 following the disposal of their interest
      in the land.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           023

PROPOSAL:                         36 DWELLINGS WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS AND CAR PARKING

LOCATION:                         Former O S U, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33992/043/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Sainsbury's Supermarket Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    15/05/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITHDRAWN for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Withdrawn by the applicants on 16 December 2002 following the disposal of their interest
      in the land.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    14
Item No.                           024

PROPOSAL:                         36 DWELLINGS WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS AND CAR
                                  PARKING(DUPLICATE APPLICATION)

LOCATION:                         Former O S U, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33992/044/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    15/05/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITHDRAWN for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Withdrawn by the applicants on 16 December 2002 following the disposal of their interest
      in the land.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           025

PROPOSAL:                         DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE/WORKSHOP

LOCATION:                         1 Primrose Cottages Tunbridge Lane, Bramshott, Liphook, Hampshire,
                                  GU307SP

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37765/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr J Crowe

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    04/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted (Including materials to be used) shall be completed in
         accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the
         approved plans will require the prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (D21) The building hereby permitted shall be used only for purposes incidental to the enjoyment
         of the dwelling house and for no other purpose including business, commercial or industrial
         purposes.
         Reason It is considered that the building is unsuitable because of its form/position/location for
         such uses.



                                                                    15
4.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no window(s) or door(s) shall at any time be inserted in the south elevation of the
     garage/workshop hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy and existing amenities of the occupants of the adjoining
      residential properties.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           026

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION, ADDITIONAL DORMER TO FRONT AND
                                  PORCH TO FRONT

LOCATION:                         22 Tilmore Gardens, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU322JQ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33461/001/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs C Broad

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    07/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
      texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           027

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         38 Buckingham Road, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU323AZ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37788/FUL/JR                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Pelling

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    08/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reason:




                                                                    16
1.       (UNQ1) The proposal creates an undesirable form of development inappropriate to and at
      variance with the prevailing form of development in the vicinity (notably the group of three semi
      detached properties), and would therefore be diminish the unique character of this part of the
      street, and if permitted would set a precedent for further such proposals which would further
      lessen the visual gaps between properties, harming the character of the area, contrary to
      Policies UB3 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan and Policies GS5 of the East Hampshire
      District Local Plan.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           028

PROPOSAL:                         CONSERVATORY TO SIDE (AS AMENDED BY PLANS RECEIVED
                                  13/12/02)

LOCATION:                         Madhuban Tandoori Restaurant, Station Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU337AQ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.24930/004/FUL/JR                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Madhuban Tandoori Restaurant

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    12/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (D13) The windows in the southern elevation of the conservatory hereby permitted shall be glazed
         with obscure glass prior to use. It shall be retained at all times and shall not at any time be
         replaced by clear glazing.
         Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the opposite residential properties.

3.       (H54K) Before any part of the development is occupied a minimum of 8 car parking spaces shall
         be marked out within the curtilage of the site and thereafter maintained and kept available for the
         parking of vehicles.
         Reason To ensure adequate car parking provision within the site to minimise harm to local
         amenity.

4.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
         have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.

5.       (L18) A hedge of species to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority shall be
         planted along the western boundary (Station Road) prior to the use of the conservatory and
         shall be maintained in perpetuity. Any plants which die or become, in the opinion of the Planning
         Authority, seriously damaged or defective within this period shall be replaced as soon as is
         reasonably practical.
         Reason To ensure an appropriate standard of visual amenity in the area.




                                                                    17
Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant's attention is drawn to the obligations specified in Sections 4, 7 and 8 of the
     Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 as amended in 1976 and by the Disabled
     Persons Act, 1981 and also to British Standards Code of Practice for Access for the disabled to
     Buildings (BS.5810: 1979). Further guidance as to these requirements can be obtained from the
     Director of Social Services, Hampshire County Council, Trafalgar House, The Castle,
     Winchester, Hants SO23 8UJ (01962 841841), in Department of the Environment Development
     Control Policy Note No. 16 entitled "Access for the Disabled", and Department of the
     Environment approved document "Part m" which explains the requirements of "The Building
     Regulations 1991".
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           029

PROPOSAL:                         NON-ILLUMINATED FASCIA SIGN, NON-ILLUMINATED PROJECTING
                                  SIGN, INFORMATION PANELS, ATM LIGHTBOX AND RECEIPT BIN
                                  (AMENDED SCHEME)

LOCATION:                         National Westminster Bank Plc, 4 High Street, Petersfield, Hampshire,
                                  GU323JF

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22936/013/ADV/SM                        PARISH:           Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         The National Westminster Bank Plc

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    13/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following condition:

1.       (V1) The sign(s) shall be displayed in strict accordance with the plan(s) and specifications hereby
      approved.
      Reason In the interests of both amenity and highway safety.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           030

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY FRONT EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         10 Fieldfare Close, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0NQ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37793/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Hodges

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    11/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:




                                                                    18
1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E2) Before development commences on site details of all external facing and roofing
         materials shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the development harmonise
         with its surroundings.

3.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no windows shall at any time be inserted in the east elevation of the extension hereby
     permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property
      (properties).
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           031

PROPOSAL:                         CHANGE OF USE OF BARN TO THATCHED ROOF DWELLING WITH
                                  DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE AFTER DEMOLITION OF STORE
                                  BUILDINGS

LOCATION:                         Upper House Farm, Ramsdean, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321RP

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37588/001/LBC/NP                        PARISH:           Langrish

APPLICANT:                         Executors & Trustees J Leggett (Deceased)

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    06/09/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
         Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (C38) Before the works hereby approved are commenced, samples of all the materials to be used
         for internal and external finishes and for construction work, shall be submitted to and approved in
         writing by the Planning Authority, and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the
         approved samples.
         Reason To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of the listed building.




                                                                    19
4.       (C36) All new works and works of making good to the retained fabric whether internal or external,
         shall be finished to match the adjacent work with regard to the methods used and to material,
         colour, texture and profile.
         Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the Grade II listed building.

5.       (C21) Before the works hereby approved are commenced, details to a scale of not less than 1:20
         elevations and 1.5 sections of all new windows and doors and their decorative finishes, shall be
         submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and the works shall be carried out
         in accordance with the approved details.
          Reason In order to safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of the listed building.

6.       (C40) All new external joinery shall be of painted timber.
         Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the Grade II listed building.

7.       (UNQ1) Before the works hereby approved are commenced, details of the rainwater gutters and
         down-pipes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and the
         works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
         Reason To ensure a satisfactory appearance on completion of the development.

8.       (UNQ2) All rooflights are to be of conservation type, flush with the existing roof, all details of which
         are to be submitted to and agreed with the Planning Authority in writing prior to commencement
         of work.
         Reason To maintain the architectural interest of this Listed Building.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.       You are advised that it is an offence to carry out works that do not fully comply with the condition
         set out above. If found guilty you could be liable on summary conviction to an unlimited fine, a
         prison sentence of up to two years, or both.

2.   Please note that this also requires planning permission.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           032

PROPOSAL:                         APPROVAL OF RESERVED MATTERS - DETACHED BUNGALOW AND
                                  GARAGE

LOCATION:                         78 London Road, Horndean, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0BX

REFERENCE NO.                      F.29520/002/RES/JM                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Barker

CASE OFFICER:                      Julia Mansi             DATE REGISTERED:                    08/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPROVAL subject to the following conditions:

1.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
         have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.




                                                                    20
2.       (L1) No works on site shall commence until a detailed landscaping scheme, which shall include
         details of the species, and position of all existing trees (with a stem diameter of 100mm or
         greater) and hedges, and the position of all proposed trees and hedges, plant sizes, planting
         distances, numbers and provisions for maintenance of the trees and shrubs, and showing areas
         to be grass seeded or turfed has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning
         Authority.
         Reason In the interests of the visual amenity of the locality and to enable proper consideration to
         be given to the impact of the proposed development on existing trees.

3.       (L5) All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
         details and to a reasonable standard in accordance with the relevant parts of appropriate British
         Standards or other recognised codes of good practice.
         To be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with
         a timetable to be first agreed with the Planning Authority.
         Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or
         become, in the opinion of the Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective, shall be
         replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable with others of species, size and number as
         originally approved, unless the Planning Authority gives its written consent to any variation.
         Reason To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of
         landscape in accordance with the approved designs.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   This approval of reserved matters is granted in part compliance with condition 2 of outline
     planning permission F.29520/001. You are reminded that all other conditions attached to the
     outline permission continue to apply, including the requirement for the dwelling to remain single
     storey only.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           033

PROPOSAL:                         DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE

LOCATION:                         15 Hazelbank Close, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314BY

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37800/FUL/JR                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Burrage

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    20/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (D22) The garage hereby permitted shall be used for the parking of private motor vehicles in
         connection with the applicants hobby, and ancillary domestic storage only and for no other
         purpose.
         Reason To maintain planning control in the interests of amenity.



                                                                    21
3.       (D21) The garage hereby permitted shall not be used for the following purposes: business,
         commercial or industrial, residential, purposes.
         Reason It is considered that the building is unsuitable because of its location
         for such uses.

4.       (L19) The existing hedge and trees along the western boundary of the site shall be retained at a
         minimum width of 2 metres and a minimum height of 2 metres.
         Reason To preserve the visual amenity of the area.

5.       (H54D) Before any other operations are commenced the access including the footway shall be
         constructed.
         Reason To provide satisfactory access.

6.       (H54M) Adequate provision shall be made within the site to enable vehicles using the site to enter
         and leave in a forward gear.
         Reason In the interests of highway safety.

7.       (H54N) Any gates provided shall be set back a distance of 4.5m from the edge of the carriageway
         of the adjoining highway.
         Reason In the interests of highway safety.

8.       (H54O) The access shall be splayed back at an angle of 45 degrees.
         Reason        In the interests of highway safety.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that before any works to the highway are undertaken that consent of the
     County Highway Authority is required and the relevant consent should be sought from the Area
     Surveyor, Hampshire County Council, The Old College, College Street, Petersfield, Hants GU31
     4AG. (Telephone 01730 266411).
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           034

PROPOSAL:                         DORMER TO REAR

LOCATION:                         375 London Road, Clanfield, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0PJ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.30612/001/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr R. Snowden

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    11/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOT PROCEEDED WITH for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) The proposal is "permitted development" under the provisions of the Town and Country
      Planning (Permitted Development Order) 1995 and therefore does not require planning
      permission.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    22
Item No.                           035

PROPOSAL:                         REPLACEMENT FRENCH DOORS

LOCATION:                         Little Boar Hunt, Portsmouth Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307EE

REFERENCE NO.                      F.20853/002/LBC/SM                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs N Davidson-Kelly

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    30/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
         Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
      plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
      prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
      Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
      interests of the amenity of the area.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           036

PROPOSAL:                         PITCH-ROOFED SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION TO FRONT WITH PORCH
                                  (REVISED SCHEME)

LOCATION:                         72 Moggs Mead, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314NX

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37215/001/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Dr W Roffey

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    19/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.


                                                                    23
3.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that further development to the front of the site is unlikely to be
     supported by the Planning Authority.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           037

PROPOSAL:                         ALTERATIONS TO GARAGE IN ORDER TO ALLOW ITS USE FOR
                                  ANCILLARY LIVING ACCOMMODATION

LOCATION:                         The Old Chapel, Ramsdean, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321RR

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22930/004/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Langrish

APPLICANT:                         Mr D D MacDonald

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    14/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.       You are advised to retain adequate provision for parking and turning of vehicles on site.

2.   You are further advised that any use of the converted garage as an independent dwelling would
     require planning permission.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    24
Item No.                           038

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         31a Mill Lane, Sheet, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU322AJ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.27789/002/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs P Haines

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    14/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

4.       (D13) The first floor windows in the north (rear) elevation of the extension hereby permitted shall
         be glazed with obscure glass, prior to first occupation. It shall be retained at all times and shall
         not at any time be replaced by clear glazing.
         Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.

5.       (UNQ1) Before and during the construction of the development hereby permitted, materials shall
     be stored well away from the river bank and surface water drainage will be directed away from
     the watercourse. Additionally any potentially polluting substances should be stored appropriately
     to avoid spillage/leakage.
      Reason To ensure that the river is protected from pollution throughout the construction period of
      the permitted development
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    25
Item No.                           039

PROPOSAL:                         CONVERSION OF BARN INTO SINGLE DWELLING AFTER DEMOLITION
                                  OF THE LEAN-TO AND BRICK SHED

LOCATION:                         Conford Park Farm Bungalow, Conford, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307QJ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.28739/002/FUL/JM                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr Simon Richards

CASE OFFICER:                      Julia Mansi             DATE REGISTERED:                    07/02/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
         have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.

4.       (L1) No works on site shall commence until a detailed landscaping scheme, which shall include
         details of the species, and position of all existing trees (with a stem diameter of 100mm or
         greater) and hedges, and the position of all proposed trees and hedges, plant sizes, planting
         distances, numbers and provisions for maintenance of the trees and shrubs, and showing areas
         to be grass seeded or turfed has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning
         Authority.
         Reason In the interests of the visual amenity of the locality and to enable proper consideration to
         be given to the impact of the proposed development on existing trees.

5.       (L5) All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
         details and to a reasonable standard in accordance with the relevant parts of appropriate British
         Standards or other recognised codes of good practice.
         To be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with
         the timetable agreed with the Planning Authority.
         Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or
         become, in the opinion of the Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective, shall be
         replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable with others of species, size and number as
         originally approved, unless the Planning Authority gives its written consent to any variation.
         Reason To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of
         landscape in accordance with the approved designs.




                                                                    26
6.    (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
      (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
      Order) no window(s) or door(s) or other openings other than shown on the permitted plans shall
      at any time be inserted in to any elevation or roof area of the dwelling hereby permitted without
      the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the character of the dwelling hereby permitted.

7.    (D15) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
      (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
      Order) no extension or alteration to this dwelling shall be made except with the prior written
      consent of the Planning Authority.
      Reason The site lies in a rural area where it is considered that further development on the site
      may be detrimental to the character of the area and as such be contrary to the adopted policies
      of the Planning Authority.

8.    (D22) The carports hereby permitted shall be used for the parking of private motor vehicles and
      ancillary domestic storage only and for no other purpose.
      Reason To maintain planning control in the interests of amenity.

9.    (UNQ1) The roof area of the car port/utility area shall only be used for storage purposes ancillary
      to the main dwelling.
      Reason To maintain planning control in the interests of amenity and appearance of the dwelling
      hereby permitted.

10.   (C9) Before work commences on the conversion of the barn a method of work statement
      indicating the sequence of works shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority
      and thereafter adhered to during construction works.
      Reason To maintain the integrity and the character of the building.

11.   (C18) Any alteration or repairs to brickwork and stone work shall be carried out in matching bond
      and matching bricks using a lime based mortar with a flush joint.
      Reason To maintain the character of these buildings.

12.   (UNQ2) Before works commence on site the following information and details shall be submitted
      to the Planning Authority for approval in writing:-
      (i) eaves details scale 1:5 (shown in situ) including methods of ventilating the roof; and
      (ii) details of the glazed door openings, including vertical and horizontal timber sections.
      The building works shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the details once approved.
      Reason To ensure the retention of the character of the buildings.

13.   (H54K) Adequate space shall be provided within the site, for the loading, unloading and parking of
      vehicles to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
      Reason In the interests of highway safety.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   Please note that there is a Section 106 Agreement that applies to this permission.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                    27
Item No.                           040

PROPOSAL:                         CHANGE OF USE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND TO SAND SCHOOL

LOCATION:                         Upper Downgate Farm, Sandy Lane, Steep Marsh, Petersfield, Hampshire,
                                  GU322BG

REFERENCE NO.                      F.27994/022/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Steep

APPLICANT:                         N Dimond

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    09/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (L1) No works on site shall commence until a detailed landscaping scheme, which shall include
         the following:

         (i) details of the native species (including hawthorn, hazel and field maple) to be used in the New
         Hedgerow coloured green on the plans hereby approved, including plant sizes, planting
         distances and numbers

         (ii) details of the native tree coppice to be planted in the area hatched red on the plans hereby
         approved to include position of all proposed trees, sizes, planting distances and numbers

         (iii) details of the reinforcement planting to be carried out on the existing hedgerow adjacent the
         south-western boundary between points marked X-X on the plans hereby approved.

         have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Planning Authority.

         Reason In the interests of the visual amenity of the locality and to enable proper consideration to
         be given to the impact of the proposed development on this Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

3.       (L5) All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
         details and to a reasonable standard in accordance with the relevant parts of appropriate British
         Standards or other recognised codes of good practice.
         To be carried out prior to the use of any part of the development or in accordance with a
         timetable to be first agreed with the Planning Authority.
         Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or
         become, in the opinion of the Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective, shall be
         replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable with others of species, size and number as
         originally approved, unless the Planning Authority gives its written consent to any variation.
         Reason To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of
         landscape in accordance with the approved designs.

4.       (UNQ1) The sand school hereby permitted shall be used solely in connection with the landowners
         existing horse breeding business and for no other commercial purpose.
         Reason In order to retain planning control over the permitted development.


                                                                    28
5.       (E1) Before development commences a finished sample of the external surface material to be
         used on the sand school shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning
         Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.

6.       (UNQ2) No external lighting shall be installed without the prior written approval of the Planning
         Authority.
         Reason To protect the AONB from light pollution.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.       The implications of the approved landscaping scheme, trees and hedgerows are an important
         element of the development proposal. You are strongly advised to contact the District Council's
         Landscape Officer on 01730 234217 at least ten days before commencement of the works and
         planting so that you are fully aware of the requirements of the approved scheme and restrictions
         of this planning permission.

2.   The applicant is advised that because this site lies in a rural area where restrictive planning
     policies apply and where new development is not normally permitted the Planning Authority are
     unlikely to favour any proposals to enlarge this facility or for the use of floodlights or any other
     means of external lighting to the sand school.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           041

PROPOSAL:                         PITCH-ROOFED FIRST FLOOR SIDE EXTENSION, SINGLE STOREY
                                  REAR EXTENSION AND CONSERVATORY TO REAR

LOCATION:                         Larkwood, 12 Bell Hill, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU322DY

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37791/FUL/NP                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs M F Cave

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    22/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

3.       (D13) The first floor window in the south elevation of the extension hereby permitted shall be
         glazed with obscure glass, prior to first occupation. It shall be retained at all times and shall not
         at any time be replaced by clear glazing.
         Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.


                                                                    29
4.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no additional first floor windows shall at any time be inserted in the south elevation of the
     extension hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           042

PROPOSAL:                         DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE AND TOOL STORE (AMENDED SCHEME)

LOCATION:                         Heron Water, Tunbridge Lane, Bramshott, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307SP

REFERENCE NO.                      F.32246/002/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs S Morton

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    21/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E2) Before development commences on site details of all external facing and roofing
         materials shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the development harmonise
         with its surroundings.

4.       (D22) The garage hereby permitted shall be used for the parking of private motor vehicles and
         ancillary domestic storage only and for no other purpose.
         Reason To maintain planning control in the interests of amenity.

5.       (H54M) Adequate provision shall be made within the site to enable vehicles using the site to enter
      and leave in a forward gear.
      Reason In the interests of highway safety.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    30
Item No.                           043

PROPOSAL:                         REPAIRS TO OUTHOUSE

LOCATION:                         Bridge Cottage, East Meon, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321QH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37769/LBC/PB                        PARISH:         East Meon

APPLICANT:                         Mrs J T Samways

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    20/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
         Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2.       (UNQ1) Before any work is undertaken in pursuance of this consent to demolish any part of the
         building, such steps shall be taken and such works shall be carried out as shall, during the
         course of the works permitted by this consent, secure the safety and stability of the remainder of
         the building and that of the adjoining neighbours property known as Frogmore Cottage.
         Reason To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of these Listed Buildings.

3.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised of his obligations under The Party Wall Act 1996 should any part of the
     proposed work or excavations come into contact with or affect the adjoining neighbours dwelling
     at Frogmore Cottage.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           044

PROPOSAL:                         CONSERVATORY TO REAR

LOCATION:                         5 Greenfields, Liss, Hampshire, GU337EQ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37790/FUL/JR                        PARISH:         Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr C Stevens

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    18/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:


                                                                    31
1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used on the brick plinth shall match, as closely as possible, in
     type, colour and texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           045

PROPOSAL:                         OUTLINE - DWELLING AND GARAGE (RENEWAL OF F.20604/008)

LOCATION:                         Land adjoining 131, Chalton Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO80RQ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.20604/009/OUT/JM                        PARISH:           Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs R Mulley

CASE OFFICER:                      Julia Mansi             DATE REGISTERED:                    18/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OUTLINE PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST1) Applications for the approval of the matters referred to herein shall be made within a period
         of three years from the date of this permission. The development to which the permission relates
         shall be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:-
         (i) five years from the date of this permission; or
         (ii) two years from the final approval of the said reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on
         different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.
         Reason To comply with the provisions of Section 92(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990

2.       (ST2) Before any works or development hereby approved is commenced on site details
         relating to the siting, design, external appearance of, the means of access to the development,
         and the landscaping of site shall be submitted to, and approved by the Planning Authority. These
         details shall comprise the 'reserved matters' and shall be submitted within the time constraints
         referred to in condition 1 above before any development is commenced.
         Reason To comply with Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development
         Procedure) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order).

3.       (H4C) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted
         Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order) the means of
         access to the development hereby permitted shall be from Pond Lane only.
         Reason In the interests of highway safety.

4.       (H54O) The access shall be splayed back at an angle of 45 degrees.
         Reason        In the interests of highway safety.

5.       (H54N) Any gates provided shall be set back a distance of 4.5m from the edge of the carriageway
         of the adjoining highway.
         Reason In the interests of highway safety.



                                                                    32
6.       (H3E) Details of the areas to be provided for the parking, turning, loading and unloading of
         vehicles shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority in writing before
         development commences. The agreed details shall be fully implemented before the use hereby
         approved is commenced and/or any part of the development is occupied. The areas shall be
         surfaced and subsequently retained and kept available at all times for these purposes.
         Reason In the interests of highway safety.

7.       (UNQ1) The boundary flint wall to the site shall be retained, repaired where necessary with
         matching materials and maintained thereafter.
         Reason In the interests of visual amenity.

8.       (L3) Prior to the commencement of development and before any felling or other alteration of the
         existing condition of the site takes place, a survey of the site shall be undertaken and a plan
         prepared to a scale of not less than 1:500 showing:-
         (a) existing and final intended levels across the site and adjacent to any existing tree
         group;
         (b) exact location, assessment of condition and size by girth or stem diameter,
         species and accurate crown spread of all trees over 100mm stem diameter on the
         site and indicating those to be felled during building operations;
         (c) all natural features such as hedgerows, ponds, streams and large shrubs and
         the treatment proposed;
         (d) positions and details of fencing or hoardings, prohibited areas and other physical
         means of protecting trees; and such plans shall be submitted to, and have been approved by, the
         Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure the enhancement of the development, by the retention of natural features.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The implications of the approved landscaping scheme, trees and hedgerows are an important
     element of the development proposal. You are strongly advised to contact the District Council's
     Arboricultural and Landscape Officers on 01730 234215/234217 at least ten days before
     commencement of the works and planting so that you are fully aware of the requirements of the
     approved scheme and restrictions of this planning permission.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           046

PROPOSAL:                         CHANGE OF USE FROM AGRICULTURAL STORAGE AND REDUNDANT
                                  GRAIN LANDSCAPING EQUIPMENT STORE TO USE FOR STORAGE OF
                                  VINTAGE VEHICLES

LOCATION:                         Wilson Atkinson Farms, Lower Farm, East Meon, Petersfield, Hampshire,
                                  GU321EZ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.23126/009/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           East Meon

APPLICANT:                         Mr G E Atkinson

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    15/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMPORARY PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:




                                                                    33
1.   (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
     permission.
     Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
     1990.

2.   (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
     plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
     prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
     Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
     interests of the amenity of the area.

3.   (UNQ1) The use hereby permitted shall be limited to the storage of vintage vehicles as outlined in
     the letter dated 14 November 2002 or for agricultural purposes as defined in Section 336 (1) of
     the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.
     Reason To ensure that the building is used for purposes which would not detrimentally impact
     the rural amenity of the area.

4.   (T6) This permission shall be restricted to a limited period expiring on 31 January 2004 when the
     use hereby permitted shall cease unless a further permission is granted in writing by the Planning
     Authority.
     Reason The site lies within predominantly in rural surroundings where industrial/commercial
     development is not normally permitted. A permission is given in this case having regard to the
     special circumstances appertaining to the property in question so that the position may be
     reviewed in the light of the circumstances prevailing at the time of the expiry of the permission.

5.   (UNQ2) No other buildings or structures shall be erected on the "Farm Base" without the prior
     written consent of the Planning Authority.
     Reason The site lies within a rural area to which restrictive planning policies apply and where
     only that development needed to meet the essential requirements of the locality is normally
     permitted.

     "Farm Base" is defined in the Legal Agreement of 20 June 2000 (F23126/003).
     A letter from the applicant, dated 13 January 2002 (on F23126/008) outlines this undertaking.

6.   (UNQ3) There shall be no more than 8 vintage vehicles stored in this building.
     Reason In the interest of highway safety and the amenity of this rural area.

7.   (H54M) Adequate provision shall be made within the site to enable vehicles using the site to enter
      and leave in a forward gear.
      Reason In the interests of highway safety.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                  34
Item No.                           047

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY FRONT EXTENSION WITH CONSERVATORY AND
                                  DORMER TO REAR

LOCATION:                         5 Fir Tree Gardens, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9HF

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37775/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr M Moore

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    12/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) The proposed rear dormer window by virtue of its excessive bulk, width, flat roof and
         ridge height set within the roof plane of this two storey dwelling is of poor design which creates a
         top heavy and incongruous addition that dominates the facade of the original house and would
         create an undesirable precedent for such additions within the existing unbroken roof planes in
         this area detrimental to the character and appearance of the locality. The proposal would
         therefore be contrary to central government guidance PPG1 that puts strong emphasis on good
         design, General Strategy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review and the
         adopted East Hampshire District Design guide for Residential Extensions.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that this Authority is not opposed to the remaining elements of this
     application, more specifically the two storey front extension, single storey front extension and
     rear conservatory. Should the applicant wish to pursue these works only then a fresh application
     will be required.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           048

PROPOSAL:                         TWO X TWO -STOREY EXTENSIONS AND TWO X SINGLE STOREY
                                  EXTENSIONS (AS AMPLIFIED BY DESIGN STATEMENT RECEIVED
                                  22/11/02)

LOCATION:                         Meadows, 21 Forest Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU337BH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.34673/001/FUL/JM                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs J. Bicknell

CASE OFFICER:                      Julia Mansi             DATE REGISTERED:                    18/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:




                                                                    35
1.   (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
     permission.
     Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
     1990.

2.   (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
     texture those of the existing building.
     Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
     existing developments.

3.   (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no window(s) or door(s), other than those hereby permitted, shall at any time be inserted
     in the northern elevation of the dwelling hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the
     Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property
      (properties).

4.   (D13) The first floor window in the northern elevation of the extension hereby permitted shall be
     glazed with obscure glass, prior to first occupation. It shall be retained at all times and shall not
     at any time be replaced by clear glazing.
     Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.

5.   (H54K) Adequate space shall be provided within the site, for the loading, unloading and parking of
     vehicles to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
     Reason In the interests of highway safety.

6.   (H54M) Adequate provision shall be made within the site to enable vehicles using the site to enter
     and leave in a forward gear.
     Reason In the interests of highway safety.

7.   (H54N) Any gates provided shall be set back a distance of 4.5m from the edge of the carriageway
     of the adjoining highway.
     Reason In the interests of highway safety.

8.   (H54O) The access shall be splayed back at an angle of 45 degrees.
      Reason In the interests of highway safety.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                    36
Item No.                           049

PROPOSAL:                         SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION AND ASSOCIATED PARKING TO FORM
                                  STUDIO/WORKSHOP (AS AMENDED BY PLANS RECEIVED 16
                                  DECEMBER 2002)

LOCATION:                         South, Broomsquires, Hammer Vale, Haslemere, Surrey, GU271QL

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22017/004/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr John Guilfoyle

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    18/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.       (UNQ2) The proposal would result in the unacceptable extension of this rural building in order to
         accommodate the business use, contrary to the provisions of policies GS2 and ENV13 of the
         East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.

2.       (R6B) The use if permitted could give rise to unacceptable levels of activity, noise and
         disturbance to nearby residents owing to the increased traffic to detriment of the character of the
         area and the quiet enjoyment thereof contrary to Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local
         Plan: First Review.

3.       (UNQ1) The site is in an unsustainable location which would necessitate the sole use of private
         motor vehicles for access contrary to policy GS1 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First
         Review.

4.       (R12L) The means of access across common land is inadequate to serve this development and
         cannot be improved within the land owned or controlled by the applicant with the result that the
         proposal would be detrimental to highway safety and would cause harm to the common land.
         The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First
         Review.

5.       (R12N) Hammer Vale is unsuitable and inadequate in its present condition to take the type and
      amount of traffic likely to be generated by the proposal with the result that danger and
      inconvenience would be caused to other highway users. The proposal is therefore contrary to
      Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    37
Item No.                           050

PROPOSAL:                         FIRST FLOOR EXTENSION, CONSERVATORY, PORCH TO REAR,
                                  ALTERATION TO FRONT PORCH TO INCLUDE PITCHED ROOF AND
                                  STEPS

LOCATION:                         Packhurst House, East Meon Road, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0RR

REFERENCE NO.                      F.30665/001/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         M. Wells

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    13/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
         have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.

         For the avoidance of doubt, the Planning Authority expect that the alterations and additions on
         the rear elevation be undertaken in flint and brick to match the existing.

4.       (UNQ1) The conservatory and window openings are hereby permitted will be constructed using
     timber to ensure that they match the existing dwelling unless agreed in writing by the Planning
     Authority.
      Reason To ensure that the extensions and alterations are harmonious with the existing dwelling.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    38
Item No.                           051

PROPOSAL:                         COVERED CATTLE SHELTER

LOCATION:                         Sunwood Farm, Ditcham, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU315RH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.26785/001/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Buriton

APPLICANT:                         Mr B Wolfe

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    15/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E2) Before development commences on site details of all external facing and roofing
         materials shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the development harmonise
         with its surroundings.

3.       (E8) Before the development commences on site details of the existing and proposed ground
         levels of the development in relation to any adjacent building shall have been submitted to and
         approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Such details must be sufficient to clearly identify
         the completed height of the development in relation to the adjacent development.
          Reason To ensure that a satisfactory relationship results between the new development and
          adjacent buildings or public areas.

4.       (A2) The building hereby permitted shall be used only for agricultural purposes as defined in
         Section 336(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 and if at any time the building
         ceases to be used or required for such purpose it shall be removed and the site re-instated to the
         satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the building is used for agricultural purposes only since it lies within a
         rural area to which restrictive planning policies apply and where only that development needed to
         meet the essential requirements of the locality is normally permitted.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   You are advised that dark green cladding and roofing materials will be preferred. Alternatively
     measures will need to be taken to tone down the roof appearance (e.g. spraying with liquid to
     encourage moss growth).
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    39
Item No.                           052

PROPOSAL:                         FIRST FLOOR SIDE EXTENSION AND PITCHED ROOF OVER GARAGE
                                  AND PORCH

LOCATION:                         10 Greenfields, Liss, Hampshire, GU337EH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.35658/001/FUL/JR                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr G Denyer

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    19/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.       (R5G) The proposal represents the unacceptable enlargement of this dwelling by proposing an
         extension which is not subordinate to the original, and which will substantially reduce the gap
         between the dwellings, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the street scene
         contrary to General Strategy Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review
         and the East Hampshire Design Guide for Residential Extensions.

2.       (R14C) In the opinion of the Planning Authority the proposal, if permitted, would result in
      demonstrable harm to the locality by means of reduction of a visual gap between properties
      contrary to the policies of the Development Plan and establish an undesirable precedent for
      other similar proposals which would be difficult to resist, the cumulative effect of which would be
      to create a terracing effect which would detract from the established character and appearance
      of the area.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           053

PROPOSAL:                         AGRICULTURAL WORKERS DWELLING

LOCATION:                         Upper Blackdown Farm, Colemore Lane, Colemore, Alton, Hampshire,
                                  GU343PY

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37564/001/FUL/JM                        PARISH:           Colemore

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs J Spicer

CASE OFFICER:                      Julia Mansi             DATE REGISTERED:                    10/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.       (R1L) The proposal would result in an undesirable intensification of the existing scattered or loose
         knit form of development in this rural area to the detriment of the locality contrary to the
         Countryside Policies of the Hampshire County Structure Plan (particularly Policies C1 & C2) and
         the General Strategy, Environment and Housing Policies of the East Hampshire District Local
         Plan: First Review (particularly Policies GS1, GS2, GS5, ENV1, ENV7 & H12).




                                                                    40
2.       (R2A) The proposal constitutes an unacceptable intrusion of development into the Countryside to
         the detriment of the East Hampshire Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the Proposed
         South Downs National Park and contrary to Policies C1 & C2 of the Hampshire County Structure
         Plan 1996-2011 (Review) (particularly Policies E6 & E7) and the General Strategy and
         Environment Policies of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review (particularly
         Policies GS5, ENV1 & ENV7)

3.       (R3A) The proposal involves the erection of a dwelling in the Countryside beyond any area
         identified in the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review for further development for
         which no overriding justification has been made on grounds of agricultural need; the proposal
         would therefore be contrary to the Policies outlined in the above reasons.

4.       (R2R) No provision has been made for public open space within the proposal contrary to Policy
      RT3 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           054

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         27 Patricks Copse Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU337DL

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37834/FUL/JR                        PARISH:         Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Shally

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    05/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E2) Before development commences on site details of all external facing and roofing
         materials shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the development harmonise
         with its surroundings.

3.       (H54D) Before any other operations are commenced the access, including the footway and/or
         verge crossing and the piping of any ditch, shall be constructed and lines of sight shall be
         provided and maintained at all times.
         Reason To provide satisfactory access.

4.       (H54O) The access shall be splayed back at an angle of 45 degrees.
         Reason        In the interests of highway safety.




                                                                    41
Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that before any works to the highway are undertaken that consent of the
     County Highway Authority is required and the relevant consent should be sought from the Area
     Surveyor, Hampshire County Council, The Old College, College Street, Petersfield, Hants GU31
     4AG. (Telephone 01730 266411).
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           055

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY AND SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSIONS AFTER
                                  DEMOLITION OF EXISTING GARAGE AND UTILITY ROOM

LOCATION:                         29 Greenfields, Liss, Hampshire, GU337EH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37835/FUL/JR                        PARISH:         Liss

APPLICANT:                         Ms W Johnson

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    04/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
      texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           056

PROPOSAL:                         RETENTION OF CONSERVATORY TO SIDE

LOCATION:                         67 Mint Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU337DQ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37675/001/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         John Mitchell and Lizzie Strickland

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    01/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    42
Item No.                           057

PROPOSAL:                         ENTRANCE GATE

LOCATION:                         Churton House, Tunbridge Lane, Bramshott, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307RF

REFERENCE NO.                      F.29712/005/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr T P Neale

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    26/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.       (R2F) The proposal by virtue of its prominent ornamental iron gate and domestified brick pier
         appearance constitutes an unacceptable intrusion of development into the countryside to the
         detriment of the character of this Area of Special Landscape Quality and the Rive Wey
         Conservation Area contrary to Policies C1-C3 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-
         2011 (Review) and the General Strategy and Environment Policies of the East Hampshire
         District Local Plan: First Review (particularly Policies GS5 and ENV2).

2.       (R14C) In the opinion of the Planning Authority the proposal, if permitted, would result in
      demonstrable harm to the locality contrary to the policy (GS5) of the East Hampshire District
      Local Plan: First Review and establish an undesirable precedent for other similar proposals
      which would be difficult to resist, the cumulative effect of which would be to further erode and
      detract from the character and appearance of the Area of Special Landscape Character and the
      River Wey Conservation Area.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           058

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY FRONT EXTENSION, SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION,
                                  CONSERVATORY TO SOUTH ELEVATION AND DETACHED GARAGE TO
                                  FRONT

LOCATION:                         Brook Cottage, 1 Ramsdean Road, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU323PJ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37016/001/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Stroud

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Smith

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    25/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.




                                                                    43
2.       (E3) The external materials (Roof tiles, tile hanging and render) to be used shall match, as closely
         as possible, in type, colour and texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

3.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
         (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
         Order) no window(s) or door(s) or other openings shall at any time be inserted in the first floor
         north elevation of the two storey extension or the north elevation of the detached garage hereby
         permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
         Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.

4.       (D10) Before development is commenced on the proposed detached garage pursuant to this
         permission, the existing detached garage on the site shall be demolished.
         Reason To accord with the terms of the application and because the proposal hereby permitted
         is for replacement development

5.       (H54M) Adequate provision shall be made within the site to enable vehicles using the site to enter
         and leave in a forward gear.
         Reason In the interests of highway safety.

6.       (H54N) Any gates provided shall be set back a distance of 4.5m from the edge of the carriageway
         of the adjoining highway.
         Reason In the interests of highway safety.

7.       (H54O) The access shall be splayed back at an angle of 45 degrees.
         Reason        In the interests of highway safety.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that the grant of this permission represents the optimum size of the
     premises and that any further enlargement would constitute an unacceptable over-development
     or intensification of building mass or use and the Planning Authority is not likely to permit any
     further proposals to enlarge the premises.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           059

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         15 Merryfield Road, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314BS

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37831/FUL/SM                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs K Longlands

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    22/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:




                                                                    44
1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

4.       (D13) The first floor windows in the south (side) elevation of the extension hereby permitted shall
     be glazed with obscure glass, prior to first occupation. It shall be retained at all times and shall
     not at any time be replaced by clear glazing.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           060

PROPOSAL:                         SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         11 Blackberry Close, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0PU

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37829/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr C and Mrs D Stiles

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    22/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
      texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    45
Item No.                           061

PROPOSAL:                         FIRST FLOOR REAR EXTENSION (REVISED SCHEME) (AS AMENDED BY
                                  PLAN RECEIVED 8 JANUARY 2003)

LOCATION:                         5 Dudley Terrace Mill Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU337BE

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22802/003/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr A Moffat & Ms I Martin

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    22/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E4) The rooftiles to be used shall match as closely as possible in type, colour and texture those
     used on the existing buildings.
     Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           062

PROPOSAL:                         EXTENSION TO ROOF AND PROVISION OF TWO DORMER WINDOWS
                                  TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL LIVING ACCOMMODATION, CONVERSION OF
                                  GARAGE TO PLAY ROOM (AS AMENDED BY LETTER DATED 3
                                  JANUARY 2003 AND PLANS RECEIVED 6 JANUARY 2003)

LOCATION:                         67 Highcroft Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9PU

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37498/001/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Dr K A Abbadey

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    21/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:




                                                                    46
1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
      texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           063

PROPOSAL:                         CONSERVATORY TO REAR

LOCATION:                         9 Ottawa Drive, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TR

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37826/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs Sharvin

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    20/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external facing brick to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

3.       (UNQ1) The existing 1.8 metre high boundary fence on the western boundary between points
     mark X-X on the plans hereby approved shall be retained.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    47
Item No.                           064

PROPOSAL:                         DETACHED DWELLING WITH DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE AFTER
                                  DEMOLITION OF GARAGES (DESCRIPTION AMENDED 11/12/2002)

LOCATION:                         East, Sheet Mill House, Mill Lane, Sheet, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU322AJ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.28190/006/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs S E Thistlethwayte

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    19/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.       (R1L) The proposal would result in an undesirable intensification of the existing scattered or loose
         knit form of development in this rural area, within the AONB and designated National Park, to the
         detriment of the locality contrary to the Countryside Policies of the Hampshire County Structure
         Plan (particularly Policies C1, E7 and E6 and the General Strategy, Environment and Housing
         Policies of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review (particularly Policies GS1, GS2,
         GS3, GS5, ENV1, ENV7 and H12).

2.       (R10A) The application site lies within a designated Conservation Area and in the opinion of the
         Planning Authority the proposal would detract from the character thereof by reason of the loss of
         the gap between small groups of dwellings and the design of the proposed development and
         would be contrary to Policies of the Hampshire County Structure Plan and the General Strategy
         (GS5) and Environment Policies (ENV15 - ENV19) of the East Hampshire District Local Plan:
         First Review.

3.       (R14C) In the opinion of the Planning Authority the proposal, if permitted, would result in
         demonstrable harm to the locality contrary to the policies of the Development Plan and establish
         an undesirable precedent for other similar proposals which would be difficult to resist, the
         cumulative effect of which would be to further erode and detract from the character and
         appearance of the area.

4.       (UNQ1) No assessment has been provided as to any flood risk on this site, contrary to Policy
         GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review and the provisions of PPG25.

5.       (R12O) The roads leading to and from the site are of inadequate width to accommodate safely
         the additional traffic which the proposed development would generate. The proposal is therefore
         contrary to Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.

6.       (R2R) No provision has been made for public open space within the proposal contrary to Policy
      RT3 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    48
Item No.                           065

PROPOSAL:                         SINGLE STOREY CONSERVATORY TO SIDE

LOCATION:                         The Well House, Idsworth, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0AW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22383/060/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Rowlands Castle

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs Clark

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    24/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external facing brick to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
     texture those of the existing building The Well House.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           066

PROPOSAL:                         SINGLE STOREY CONSERVATORY TO SIDE

LOCATION:                         The Well House, Idsworth, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0AW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22383/061/LBC/PB                        PARISH:           Rowlands Castle

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs Clark

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    18/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.




                                                                    49
2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external facing brick to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
     texture those of the existing building The Well House.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           067

PROPOSAL:                         DORMER TO NORTH ELEVATION

LOCATION:                         8b Farm View Avenue, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0NZ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37462/001/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr J Scriven

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    21/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external facing materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour
         and texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

3.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no window(s), rooflights or other openings shall at any time be inserted in the northern
     elevation of the side dormer window hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the
     Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    50
Item No.                           068

PROPOSAL:                         DETACHED SINGLE STOREY DWELLING WITH ATTACHED GARAGE

LOCATION:                         East, 26 Dragon Street, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314JJ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.30091/008/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr N Pride

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    28/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.       (UNQ1) The proposed development by reason of its location and design would adversely affect
         the character and appearance of the Petersfield Conservation Area, and in particular be
         detrimental to the setting of the adjacent listed buildings which are listed as being of special
         architectural or historic interest. This is contrary to the Regeneration and Conservation Policies
         of the Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996 - 2011 (Review) and General Strategy (GS5) and
         Environmental Policies (ENV15 - ENV19) of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First
         Review.

2.       (UNQ2) The proposed garage are shown to be attached to the listed wall at the rear of the site.
         This is considered to be detrimental to the listed wall which is listed as being of special
         architectural or historic interest. This is contrary to the Regeneration and Conservation Policies
         of the Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996 - 2011 (Review) and General Strategy (GS5) and
         Environmental Policies (ENV15 - ENV19) of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First
         Review.

3.       (R2R) No provision has been made for public open space within the proposal contrary to Policy
         RT3 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that the proposed garage outside of the orange line has not been
     considered as part of this application. A planning application and/or listed building application
     would be required if the applicant wishes to proceed with the proposal.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    51
Item No.                           069

PROPOSAL:                         PITCH-ROOFED FIRST FLOOR SIDE EXTENSION (AMENDED
                                  DESCRIPTION - CONSERVATORY DOES NOT REQUIRE PLANNING
                                  PERMISSION)

LOCATION:                         2 Valley Park Drive, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0PB

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37551/002/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Friswell

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    18/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

4.       (D13) The first floor window in the side elevation of the extension hereby permitted shall be
         glazed with obscure glass, prior to first occupation. It shall be retained at all times and shall not
         at any time be replaced by clear glazing.
         Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential property.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   Conservatory does not require planning permission. It is below 70 cubic metres in volume, not
     closer to the highway than the original house and is not greater than the height levels as outlined
     in the GPDO.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    52
Item No.                           070

PROPOSAL:                         THREE DORMER WINDOWS TO NORTH ELEVATION

LOCATION:                         211 The Causeway, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314NG

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37823/FUL/NP                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs H J Newby

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    20/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (C36) All new works and works of making good to the retained fabric whether internal or external,
         shall be finished to match the adjacent work with regard to the methods used and to material,
         colour, texture and profile.
         Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the Grade II listed building.

3.       (C39) Details of the dormer windows at a scale of not less than 1:20 elevations and 1:5 sections,
         shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the works shall be
         carried out in accordance with the approved details.
         Reason To ensure that the alterations are appropriate to the character and appearance of the
         listed building.

4.       (C40) All new external joinery shall be of painted timber.
         Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the Grade II listed building.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   You are reminded that this only grants planning permission for the three dormer windows in the
     rear elevation. Listed building consent is also needed for this development.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    53
Item No.                           071

PROPOSAL:                         VARIATION OF CONDITION 6 F21019/006, REPLACE STAINED GLASS
                                  WINDOWS IN WALL WITH ORIGINAL FLINT MOTIFS

LOCATION:                         Basing Home Farm, Privett, Alton, Hants, GU343NS

REFERENCE NO.                      F.21019/013/LBC/JM                        PARISH:           Froxfield

APPLICANT:                         Ashmarden Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Julia Mansi             DATE REGISTERED:                    20/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
         Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2.       (UNQ1) The proposed courtyard flint wall shall be constructed strictly in accordance with the
         details shown on Drawing No. 1184/60, including the flint motifs.
         Reason In the interest of the visual amenity of the building and retention of architectural and
         historic features on the site.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is reminded that all other conditions imposed on application F.21019/006 continue
     to apply.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           072

PROPOSAL:                         GABLE TO REAR

LOCATION:                         4 Victory Avenue, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9PH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.32695/002/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr and MrsS Pallett

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    04/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.




                                                                    54
2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
      texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           073

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO REAR

LOCATION:                         27 Catherington Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9HS

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37854/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mrs Stockdale-Powell

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    11/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reason:

1.       (R5J) The proposal represents the unacceptable enlargement of this terrace which by virtue of its
      flat roof is an unsympathetic addition of poor design that detracts from the character of the
      original building and the visual amenities of the area contrary to General Strategy Policy GS5 of
      the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review and the adopted East Hampshire Design
      Guide for Residential Extensions.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           074

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY DETACHED HOUSE AFTER DEMOLITION OF EXISTING
                                  AND ALTERED ACCESS (AS AMENDED BY PLANS RECEIVED ON
                                  10/1/03)

LOCATION:                         47 Church Road, Steep, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU322DN

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37458/001/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Steep

APPLICANT:                         Mrs A Patchett-Joyce

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    27/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.




                                                                    55
2.     (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
       plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
       prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
       Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
       interests of the amenity of the area.

3.    (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
      have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
      Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
      harmonise with the surroundings.

4.    (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
      (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
      Order) no additional window(s) or door(s) shall at any time be inserted in the first floor east and
      west elevations of the dwelling hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning
      Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential properties.

5.    (D15) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
      (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
      Order) no extension or alteration to this dwelling shall be made except with the prior written
      consent of the Planning Authority.
      Reason It is considered that further extensions/alteration of this dwelling could result in an
      adverse effect upon the adjacent properties and the visual character of the area.

6.     (D22) The garage hereby permitted shall be used for the parking of private motor vehicles and
       ancillary domestic storage only and for no other purpose.
       Reason To maintain planning control in the interests of amenity.

7.    (H54K) Before any part of the development is occupied a minimum of 3 car parking spaces shall
      be provided within the curtilage of the site and thereafter maintained and kept available for the
      parking of vehicles.
      Reason To ensure adequate car parking provision within the site in accordance with the adopted
      standards of the Planning Authority.

8.     (H54M) Adequate provision shall be made within the site to enable vehicles using the site to
       enter and leave in a forward gear.
       Reason In the interests of highway safety.

9.     (H54N) Any gates provided shall be set back a distance of 4.5m from the edge of the
       carriageway of the adjoining highway.
       Reason In the interests of highway safety.

10.    (H54O) The access shall be splayed back at an angle of 45 degrees.
       Reason       In the interests of highway safety.

11.   (H54D) Before any other operations are commenced the access, including the footway and/or
      verge crossing and the piping of any ditch, shall be constructed and lines of sight of 2.4 metres
      by 70 metres splays within applicants control provided and maintained at all times.
      Reason To provide satisfactory access.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                    56
Item No.                           075

PROPOSAL:                         REPLACEMENT CONSERVATORY AND DETACHED GARAGE (REVISED
                                  SCHEME)

LOCATION:                         Old London, Rake Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU337HB

REFERENCE NO.                      F.29686/004/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr Baldwin

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    21/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans, specifications and method statement. Any variation or departure from the approved plans
         will require the prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E2) Before development commences on site details of all external facing and roofing
         materials shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the development harmonise
         with its surroundings.

4.       (L18) A hedge of species to be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority shall be
     planted along the rear boundary (north west), behind the garage, prior to the occupation of the
     development, or any phase of it, for its permitted use and shall be maintained for a minimum of
     five years following contractual practical completion of the development to ensure its successful
     establishment. Any plants which die or become, in the opinion of the Planning Authority,
     seriously damaged or defective within this period shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably
     practical.
      Reason To ensure an appropriate standard of visual amenity in the area.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    57
Item No.                           076

PROPOSAL:                         REPLACEMENT CONSERVATORY AND DETACHED GARAGE (REVISED
                                  SCHEME)

LOCATION:                         Old London, Rake Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU337HB

REFERENCE NO.                      F.29686/005/LBC/NP                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr Baldwin

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    21/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
         Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (C38) Before the works hereby approved are commenced, details of all the materials to be used
         for internal and external finishes and for construction work, shall be submitted to and approved in
         writing by the Planning Authority, and the works shall be carried out in accordance with the
         approved details.
         Reason To safeguard the special architectural or historic interest and setting of the listed
         building.

4.       (C36) All new works and works of making good to the retained fabric whether internal or external,
         shall be finished to match the adjacent work with regard to the methods used and to material,
         colour, texture and profile.
         Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the Grade II listed building.

5.       (C40) All new external joinery used for the construction of the conservatory shall be of painted
     timber in accordance with details on the approved plans.
      Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the Grade II listed building.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    58
Item No.                           077

PROPOSAL:                         RELIEF OF CONDITION 5 OF F.23650/012/OUT TO ALLOW CHANGE OF
                                  USE TO CLASS (B1c) LIGHT INDUSTRY - (THE DEVELOPMENT HEREBY
                                  PERMITTED SHALL BE USED FOR PURPOSES WITHIN CLASS B1a AND
                                  B1b OF THE T&CPA USE CLASSES ORDER AND FOR NO OTHER
                                  PURPOSE)

LOCATION:                         Former King George's Hospital site, Hewshott Lane, Liphook, GU30

REFERENCE NO.                      F.23650/015/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr W Gair

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    30/04/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOT PROCEEDED WITH for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) The application cannot be determined until the implications of the proposal for the design
      of the buildings and predicted levels of traffic are known. In the absence of this additional
      supporting information, which was requested on 19 June 2002, the Council cannot proceed with
      the application. A revised application supported by the necessary information would be
      welcomed by the Council.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           078

PROPOSAL:                         OUTLINE - DWELLING WITH INTEGRAL GARAGE (AS AMENDED BY
                                  PLANS REVEIVED ON 13 JUNE 2002)

LOCATION:                         The Former Rectory, Manor Lodge Road, Rowland's Castle, Hampshire, PO9
                                  6BA

REFERENCE NO.                      F.31431/003/OUT/JM                        PARISH:           Rowlands Castle

APPLICANT:                         Mr M Herman

CASE OFFICER:                      Julia Mansi             DATE REGISTERED:                    11/04/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OUTLINE PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST1) Applications for the approval of the matters referred to herein shall be made within a period
         of three years from the date of this permission. The development to which the permission relates
         shall be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:-
         (i) five years from the date of this permission; or
         (ii) two years from the final approval of the said reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on
         different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.
         Reason To comply with the provisions of Section 92(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990




                                                                    59
2.    (ST2) Before any works or development hereby approved is commenced on site details
      relating to the design, external appearance of, and a detailed landscaping scheme for the site
      shall be submitted to, and approved by the Planning Authority. These details shall comprise the
      'reserved matters' and shall be submitted within the time constraints referred to in condition 1
      above before any development is commenced.
       Reason To comply with Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development
       Procedure) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order).

3.    (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the revised plans
      and specifications received on 13 June 2002. Any variation or departure from the approved
      plans will require the prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
      Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
      interests of the amenity of the area.

4.    (UNQ1) The proposed new access onto Manor Lodge Road shall be constructed prior to works on
      the site taking place. The existing access shall be permanently stopped up prior to
      commencement of works on site.
      Reason In the interests of highway safety.

5.    (L11) All trees, shrubs and other natural features not scheduled for removal shall be fully
      safeguarded during the course of the site works and building operations. No work shall
      commence on site until all trees, shrubs or features to be protected are fenced with:-
      1.2m minimum height chestnut paling to BS.1722 Part 4 securely mounted on 1.2m
           minimum height timber posts driven firmly into the ground;

      i)    for trees and shrubs the fencing shall follow a line 1.0m outside the furthest extent of
            the crown spread, unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority;
      ii) for upright growing trees at a radius from the trunk not less than 6.0m, or two thirds of
            the height of the tree which ever is the greater;
      iii) for other natural features along a line to be agreed with the Planning Authority.
      Such fencing shall be maintained during the course of the works on site. No unauthorised
      access or placement of goods, fuels or chemicals, soil or other materials shall take place inside
      the fenced area.
       Reason To ensure that trees, shrubs and other natural features to be retained are adequately
       protected from damage to health and stability throughout the construction period.

6.    (L16) The soil levels within the root spread of the trees/hedgerows to be retained shall not be
      raised or lowered.
      Reason To avoid damage to the health of existing trees and hedgerows.

7.    (H54D) Before any other operations are commenced the access, including the footway and/or
      verge crossing and the piping of any ditch, shall be constructed and lines of sight of 2 metres by
      70 metres provided and maintained at all times.
      Reason To provide satisfactory access.

8.    (H54M) Adequate provision shall be made within the site to enable vehicles using the site to enter
      and leave in a forward gear.
      Reason In the interests of highway safety.

9.    (H54N) Any gates provided shall be set back a distance of 4.5m from the edge of the carriageway
      of the adjoining highway.
      Reason In the interests of highway safety.

10.   (H54O) The access shall be splayed back at an angle of 45 degrees.
      Reason    In the interests of highway safety.



                                                      60
11.      (H54K) Adequate space shall be provided within the site, for the loading, unloading and parking of
         vehicles to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
         Reason In the interests of highway safety.

12.      (L14) The burning of materials shall not take place where it could cause damage to any tree or
         tree group to be retained on the site or on land adjoining.
         Reason To protect the health of trees to be retained.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   Please note that there is a Section 106 Agreement that applies to this permission.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           079

PROPOSAL:                         SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION AND CONSERVATORY TO REAR; SINGLE
                                  STOREY EXTENSION TO FRONT; RAISED ROOF WITH DORMERS TO
                                  FRONT AND BACK; DETACHED GARAGE TO FRONT (AMENDED
                                  DESCRIPTION)

LOCATION:                         235 London Road, Horndean, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0HN

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22617/001/FUL/SM                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr Kevin Hatcher

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    28/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.       (UNQ1) This proposal represents an overdominant extension by virtue of its excessive of its bulk,
         height and size which is tantamount to a two storey dwelling detrimental to the existing character
         of the bungalow which forms a more modest architectural break within this street scene contrary
         to Policy GS5 of East Hampshire District Local Plan (First Review)

2.       (UNQ2) The detached garage represents the unacceptable development at the front of this site
         which interrupts the open aspect of the front garden. This adds an element of built form to the
         front of the site which is to the detriment of the character and appearance of the street scene
         contrary to General Strategy Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.

3.    (R14C) In the opinion of the Planning Authority the proposal, if permitted, would result in
      demonstrable harm to the locality contrary to the policies of the Development Plan and establish
      an undesirable precedent for other similar proposals which would be difficult to resist, the
      cumulative effect of which would be to further erode and detract from the character and
      appearance of the area.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    61
Item No.                           080

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION AND SINGLE STOREY FRONT
                                  EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         11 Redwing Road, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0LU

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37853/FUL/SM                        PARISH:         Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs R W Clark

CASE OFFICER:                      Sarah Marr              DATE REGISTERED:                    18/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

4.       (D11) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
     (General Permitted Development) Order, 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that
     Order) no window(s) or door(s) shall at any time be inserted in the first floor side elevation of the
     extension hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Planning Authority.
      Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential properties.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    62
Item No.                           081

PROPOSAL:                         INSTALLATION OF EXTERNAL AIR CONDITIONING CONDENSERS (AS
                                  AMENDED BY PLANS RECEIVED 02.01.03)

LOCATION:                         12 & 14 High Street, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU323JG

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37673/FUL/JR                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs G Boardman

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    24/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (UNQ1) Full specifications of the units (including manufacturer details) and details of the wall
         mountings shall be submitted to the Planning Authority and approved in writing before works
         commence.
         Reason To ensure protection of nearby properties.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.       The burning of waste materials on site during construction is not permitted.

2.       Hours of construction shall be limited to 07:30 - 18:00 hours Monday to Friday, and 08:00-13:00
         Saturdays.

3.   The movement of delivery vehicles, both to and from the site including manoeuvring, shall only
     be conducted between 7:30 - 18:00 Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 - 13:00 Saturdays.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           082

PROPOSAL:                         PITCH-ROOFED PORCH TO SIDE

LOCATION:                         Rose Cottage, Steep Marsh, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU322BN

REFERENCE NO.                      F.35044/003/FUL/JR                        PARISH:           Steep

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Richards

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    27/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:




                                                                    63
1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E2) Before development commences on site details of all external facing and roofing
         materials shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the development harmonise
         with its surroundings.

3.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
      plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
      prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
      Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
      interests of the amenity of the area.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           083

PROPOSAL:                         PITCHED ROOF EXTENSION TO SIDE AND REAR, DORMERS TO FRONT
                                  ELEVATION AND CONSERVATORY TO REAR (AMENDED PLANS TO
                                  F36113/002)

LOCATION:                         The Brambles, 29 Green Lane, Clanfield, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0JU

REFERENCE NO.                      F.36113/004/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr P Baigent

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    13/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E2) Before development commences on site details of all the external render and roofing
         materials shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the development harmonise
         with its surroundings.

3.       (UNQ1) The full height front door entrance feature on the east elevation shall be retained as such
         in perpetuity. (For the avoidance of doubt it shall not be bricked up or replaced by a window or
         any other opening).
          Reason In the interests of good design and to ensure a harmonious visual relationship within the
          streetscene.

4.       (D13) The first floor bathroom windows in the north and south elevations shall be glazed with
         obscure glass, prior to first occupation. This shall be retained at all times and shall not at any
         time be replaced by clear glazing.
         Reason To protect the privacy of the occupants of the adjoining residential properties.



                                                                    64
Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is advised that the grant of this permission represents the optimum size of the
     premises and that any further enlargement would constitute an unacceptable over-development
     or intensification of building mass or use and the Planning Authority is not likely to permit any
     further proposals to enlarge the premises.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           084

PROPOSAL:                         FIRST FLOOR REAR EXTENSION

LOCATION:                         2 Riplington Cottages East Meon, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321HU

REFERENCE NO.                      F.30926/001/FUL/JR                        PARISH:           East Meon

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs N Butcher

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    28/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
      texture those of the existing building.
      Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
      existing developments.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           085

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO FRONT, INCLUDING TWO DORMERS,
                                  CHIMNEY STACK AND PORCH . PORCH TO REAR (AFTER DEMOLITION
                                  OF EXISTING EXTENSION).

LOCATION:                         Maewood, Steep, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321AA

REFERENCE NO.                      F.30820/004/FUL/PB                        PARISH:           Steep

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs S. Braithwaite

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    27/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:




                                                                    65
1.       (R5A) The application site lies within a rural area to which restrictive Planning Policies apply. The
         proposal involves the substantial enlargement of this rural dwelling by 93.7 per cent which would
         significantly affect its scale and character and involve an unacceptable increase in building mass
         in this rural locality. The proposal would, therefore, represent an over-large extension of the
         dwelling affecting the successful retention of a range of dwellings of varying sizes in an area
         where new dwellings are not permitted contrary to Policy H16 of the East Hampshire District
         Local Plan: First Review.

2.       (UNQ1) The proposed extension by virtue of its strong two storey emphasis, repetitive gable
      elements, heavily fenestrated and over ornate facade represents an over detailed, dominant and
      unharmonious extension detrimental to the character of the original dwelling contrary to Policy
      GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review and the Adopted East Hampshire
      District Council Design Guide for Residential Extensions.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           086

PROPOSAL:                         CHANGE OF USE OF VACANT LAND TO GARDEN (RETROSPECTIVE
                                  APPLICATION)

LOCATION:                         21 Walburton Way, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0XP

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37625/001/FUL/JR                        PARISH:           Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mrs P Sangster

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    24/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The granting of this permission does not override any private permissions or covenants required
     under separate legislation.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           087

PROPOSAL:                         CONSERVATORY TO REAR AND ADDITION OF DORMER TO SOUTH
                                  ELEVATION

LOCATION:                         31 The Curve, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9SE

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37864/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs Wiltshire

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    11/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:



                                                                    66
1.       (R5G) The proposal dormer window by virtue of its excessive ridge height, bulk and dormer
         cheek width represents a over dominant and top heavy addition of poor design to the detriment
         of the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and of the street scene contrary to
         General Strategy Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review and the
         adopted East Hampshire District Council Design Guide for Residential Extensions.

2.       (UNQ1) The proposed conservatory by virtue of it prominent elevated position within the
      streetscene, high level of glazing and use of UPVC material represents an unsympathetic and
      incongruous addition harmful to the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and
      further detrimental to the character and appearance of the streetscene contrary to General
      Strategy Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan and the adopted East Hampshire
      District Design Guide for Residential Extensions.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           088

PROPOSAL:                         RETENTION OF 2.26 METRE FENCE WITH TRELLIS (RETROSPECTIVE
                                  APPLICATION)

LOCATION:                         6 Oaks Coppice, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9QR

REFERENCE NO.                      F.27490/011/FUL/JR                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr P C White

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    26/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION
_______________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           089

PROPOSAL:                         CARPORT AND SHEDS TO NORTH ELEVATION

LOCATION:                         36 Bulls Copse Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9RA

REFERENCE NO.                      F.28072/003/FUL/JR                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr J Cocking

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    28/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
      permission.
      Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
      1990.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    67
Item No.                           090

PROPOSAL:                         VARIATION FROM CONDITION 28 OF F33993/001 TO ALTER DELIVERY
                                  HOURS (AS AMENDED BY PLANS RECEIVED 17/01/2002)

LOCATION:                         Sainsbury's Store, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33993/035/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Sainsbury's Supermarket Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    02/10/2001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITHDRAWN for the following reason:

1.    (UNQ1) Withdrawn in writing by the applicant's agent on 22 May 2002.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           091

PROPOSAL:                         DUPLICATION OF VARIATION FROM CONDITION 28 OF F33993/001 TO
                                  ALTER DELIVERY HOURS (AS AMENDED BY PLANS RECEIVED
                                  17/01/2002)

LOCATION:                         Sainsbury's Store, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307TW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33993/036/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Sainsbury's Supermarket Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    02/10/2001

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITHDRAWN for the following reason:

1.    (UNQ1) Withdrawn in writing by the applicant's agent on 22 May 2002.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    68
Item No.                           092

PROPOSAL:                         DETACHED TRIPLE GARAGE AND PITCHED ROOF TO EXISTING
                                  GARAGE WITH LINK TO DWELLING

LOCATION:                         Lower Oakshott Farmhouse, Hawkley, Liss, GU336LP

REFERENCE NO.                      F.27414/007/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Hawkley

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs J Sheldon

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    26/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.       (R5B) The application site lies within a rural area to which restrictive planning policies apply. The
         proposed link represents an unacceptable cumulative addition to this property, which has been
         extended in the past, representing a 94 per cent increase in floor area (including the area of the
         existing garage/store which would be incorporated into the house). This enlargement and the
         extension itself changes the scale and character of the property and affects the successful
         retention of a range of dwellings of varying sizes in an area where new dwellings are not
         permitted contrary to Policy H16 of the East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.

2.       (R2A) The proposed detached garage constitutes an unacceptable intrusion of development into
         the countryside to the detriment of the East Hampshire Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and
         contrary to Policies C1-C2 and E7 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-2011 (Review)
         and the General Strategy and Environment Policies of the East Hampshire District Local Plan:
         First Review (particularly Policies GS1, GS2 and ENV1).

3.       (UNQ1) The impact of the proposal on the public footpath is likely to result in danger and
      inconvenience to the users of the public footpath and as such is contrary to policy RT11 of the
      East Hampshire District Local Plan: First Review.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           093

PROPOSAL:                         REMOVE EXISTING WATER HEATER AND GAS CONVECTOR HEATER,
                                  REMOVE STORAGE HEATERS FROM LOUNGE AND BEDROOM AND
                                  INSTALL COMBINATION BOILER AND FOUR RADIATORS, REPLACE
                                  FLUE

LOCATION:                         April Rise, 1 Village Street, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU322AH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.26542/001/LBC/JR                        PARISH:           Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Miss C Miles & Mr T Jamieson

CASE OFFICER:                      Joanne Riley            DATE REGISTERED:                    27/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:



                                                                    69
1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
         Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2.       (UNQ1) All new works and works of making good to the retained fabric whether internal or
      external shall be finished to match the adjacent work with regard to the methods, and materials
      used.
      Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of this Grade II Listed Building.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           094

PROPOSAL:                         TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO FRONT AND REAR AFTER DEMOLITION
                                  OF PART OF EXISTING

LOCATION:                         The Triangle-Liss Community Centre, Mill Road, Liss, Hampshire, GU337DX

REFERENCE NO.                      F.33447/002/FUL/NP                        PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Liss Community Association

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    02/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (E1) Before development commences samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall
         have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the construction of the approved development
         harmonise with the surroundings.

4.       (C40) All new external joinery shall be of painted timber.
      Reason To safeguard the character of the Conservation Area.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    70
Item No.                           095

PROPOSAL:                         RENEWAL OF TEMPORARY PERMISSION (STORAGE OF
                                  CONSTRUCTION PLANT AND EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING CONTAINERS)

LOCATION:                         Land Rear of Beaver Industrial Estate,, Midhurst Road, Liphook, Hampshire,
                                  GU30

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22115/019/TEMP/JH                             PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Land Clean Ltd

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    18/03/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMPORARY PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (T4) This permission shall be restricted to a limited period expiring on 31 January 2004 when the
         use hereby permitted shall cease unless a further permission is granted in writing by the Planning
         Authority.
         Reason The Planning Authority considers it appropriate to retain control over the use of this
         land and the structures erected therein, as the site may form a part of the comprehensive
         redevelopment of the OSU site for mixed development as allocated in the East Hampshire
         District Local Plan: First Review.

2.       (T9) The use hereby permitted shall be discontinued and all structures removed and the land
         shall be reinstated to a condition to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority at or before the
         expiration of the period specified in this permission.
         Reason To ensure that the site is properly restored to its former condition at the expiry of the
         permission.

3.       (H3W) Details of the measures to be taken prevent material on vehicles leaving the site being
         deposited on the Beaver Industrial Estate road shall be submitted to and approved by the
         Planning Authority in writing and fully implemented within 2 months of the date of this permission.
         Such measures shall be retained for the duration of this permission. No lorry shall leave the site
         unless its wheels have been cleaned sufficiently to prevent material being carried on to the
         highway.
         Reason In the interests of public amenity and highway safety.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   For your information this permission relates to all the temporary structures on the site, not just
     those shown on your original plan. The plan attached to this permission has been updated to
     reflect the current position. Please be aware that any further encroachment of portable
     structures north-eastwards would not be acceptable because of the close proximity of houses.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    71
Item No.                           096

PROPOSAL:                         RELIEF FROM CONDITION 1 F23650/011 (EXTENSION OF TIME LIMIT ON
                                  ORIGINAL PERMISSION)

LOCATION:                         Former King George's Hospital site, Hewshott Lane, Liphook, GU30

REFERENCE NO.                      F.23650/016/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Urban Renaissance Villages

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    31/07/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following condition:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   You are reminded that all the conditions attached to permission F.23650/011, as well as the legal
     agreements, continue to apply to this permission.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           097

PROPOSAL:                         RELIEF OF CONDITION 1 TO F.23650/012 (EXTENTION OF TIME LIMIT
                                  ON ORIGINAL PERMISSION)

LOCATION:                         Former King George's Hospital site, Hewshott Lane, Liphook, GU30

REFERENCE NO.                      F.23650/017/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Urban Renaissance Villages

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    31/07/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OUTLINE PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST1) Applications for the approval of the matters referred to herein shall be made within a period
         of three years from the date of this permission. The development to which the permission relates
         shall be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:-
         (i) five years from the date of this permission; or
         (ii) two years from the final approval of the said reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on
         different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.
         Reason To comply with the provisions of Section 92(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990




                                                                    72
Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   You are reminded that all the conditions attached to permission F.23650/012, as well as the legal
     agreements, continue to apply to this permission.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           098

PROPOSAL:                         CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS FOR EXISTING USE:- OCCUPATION AS
                                  A DWELLING WITHOUT AN AGRICULTURAL OCCUPANCY
                                  RESTRICTION (BREACH OF CONDITION 2 OF PRD102/1)

LOCATION:                         The Bothy, Hewshott Lane, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307SU

REFERENCE NO.                      F.20975/008/CLUX/JH                             PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr & Mrs T. Abbott

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    30/10/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS – PERMITTED subject to the following condition:

1.       (UNQ1) From the evidence submitted it appears that the property is not currently occupied by a
      person employed or last employed in agriculture or forestry, nor by the dependents of such a
      person, and has not been occupied for that purpose for in excess of 10 years.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           099

PROPOSAL:                         GARDEN SHED

LOCATION:                         71 Durford Road, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU314ER

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37817/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Petersfield

APPLICANT:                         Mr G A Hanna

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    05/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following condition:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   The applicant is informed that the rear conservatory at this property does not appear to have the
     benefit planning permission and should contact the planning department regarding this matter.
________________________________________________________________________


                                                                    73
Item No.                           100

PROPOSAL:                         REPLACEMENT WINDOWS

LOCATION:                         West Lodge, Bordean, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321EP

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37846/LBC/NP                        PARISH:         East Meon

APPLICANT:                         Mrs M J Fry

CASE OFFICER:                      Nicky Powis             DATE REGISTERED:                    05/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST6) The works hereby consented to shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
         Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2.       (ST8) The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the approved
         plans and specifications. Any variation or departure from the approved plans will require the
         prior approval of the Planning Authority before works commence.
         Reason To ensure that the development hereby authorised is satisfactorily undertaken in the
         interests of the amenity of the area.

3.       (C40) All new external joinery shall be of painted timber.
         Reason To safeguard the architectural and historic character of this curtilage listed building.

4.       (C21) Before the works hereby approved are commenced, details to a scale of not less than 1:20
         elevations and 1.5 sections of all new windows and their decorative finishes, shall be submitted
         to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and the works shall be carried out in
         accordance with the approved details.
         Reason In order to safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of the curtilage listed
         building.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   You are advised that it is an offence to carry out works that do not fully comply with the condition
     set out above. If found guilty you could be liable on summary conviction to an unlimited fine, a
     prison sentence of up to two years, or both.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    74
Item No.                           101

PROPOSAL:                         SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION AND GARAGE CONVERSION

LOCATION:                         81 Castle Road, Rowland's Castle, Hampshire, PO9 6AR

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37868/FUL/PB                        PARISH:         Rowlands Castle

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs Clunes

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    12/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (E3) The external materials to be used shall match, as closely as possible, in type, colour and
         texture those of the existing building.
         Reason To ensure that a harmonious visual relationship is achieved between the new and the
         existing developments.

3.       (H54K) Adequate space shall be provided within the site, for the loading, unloading and parking of
     vehicles to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.
      Reason In the interests of highway safety.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           102

PROPOSAL:                         TEMPORARY CHANGE OF USE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR
                                  TEMPORARY SITING OF MOBILE HOME

LOCATION:                         Warsdown, East Meon, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321PW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37520/001/TEMP/PB                             PARISH:           East Meon

APPLICANT:                         Mr J Marks

CASE OFFICER:                      Paul Bowman                   DATE REGISTERED:                    13/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMPORARY PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (T1) This permission for siting and temporary change of use of land shall be restricted to a
         limited period expiring on 1st April 2004 or upon first occupation of the replacement dwelling
         permitted under reference F.37520 whichever is the sooner.
         Reason The site lies within predominantly rural surroundings where new residential
         development is not normally permitted. A permission is given in this case having regard to the
         circumstances appertaining to the property in question.



                                                                    75
2.       (T8) The mobile home hereby permitted shall be removed and the site reinstated to its previous
         condition and use or to such a condition as may be agreed beforehand in writing by the Planning
         Authority, at or before the expiration of the temporary period specified in this permission.
         Reason To ensure that the site is properly restored to its former condition at the expiry of the
         permission.

3.       (T10) This temporary permission shall enure solely for the benefit of the applicant for the duration
     of the construction of the replacement dwelling permitted under reference F.37520.
       Reason The site lies in a locality where permission would not normally be granted except for the
      circumstances of the applicant.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           103

PROPOSAL:                         EXTERNAL HOPPER FEEDER (TO LINK WITH PROPOSED BOILER
                                  AFTER REMOVAL OF EXISTING FLUE)

LOCATION:                         Earthworks Trust/ Sustainability Centre, East Meon, Petersfield, Hampshire,
                                  GU32

REFERENCE NO.                      F.21514/070/FUL/JH                        PARISH:           East Meon

APPLICANT:                         The Earthworks Trust Ltd.

CASE OFFICER:                      Jeremy Heppell                DATE REGISTERED:                    04/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERMISSION subject to the following conditions:

1.       (ST5) The development hereby permitted shall be begun within five years from the date of this
         permission.
         Reason To comply with the provision of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act,
         1990.

2.       (UNQ1) Within 1 month of the development hereby permitted being brought into operation, the
         log-fired boiler and flue granted temporary permission in 2000 (F21514/64) shall be dismantled
         and permanently removed from the site.
          Reason In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of the nearby residential properties.

3.       (E2) Before development commences on site details of the colour of the hopper shall have
         been submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure that the materials used in the development harmonise with its surroundings.

4.       (G16) No materials for use in connection with the hopper or boilers shall be stacked, stored
         or deposited in the open on the site.
         Reason To ensure that the visual appearance of the area is not adversely affected.

5.       (L15) Before any works commence, details of the design and layout of the underground heating
         circuit and associated excavations, insofar as they may affect trees on the site, shall be
         submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority.
         Reason To ensure the protection of trees to be retained, and in particular to avoid unnecessary
         damage to their root systems.




                                                                    76
6.    (UNQ2) The boilers to be installed in connection with this application shall be operated, serviced
      and maintained according to the manufacturer's instructions, and service records shall be made
      available when notice is given for the Planning Authority to inspect.
      Reason To ensure that the boilers are operated without giving rise to pollution.

7.    (UNQ3) All emissions from the heating system shall be free from odour at all the boundaries of
      the site.
      Reason To protect neighbouring properties from odour nuisance.

8.    (UNQ4) Wood chipping operations shall only be carried out between 8am and 6pm on Mondays
      to Fridays, with no operations at weekends or on public holidays.
      Reason To protect neighbouring properties from noise nuisance.

Informative Notes to Applicant:

1.   You are advised to carry out a daily visual and olfactory assessment of the emissions from the
     boilers whilst either or both of them are in operation, and to keep a written log recording any
     observations.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                   77
78
79
80
81
82
83
                                         EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL

                                              SOUTH PLANNING COMMITTEE

                                  DECISIONS MADE UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

                                              MATTERS RELATING TO TREES

                                                                                                                         PC.35/2003
                                                                                                                    6 February 2003
SECTION V


Item No.                           001

PROPOSAL:                         FELL SPRUCE TREE

LOCATION:                         136 Longmoor Road, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307NZ

REFERENCE NO.                      F.26924/001/TPO/SG                        PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr R.G. Howey

CASE OFFICER:                      Stewart Garside               DATE REGISTERED:                    12/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED to fell one Spruce tree for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) The Spruce tree identified as T7 of Tree Preservation Order (EH474)02 at the rear of 136
      Longmoor Road, Liphook, is considered to be of good health and form and contributes to the
      visual amenity of the area. The reasons given for removal are considered insufficient to override
      the positive contribution this tree makes to local landscape.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           002

PROPOSAL:                         TO PRUNE TWO TREES IN THE REAR GARDEN

LOCATION:                         Riverbank, High Street, East Meon, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU321NW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37820/CAT/AMP                           PARISH:           East Meon

APPLICANT:                         Mr L Tucci

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    19/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO OBJECTION to the pruning of two trees in the rear garden of Riverbank, High Street, East Meon.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    84
Item No.                           003

PROPOSAL:                         PRUNE ONE WALNUT TREE

LOCATION:                         209 Lovedean Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9RT

REFERENCE NO.                      F.27787/002/TPO/SG                        PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr S.A.W. Anderson

CASE OFFICER:                      Stewart Garside               DATE REGISTERED:                    14/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT to the removal of two limbs on the southern side of the Walnut tree subject of this application
and extending over the garage of the neighbouring property subject to the following conditions:

1.       (W1) All works shall be carried out within one year of the date of this consent to the satisfaction of
         the District Council's Arboricultural Officer. The contractor (or other person) carrying out the
         work shall contact the Arboricultural Officer before starting work and meet him on site if so
         required.

2.       (W2) All works shall be carried out in accordance with BS.3998 (1989). (However, painting of cuts
         with tree sealant shall be discretionary).

3.       (W3) The use of climbing irons (spikes) to enter or move around the tree canopy is strictly
      prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           004

PROPOSAL:                         TO PRUNE LEYLANDII TREES

LOCATION:                         Deerleap, 17 The Green, Rowland's Castle, Hampshire, PO9 6BW

REFERENCE NO.                      F.29506/019/CAT/AMP                             PARISH:           Rowlands Castle

APPLICANT:                         Mrs P Conroy

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    04/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO OBJECTION to the reduction by 1metre of Leylandii trees growing on the western boundary of
Deerleap, 17 The Green, Rowlands Castle.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    85
Item No.                           005

PROPOSAL:                         TO PRUNE FIVE BEECH TREES

LOCATION:                         Elm Cottage, Pond Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 0RG

REFERENCE NO.                      F.25072/010/TPO/AMP                             PARISH:           Clanfield

APPLICANT:                         Mrs D Baldanza

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    20/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED to prune five Beech Trees adjacent to the northern boundary of Elm Cottage, Pond Lane,
Clanfield for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Insufficient justification for the works proposed which will have a detrimental impact on
      the amenity value of the trees in the local landscape.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           006

PROPOSAL:                         PRUNE TWO HOLLIES AND FOUR YEWS

LOCATION:                         Pillmead House, North Lane, Buriton, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU315RS

REFERENCE NO.                      F.31634/009/CAT/AMP                             PARISH:           Buriton

APPLICANT:                         Mrs B Blackburn

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    05/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO OBJECTION to the cutting back to approximately 2m and re-shape of two (2) Hollies and Four (4)
Yew trees all at Pillmead House, North Lane, Buriton.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           007

PROPOSAL:                         TO PRUNE ONE SYCAMORE

LOCATION:                         4 The Ridings, Liss, Hampshire, GU337RP

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37838/TPO/AMP                           PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr and Mrs Duff

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    26/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT to crown lift to 3 metres, reduce outer crown by 10% and crown thin by 25% all on one
Sycamore tree in the rear garden of 4, The Ridings, Liss subject to the following conditions:


                                                                    86
1.       (W1) All works shall be carried out within one year of the date of this consent to the satisfaction of
         the District Council's Arboricultural Officer. The contractor (or other person) carrying out the
         work shall contact the Arboricultural Officer before starting work and meet him on site if so
         required.

2.       (W2) All works shall be carried out in accordance with BS.3998 (1989). (However, painting of cuts
         with tree sealant shall be discretionary).

3.       (W3) The use of climbing irons (spikes) to enter or move around the tree canopy is strictly
      prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           008

PROPOSAL:                         TO PRUNE TWO OAKS AND TWO MAPLE TREES

LOCATION:                         24 Victory Avenue, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9PH

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37843/TPO/AMP                           PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr Michael McBride

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    25/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT to trim back the upper crown of one Oak by 2 metres, remove one limb on the western side
of one Maple, remove two limbs on the western side of one further Maple and raise the crown by up to 5
metres. Remove epicormic growth only, on one mature Oak tree up to 5 metres all on the western
boundary of 24 Victory Avenue, Horndean and adjacent to the eastern boundary of 15 Quail Way,
Horndean subject to the following conditions:

1.       (W1) All works shall be carried out within one year of the date of this consent to the satisfaction of
         the District Council's Arboricultural Officer. The contractor (or other person) carrying out the
         work shall contact the Arboricultural Officer before starting work and meet him on site if so
         required.

2.       (W2) All works shall be carried out in accordance with BS.3998 (1989). (However, painting of cuts
         with tree sealant shall be discretionary).

3.       (W3) The use of climbing irons (spikes) to enter or move around the tree canopy is strictly
      prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    87
Item No.                           009

PROPOSAL:                         TO PRUNE ONE OAK AND ONE ASH TREE

LOCATION:                         77 Catherington Lane, Waterlooville, Hampshire, PO8 9HY

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37842/TPO/AMP                           PARISH:           Horndean

APPLICANT:                         Mr M McBride

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    25/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT to remove one stem of one Ash tree, crown lift to 8 metres and trim back upper crown by no
more than 3 metres. Crown lift to 8 metres and trim back upper crown by no more than 3 metres one
Oak tree, all on the western boundary of 77 Catherington Lane, Horndean and adjacent to the eastern
boundary of 15 Quail Way, Horndean, subject to the following conditions:

1.       (W1) All works shall be carried out within one year of the date of this consent to the satisfaction of
         the District Council's Arboricultural Officer. The contractor (or other person) carrying out the
         work shall contact the Arboricultural Officer before starting work and meet him on site if so
         required.

2.       (W2) All works shall be carried out in accordance with BS.3998 (1989). (However, painting of cuts
         with tree sealant shall be discretionary).

3.       (W3) The use of climbing irons (spikes) to enter or move around the tree canopy is strictly
      prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           010

PROPOSAL:                         TO FELL ONE LIME AND POLLARD TWO LIME TREES

LOCATION:                         Hawkley Hurst, Hawkley, Liss, Hampshire, GU336NS

REFERENCE NO.                      F.31245/007/TPO/AMP                             PARISH:           Liss

APPLICANT:                         Mr J J Iggleden

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    04/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSENT to the re-pollarding of 2 Lime trees and removal of 1 Lime tree all at Hawkley Hurst, Hawkley,
Liss subject to the following conditions:

1.       (W1) All works shall be carried out within one year of the date of this consent to the satisfaction of
         the District Council's Arboricultural Officer. The contractor (or other person) carrying out the
         work shall contact the Arboricultural Officer before starting work and meet him on site if so
         required.

2.       (W2) All works shall be carried out in accordance with BS.3998 (1989). (However, painting of cuts
         with tree sealant shall be discretionary).


                                                                    88
3.       (W3) The use of climbing irons (spikes) to enter or move around the tree canopy is strictly
      prohibited.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           011

PROPOSAL:                         FELL 9 HOLLY, 2 WILLOW, 3 ALDER, 2 BEECH AND 1 OAK, POLLARD 4
                                  WILLOWS, COPPICE 2 POPLARS AND PRUNE 1 HORNBEAM ALL
                                  WITHIN RADFORD PARK, LIPHOOK

LOCATION:                         Radford Park, Malthouse Meadows, Liphook, Hampshire, GU30

REFERENCE NO.                      F.22570/007/CAT/AMP                             PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Bramshott and Liphook Parish Council

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    12/12/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO OBJECTION to the felling of 9 Holly, 2 Willow, 3 Alder, 2 Beech and 1 Oak, pollarding of 4 Willows,
coppicing of 2 Poplars and pruning of 1 Hornbeam all within Radford Park, Liphook.
________________________________________________________________________

Item No.                           012

PROPOSAL:                         TO FELL ONE OAK TREE

LOCATION:                         33 Chiltley Way, Liphook, Hampshire, GU307HG

REFERENCE NO.                      F.37841/TPO/AMP                           PARISH:           Bramshott/Liphook

APPLICANT:                         Mr R Moore

CASE OFFICER:                      Adele Poulton                 DATE REGISTERED:                    27/11/2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFUSED to fell one Oak tree at 33, Chiltley Way, Liphook for the following reason:

1.       (UNQ1) Insufficient justification for the removal of a mature tree of significant amenity value in the
      street scene.
________________________________________________________________________




                                                                    89
                           EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL

             SOUTH & NORTH PLANNING COMMITTEES 6 AND 20 FEBRUARY

                     REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING CONTROL
                                                                                         PC.35/2003
                                                                                    6 February 2003
SECTION VI – INFORMATION ON APPEALS

(A)     APPEALS LODGED

        South

        1)   F.37435/FUL – Detached dwelling to rear after demolition of garage and shed, 20
             Pulens Lane, PETERSFIELD – Mr J Sutton (Hearing)

        2)   F.37252/002/FUL – Dwelling and formation of vehicular access (as amended by letter
             and plan received 21/10/02), Monks Lea, Tilmore Gardens, PETERSFIELD – The
             Classic Home Company Limited (Written Representations)

        3)   F.37193/FUL – Relief from condition 2 of PRD.4279/001 (Agricultural occupancy)
             (amended description) (as amplified by letter received 20/8/02), Shrublands, St
             Patricks Lane, LISS – Mrs P Catt (Hearing)

        4)   F.31172/007/FUL – Five – two bedroomed dwellings and altered access after
             demolition of redundant buildings, North, 20 Station Road, LISS – Mayserve Ltd
             (Written Representations)

        5)   F.27158/011/FUL – Two storey side extension with dormer window to back and front,
             165 Portsmouth Road, HORNDEAN – Mr & Mrs I Kitchingham (Written
             Representations)

        6)   F.37719/FUL – Two storey side extension and first floor extension over garage, single
             storey rear extension and two dormer windows, 15 The Peak, ROWLANDS CASTLE –
             Mr & Mrs A Tucker (Written Representations)

        7)   F.24695/003/FUL – Two detached dwellings, The Queens, Petersfield Road,
             GREATHAM – Greene King Plc (Inquiry)

        North

        1)   F.33896/001/FUL – Formation of car park, Unit 3, Caker Stream Road, ALTON – TNT
             UK Limited (Written Representations)

        2)   F.32372/014/EENC – Without planning permission change of use of land from
             agricultural to the commercial storage and parking of vehicles, Gilbert Street Farm,
             Gilbert Street, ROPLEY – Mr T Hough (Public Inquiry)

        3)   F.32372/015/ - Without planning permission the construction of a bund, Gilbert Street
             Farm, Gilbert Street, ROPLEY – Mr T Hough (Public Inquiry)

        4)   F.29438/002/FUL – Two storey side extension and rear dormer, Jeffords Cottage, 3
             Parkside Lane, ROPLEY – Mr & Mrs M Hardy (Written Representations)



                                               90
      5)    F.23538/003/LBC – Four replacement windows, 1 Mount Pleasant Road, ALTON – Mr
            A R Pearson (Written Representations)

      6)    F.36724/ECOU - Appeal against enforcement notice - without planning permission
            construction of a hard surfaced area, a track, a bund, a building/structure and erection
            of fencing and gates, Land adj to Lower College Copse, Wield Road, MEDSTEAD – Mr
            S J Friend (Inquiry)

      7)    F.36724/001/ECOU - Appeal against enforcement notice - without planning permission
            the use of the land for the storage of a caravan, a building/structure, building materials
            and building plant/vehicles, Land adj to Lower College Copse, Wield Road,
            MEDSTEAD – Mr S J Friend (Inquiry)

(B)   APPEALS ALLOWED

      South

      1a)   F.22577/009/FUL - Alteration & extension of existing buildings to form 13 dwellings
            together with an additional block of six flats and four houses with associated garages
            and landscaping (amended description) (as amended by plans received 02/01/2002
            and letter and plans received 19/02/2002), Ludshott Manor, Woolmer Lane,
            BRAMSHOTT/LIPHOOK – Macleod Limited (Inquiry)

            Committee Decision – Recommendation Permission

      1b)   F.22577/010/LBC - Alteration and extension of existing buildings to form 13 dwellings
            together with an additional block of six flats and four houses with associated garages
            and landscaping (amended description) (as amended by plans received 02/01/2002
            and letter and plans received 19/02/2002), Ludshott Manor, Woolmer Lane,
            BRAMSHOTT/LIPHOOK – Macleod Limited (Inquiry)

            Committee Decision – Recommendation Consent

            These appeals were heard by way of a Local Inquiry and concerned the refusal of
            planning permission and Listed Consent.

            The Inspector considered there were two main issues:

                Effect of the proposal on highway safety
                Effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, in particular the
                 Area of Special Landscape Quality and setting of the Listed Building

            On the first issue the Inspector acknowledged the physical characteristics and
            limitations of Woolmer Lane which also served as a bridleway. However, he felt that
            the additional traffic movements for 23 private dwellings would result in unacceptable
            congestion or would affect the safety of the various types of use.

            In landscape and countryside terms, the Inspector felt that the large number of
            surrounding trees resulted in the buildings being generally well screened from public
            view. Overall the scheme as a whole was considered to be of substantial benefit to the
            surrounding countryside, which is an ASLQ.




                                               91
     Ludshott Manor is a Grade II Listed Building. Previously a number of unsympathetic
     extensions had been carried out. These were to be demolished and the new
     development, in the Inspector‟s opinion, would be of a high quality and complement the
     remaining older parts of the Manor. The loss of the walled garden to development was
     considered. This had not been included in the listing description. However, the
     Inspector felt that there was no reasonable prospect of the walled garden being put
     back to its original purpose and that the financial appraisal was a realistic reflection and
     justified enabling development of this scale.

2)   F.22878/009/FUL - Relief from condition 5 of F22878/006 to allow garden area to be
     used for outside seating, 25-27 Chapel Street, PETERSFIELD – Pizza Express
     (Written Representations)

     The application was determined under delegated powers. The Officers
     recommendation was to refuse the application on the grounds of lack of onsite car
     parking and the impact on the amenities of the neighbouring properties.

     This appeal relates to the refusal to relax condition 5 of F22878/006/FUL which only
     permits the restaurant use of the ground floor of the building and did not allow any use
     of the outside area.

     The relevant policies are T2, T5, T6 and T9 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan
     1996-2011 (Review) and policy GS5 of the East Hampshire Local Plan, First Review.
     Also referred to is PPG13 - Transport.

     The Inspector considered the main issues to be whether the disputed condition is
     reasonable or necessary in order to protect adjoining residential occupiers from undue
     noise and disturbance and secondly if the condition is removed, would there be a
     negative impact for car parking provision within the town centre.

     On the first issue the Inspector considered that anyone living in a town centre location
     such as this may reasonably expect a degree of evening activity and noise, she
     observed that there are a number of pubs and restaurants in the immediate locality.
     The Inspector also noted that a condition on the original planning permission ensures
     that the use of the restaurant ceases at 2300, additionally as the entrance to the
     restaurant is at the rear a degree of activity already exists on this part of the site.
     Whilst the English weather would prevent the use of this area throughout the whole
     year, and the condition restricting the restaurant to 2300 would ensure that the
     residents enjoy a greater degree of peace and quiet, the Inspector concluded that
     condition 5 was not necessary or reasonable in order to protect nearby residential
     occupiers from undue noise or disturbance.

     On the second issue the Inspector considered that a provision of an additional 14 on
     site car parking spaces would be unnecessary in this instance in view of the proximity
     of the site to a large town centre car park. She did not consider that the use would be
     a major generator of additional car trips in the daytime, and it is expected that more
     space is available in the car park in the evening which would be sufficient to meet the
     needs of the development. Additionally PPG13 was considered, this encourages
     linked trips and post dates the development plan. In the Inspector‟s judgement this
     provides justification for overriding the parking requirements in the Local Plan in this
     case. Furthermore the Inspector considered the need for a commuted sum to provide
     additional parking spaces and help fund a cycle route. However she considered that
     there was no evidence to satisfy her that such requirements are necessary in order to
     allow the proposal to go ahead. In conclusion the removal of the condition would have
     no adverse impact on the town centre parking.


                                        92
     The Inspector concluded that the appeal be allowed and condition 5 of
     F22878/006/FUL is varied to:

     This use hereby permitted relates to the ground floor of the building and the outside
     terrace only.

North

1)   F.22618/003/OUT - Outline - ten two bedroomed flats with associated parking and
     altered access after demolition of existing building, The Grayshott Nursing Home,
     Boundary Road, GRAYSHOTT – Premier Properties PLC (Written Representations)

     Committee decision – Recommendation Outline Permission

     The Inspector considered that the main issues in this appeal are the effect of the
     proposal on the character and appearance of the locality and the implications of the
     level of off road parking proposed for highway safety.

     He found that the appeal site contains a part 3 storey building currently in use as a
     nursing home which also has a single storey rear extension. There is a hard surfaced
     parking area to the front of the site.

     Although the proposed building would be wider than that existing it would involve the
     removal of an existing single storey structure and would consolidate development on
     the site. The existing somewhat sprawling structure which can be seen from Boundary
     Road could be replaced with a more compact structure, which he considered would be
     a visual improvement. Supporting information, submitted with the planning application,
     included a plan which showed that it would be possible for the proposed building to be
     lower than that existing. The proposal would still retain some space to the sides and
     would not extend the full width of the site. The proposal would be set significantly
     further back than the existing building which in his view would give the building a
     pleasant open setting which, despite its width, would not be detrimental to the
     character and appearance of the area.

     The proposal would make provision for 15 parking spaces. Although the Council
     considered this to be an inadequate level of provision the Inspector noted it did not say
     what would be considered an acceptable level of provision. The Appellant stated that
     provision is 5 spaces short of the Council‟s parking requirement and the Council did not
     contest this statement. Policy T6 only requires broad conformity with the standards
     and the Inspector noted that these standards are stated to be under review. Policy
     GS5 only requires sufficient parking to be provided.

     In his view it is unlikely that 2 bedroom dwellings, which are towards the smaller end of
     the spectrum of dwelling sizes, would justify a higher parking standard. He considered
     there is a reasonable prospect that occupiers would comprise a mix of single and 2
     person households, some of which may have 2 cars. Paragraph 9 of PPG3 highlights
     the fact that the majority of projected household growth is expected to be in one person
     households. He saw no reason why such growth should not be reflected in the
     household size of the occupiers of the proposed flats. He also considered that any
     potential purchasers would be unlikely to decide to buy a property without ensuring that
     parking arrangements met their needs.




                                       93
Grayshott has public transport links and there are bus stops in Headley Road near the
appeal site, although there is no railway station. The quality of the bus service has
been stated to be poor but there is no dispute that there is a bus service. There is also
a range of shops, including a general store, within walking distance of the appeal site
and he considered the location to be reasonably well served and not one obviously
lacking in facilities.

He did not consider the location to be so demonstrably deficient, in relation to access to
services and facilities, that it justifies a higher standard than 1.5 spaces per dwelling,
as the Council argued.

The appellant submitted a traffic report which shows a nursing home could generate 63
daily vehicle trips and a 2 bedroomed flat 43 vehicle trips. Although this would be
comparable to the vehicle movements generated by a typical nursing home use, the
existing use generates a low level of traffic movements, due partly to some employees
walking to work. However, the continuation of this situation is dependent on the
existing employees continuing to work here and there is no guarantee that this would
be the case. Based on the information from the TRICS database it seems more likely
that the level of movement would increase if the employees changed, either, due to
normal staff turnover, or a different operator bringing in new staff.

On his site visit the Inspector saw no on street parking in Boundary Road. Because he
was not convinced that the proposal would involve any significant intensification of
vehicle movements he is satisfied that the use of Boundary road, which has no
footways and is relatively narrow, and the junction with Headley Road by traffic
generated by the proposal would be acceptable. Any existing problems in Boundary
Road cannot justify preventing a development which in itself would not worsen this
situation. He therefore considered the proposed level of provision of 1.5 parking
spaces per flat would be appropriate bearing in mind national policy which requires
maximum levels of provision.

For the above reasons he concluded that the proposal would not be harmful to highway
safety, makes sufficient provision for car parking and so does not conflict with local
plan policy GS5, as the Council argues.

In response to the Council‟s reason for refusal concerning the lack of open space
within the site or for alternative off-site provision, the Appellant submitted a Unilateral
Undertaking.

The Inspector was satisfied that, in providing for off-site open space, this Undertaking
is necessary and properly addresses the requirements of policy RT3 of the Local Plan.

The Inspector noted that there are no local or structure plan policies which specifically
oppose the loss of the nursing home use. The existing nursing home may close, partly
because of the level of investment likely to be needed to improve facilities and this
could not be prevented.

In the absence of a quantified need he did not consider the general concern over the
loss of beds could carry significant weight. The need for nursing homes must also be
set against an acknowledged need in PPG3 to use previously developed land to avoid
the development of green field sites and provide dwellings for small households.
These needs pull in opposite directions and he concluded that the overall effect is
neutral and the loss of a nursing home does not, therefore, weigh against the proposal.




                                    94
     The Council referred to guidance in PPG3 advocating densities of 30 to 50 dwellings
     per hectare (dph). The appeal proposal has a density of about 76 dph. The figure in
     PPG3 is not an upper limit and does not preclude higher densities where there is an
     absence of harm and particular statistical densities are not in themselves harmful.
     Given the absence of harm or conflict with development plan polices that he found, the
     density reflects good use of previously developed land.

     Finally he did not accept that the proposal would set a precedent for further
     development. On his site visit he could not see any obviously comparable sites and in
     any case it is a fundamental principle that each proposal should be considered on its
     own merits having regard to the development plan. Although the existing building is
     attractive it is not a listed building and neither is it located in a Conservation Area.

     The appeal decision was referred to the Council‟s Legal Officer to determine whether
     there was any scope to challenge this decision but the opinion was that there was not.

2)   F.23971/004/OUT - Outline - detached dwelling and garage, Beaulieu, Stapley Lane,
     ROPLEY – Mr P Gurd (Hearing)

     Delegated decision

     The Inspector commented that the main issue in this appeal is whether the proposed
     dwelling would be in harmful conflict with the prevailing policies for the protection of the
     countryside.

     He found that the relevant different development plan policies to the appeal proposal
     essentially depend on a judgement as to whether the appeal site lies within a “built-up”
     area. In the Council‟s view it does not and the proposal therefore falls to be
     determined under the policies to protect the open countryside, in particular Structure
     Plan Policies C1 and C2 and Local plan Policies GS1 and GS2. On behalf of the
     appellant it is argued that because the site is considered to be within a built up area,
     the relevant policy is Local Plan Policy GS3(c) and permission should be granted if the
     proposal satisfies the five criteria in that policy.

     Because the area lies within the countryside and outside a settlement policy boundary
     the thrust of policy remains one of restraint and Policy GS3c itself, with two tests to be
     met before development is permitted, reflects this. Firstly the development must be
     either frontage infill development involving a single dwelling or a conversion to
     residential use; secondly, in the case of frontage infill, the proposal will only be
     permitted if it satisfies all of five criteria.

     The thrust of Local Plan Polices GS1 and GS2, the more recently adopted Structure
     Plan Polices C1 and C2 and national guidance in PPGs 3 and 13 is also towards the
     more stringent control of development in rural areas. The objective is not only to
     protect the open countryside but also to encourage development in more sustainable
     locations. The emerging Local Plan similarly seeks tighter control through the
     proposed Settlement Policy Boundary for Ropley and the preclusion of infill
     development outside it. The dispersed nature of Ropley and a number of other
     settlements in this part of East Hampshire provide ample evidence that such a tighter
     policy regime is necessary.




                                        95
In respect of criterion i, the Council argued that although there is a continuous line of
development along this side of Stapley Lane, because these are large plots with
significant space between them, this cannot be regarded as the required „continuously
built-up frontage‟. However in his view this is a contradiction in terms. There is a
continuous one of development and with one small exception all the frontage forms
part of residential curtilages, with no gaps between them. He therefore regarded this
as „continuously built-up frontage‟, albeit of spacious, low-density character. In terms
of the extent of the proposed plot, the sizes of plots along Stapley Lane vary
considerably and its scale is commensurate with or larger than others in the locality.

In respect of criteria ii and iii, the proposal would represent an element of
„consolidation‟ as indeed infill development must, by its very nature. But although
Ropley is a dispersed settlement, the Stapley Lane / Parkstone Road area is a
substantial area large enough to have a residential character and cannot reasonably be
regarded as „an isolated group of dwellings‟ within the meaning of the policy. Because
the site is wholly surrounded by existing residential properties, its development would
not lead to expansion into the open undeveloped part of the countryside or
coalescence with another group of buildings.

Criterion iv of Policy GS3(c) refers to the harmful loss of a frontage gap. But because
Beaulieu adjoins Walscot House there is no gap as such and because of the mature
tree and shrub screening along the Stapley Lane frontage, the loss of space between
the two dwellings would not be evident.

Criterion v refers to compliance with the criteria of Policy GS5 and of these it is only i
and ii that are relevant. These tie in with criterion iv of Policy GS3(c) and, as
paragraphs 2.16, 10.43 and 10.44 of the Local Plan explain, the intention is to protect
the character of a settlement and that of the country lanes which are already
characterised by linear development. In my judgement it is because the appeal
proposal would have no adverse effect on the character and appearance of this part of
Ropley that the Council‟s fears of the appeal scheme setting a precedent are
unfounded.

The Council also referred to PPGs 3, 7 and 13 as being supportive of its case. But
PPG3 encourages the development of „previously developed land‟ in rural as well as
urban locations whilst PPG7 advises that sensitive infilling within small groups of
houses may be acceptable depending on the character of the surroundings. In terms
of sustainability, which is the thrust of PPG13, the relevance of this aspect is
recognised by Local Plan policy GS1 which is concomitant with Policy GS3. In terms of
accessibility to services, the location of development that might be permitted within the
Ropley settlement policy boundary in the emerging Local Plan, is not materially
different to that of the appeal site.

Overall, he concluded that the proposed dwelling would not be in harmful conflict with
the prevailing policies for the protection of the countryside and in particular would
accord with Local Plan Policy GS3(c). Although the new settlement policy boundary for
Ropley and the associated restrictive polices deserve weight, they should not in my
view preclude a proposal which clearly accords with the relevant policies of the extant
Local Plan.




                                   96
     Two other matters were considered. Firstly, the occupier of Walscot House was
     concerned that the proposal would have an adverse effect on the outlook from his
     property and the amenity of his garden, however, he formed the view that the size of
     the garden and generous distance that would remain between Walscot House and the
     new dwelling would, together with the existing mature screening that could be
     augmented by a landscaping scheme, fully safeguard against any harmful effect.

     Secondly, the Council refused the appeal application because of an absence of
     provision of public open space required by Local Plan Policy RT3. However the
     Planning Obligation by Unilateral Undertaking submitted at the Hearing has
     satisfactorily dealt with this issue through a commitment to make a financial
     contribution toward its provision in the area.

     The appeal decision was referred to the Council‟s Legal Officer to determine whether
     there was any scope to challenge this decision but the opinion was that there was not.

3)   F.27454/018/LBC – Front porch, Aldersey Cottage, Lower Froyle (FROYLE) – Mr D
     Forrester (Written Representations)

     Delegated decision

     The Inspector considered the main issue to be the effect of the proposed development
     on the architectural and historic interest of Aldersey Cottage and the character and
     appearance of the Lower Froyle Conservation Area.

     Aldersey Cottage is a Listed Building and is within a Conservation Area.

     The Inspector noted that the Appellant has drawn attention to the functional need for
     the proposed porch. This derives from the fact that the cottage has no gutters, with the
     result that rain from the roof runs down the face of the building and damages the front
     door. The Council agreed that a porch is needed but would prefer it to have a lean-to
     roof.

     He considered that Aldersey Cottage has an informal rustic quality and the proposed
     porch would therefore not interfere with any formal architectural composition. The
     porch has been designed so as to leave the existing string course over the door
     physically intact. As that string course is not a continuous feature of the building he
     considered that, in partly covering it, the porch would not harm the architectural interest
     of the building. He did not attach much weight to the fact that the plain doorway is
     mentioned in the description of the building in the statutory list. That description is
     intended to assist in the identification of the building and is not a catalogue of its
     features of architectural or historic interest.

     He did not share the Council‟s concern about the fact that the porch would have a
     gable whereas the main building has a hip roof. The porch, as proposed, would be a
     simple structure with an open gable and would shed water to each side. It seemed to
     him that the alternative of a lean-to roof would be more obtrusive and would also
     require a gutter and down-pipe to deal with rainwater. He considered that its design
     and materials (oak and reclaimed clay tiles) would be in keeping with the overall
     character of the building.

     He concluded that the appeal proposal would preserve both the architectural and
     historic interest of Aldersey Cottage and the character and appearance of the
     Conservation Area.



                                        97
4a)   F.36519/001/FUL - Two detached dwellings with integral garages, associated parking
      and access, 114 Winchester Road, FOUR MARKS – Mr Giles (Written
      Representations)

      Committee decision – Recommendation Permission

4b)   F.36519/002/FUL - Two detached dwellings with integral garages, associated parking
      and access (amended scheme), 114 Winchester Road, FOUR MARKS – Mr Giles
      (Written Representations)
      Committee decision – Recommendation Permission

      The Inspector considered that the main issue in both appeals is the effect of the
      proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

      She noted that the appeal site is on the northern side of Winchester Road and is a
      vacant site following the demolition of the bungalow that previously occupied it. Nearby
      development on this side of the road comprises single storey dwellings standing back
      from the road behind generously sized front gardens bordered by trees and hedges.
      To the rear is an estate of two storey houses. On the other side of the road
      development is more varied, including bungalows, houses and chalets.

      The principle of two dwellings on this site has been established by virtue of an outline
      planning permission for two chalet style dwellings in 2001. The appeal scheme is for
      substantially larger properties but their overall height is very similar to that shown on
      the illustrative drawings accompanying the outline application. Although the new
      dwellings would be larger and taller than their immediate neighbours, they would also
      be seen within the context of the houses to the rear and on the opposite side of
      Winchester Road. In overall townscape terms she did not consider that houses on this
      site would be objectionable or discordant with their surroundings.

      The distance of each dwelling from the side boundary and the gap between them
      would be broadly comparable to the approved siting in the outline permission. She
      considered that this would maintain the sense of spaciousness, which to her mind is an
      important feature of the street scene. The houses in Appeal A are slightly wider and
      deeper but she did not believe that this would make a material difference in terms of
      the visual impact of the development. They would have a staggered layout and “L”
      shaped footprints, with adjoining projecting front gables. This, along with the use of
      hipped roofs would reduce the mass of development at the edge of the site. The
      buildings would be well set back from the road frontage in keeping with their
      neighbours. She was satisfied that the development would not unduly dominate the
      street scene at this point.

      Although each dwelling would be similar in design, visual interest would be provided by
      individual detailing, for example on the fenestration and use of material she observed
      other examples of similar styles of architecture within the immediate locality and she
      was satisfied that either proposal would make an attractive addition to the townscape in
      this respect. Taking account of all of the above factors, she concluded that the
      proposed developments would have no adverse effect on the character and
      appearance of the area.




                                        98
           Finally she noted that people in houses in Penrose Way to the rear are concerned
           about overlooking and loss of privacy. However, she was satisfied that the distances
           involved and the orientation of the new dwellings would ensure that this would not
           occur. The bungalows on either side are far enough away to ensure that existing
           occupiers would not suffer unduly from loss of privacy and that the new houses would
           not appear unacceptably overbearing.

(C)   APPEALS DISMISSED

      South

      1)   F.37059/FUL - Dwelling with detached garage and associated access, Land W of
           Brambles, Hammer Lane, Haslemere (BRAMSHOTT/LIPHOOK PARISH) – Mr R Hall
           (Written Representations)

           Delegated Decision

           This appeal relates to the refusal of a two storey dwelling with detached garage.

           The main issue is whether the proposal would be in harmful conflict with the prevailing
           policies for the protection of the countryside, the local landscape and the conservation
           area.

           Relevant policies include C1, C2 and H10 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan
           2011 (Review) and policies GS1, GS2, GS3, GS5, ENV2, and ENV15 - ENV19 of the
           East Hampshire Local Plan, First Review.

           Also referred to is the planning history of the site including three previous refusals by
           the Council in 1963, 1965 and 1972 which were upheld at appeal. PPG7 - The
           Countryside, was also considered relevant by the Inspector.

           The Inspector considered that there had been no material changes to the physical
           surroundings of the site and that the adopted development plan policies are much more
           comprehensive than those considered in the 1960s and 1970s. He also noted that the
           proposal does not comply with the criteria set down by policies C2 and H10 of the
           Structure Plan or GS3 of the Local Plan. This proposal would not only create a
           detrimental precedent, but also would harm the ASLQ and would not preserve the
           Conservation Area. As a result the Inspector concluded that appeal be dismissed.

      2)   F.30615/002/OUT - Outline - one dwelling, Ashlyns, Hill Brow Road, LISS – Mr & Mrs
           D P Loble (Written Representations)

           Delegated Decision

           This was an outline application with all matters reserved for future approval except
           siting and means of access for erection of a detached dwelling. A copy of signed and
           sealed unilateral undertaking contributions to meet the provisions of Policy RT3. The
           Inspector considered that the completed Agreement overcomes the open space
           objection set out in Reason 4 of the Decision Notice.

           The Inspector considered that there were two main issues. The first being the effect of
           the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. The second, the effect of
           the proposed access on highway safety.




                                              99
The appeal site lies midway between Liss and Hill Brow in an area characterised by
large detached houses in mature gardens. The residential nature of the area is
spacious and the separation between properties makes an important contribution to the
character and appearance of this part of Hill Brow Road, where spacing between
properties is greatest. It is also evident that individual properties in the area benefit
from the strong sense of enclosure provided by mature trees, substantial shrubs and
hedgerows along boundaries, which provides some screening from the road. The
Inspector considered such features are worthy of retention in this semi-rural part of the
AONB where conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty of the landscape is
a material consideration. The Inspector did not differ significantly from the views of
other Inspectors who have determined appeals nearby that if a number of plots that
could be sub-divided were developed, then the character of the AONB would be
harmed. However, since the notation for the AONB “washes” over the whole
settlement, on its own the Inspector felt that the appeal proposal would not materially
conflict with the objectives of Structure Plan Policy E7 or Policy ENV1 of the Local
Plan.

The proposal involved the sub-division of Ashlyns to provide an additional plot
approximately half the size of the remainder of the host plot and significantly smaller
than adjoining plots. The Inspector considered this would be incompatible with the
established pattern of development surrounding the appeal site. The plot would be
significantly narrower than adjoining properties, which would be incompatible with the
spaciousness of these properties, each within a generous enclosed plot. The relative
closeness to Ashlyns would be particularly noticeable given the insufficient space to
provide effective screening to achieve an adequate sense of enclosure for each
property. The proposal would be clearly visible from the frontage, particularly through
the gap that would provide access to the proposed house, where it would be perceived
to dominate the space at the side of the host dwelling, resulting in the perceived loss of
the gap between Ashlyns and the neighbouring property.

The Inspector concluded in the first issue that the proposal would cause harm to the
character and appearance of the area. It would not accord with Policies GS3c and
GS5 of the Local Plan.

Hill Brow Road is a commuter route, with few straight sections and poor car-to-car
visibility. The Inspector shared the concern of the Council that visibility would be
seriously restricted for vehicles emerging from the appeal site. The Inspector
concluded on the Highway Safety issue that the proposal would be detrimental to
highway safety, contrary to the provisions of Policy GS5 of the Local Plan.

The Inspector noted the concerns over the question of precedent, as well as the
comparisons drawn with previous appeals that have been determined on nearby land.
However, he reached his own conclusions on the basis of the merits of the appeal
proposal, having in mind the development plan policies, as he is required to do.




                                  100
3)   F.23270/004/OUT - Outline - 11 dwellings (as amplified by letter received 18/3/02),
     North 43 - 57, Tunbridge Crescent, LIPHOOK – S C Properties Ltd (Written
     Representations)

     Delegated decision

     The Inspector considered there are 5 main issues in this case:

         The likely impact of this proposal, by reason of its form, nature and location, on
          the character and appearance of these surroundings and on the amenities of
          neighbouring residents;
         Whether this proposal would have the effect of preserving or enhancing the
          character or appearance of the River Wey Conservation Area or its setting;
         Whether, by reason of the proximity of the A3 Trunk Road, future residents of this
          scheme would suffer an unacceptable level of traffic noise and disturbance;
         The likely impact of this proposal on standards of highway safety in this area; and
         How this project stands in relation to the Council‟s policy on open space
          provision.

     As to the first main issue, this site comprises garden land behind mainly single-storey
     or chalet-style dwellings fronting the northern side of Tunbridge Crescent which is a
     residential cul-de-sac at the edge of a sizeable urban area. There are other rear
     gardens directly to the west and further houses along the opposite road frontage; a
     modern housing estate adjoins to the north, while beyond the eastern site boundary is
     woodland. The originally submitted plans had an illustrative layout with 6 two-storey
     houses, orientated north-south, behind 3 existing dwellings and 5 houses, orientated
     east-west, behind 2 other existing dwellings. Vehicular access, which is a matter for
     approval at this stage, would be in the form of a driveway between Nos 49 and 51.

     National policy guidance in PPG3, reinforced by more recent Ministerial
     pronouncements, clearly establishes the need generally to increase housing provision
     by making the best use of land in sustainable locations. The tenor of this guidance is
     reflected in strategic and local policies concerning urban development and
     regeneration. The Inspector considered that neither national policy nor those at the
     lower levels of the planning hierarchy suggest that in pursuing these aims the quality of
     the environment should be allowed to suffer, he considered that designing for quality,
     with particular regard to residential environments, is given some prominence.

     The Inspector recognised the Council‟s concerns about this aspect of the appeal case.
     In seeking to maximise the density of housing development on this site, the scheme
     completely ignored the predominant character of the immediate area in which it is
     situated. Most of the dwellings in Tunbridge Crescent have reasonably-sized curtilages
     creating a moderate sense of spaciousness. The Inspector considered the tandem
     development of the nature now intended would be alien to these surrounds and,
     especially if carried out in a piecemeal fashion like this, would be likely to cause serious
     harm to the character and appearance of this area; in terms of the relationship between
     buildings both within the site and outside. This Inspector felt it would appear unduly
     cramped and unneighbourly. And if permitted, the Inspector felt this would lead to
     further such uncoordinated developments on other rear garden land nearby thus
     exacerbating the environmental damage hereabouts.




                                        101
The Inspector also considered the potential harm to the amenities of existing residents.
Three of the frontage properties would have noticeable length of 2 storey housing
facing directly towards their private garden space and rear windows. He considered
that this would have had an overbearing impact on those occupiers and appreciably
reduce the standard of living to which they might reasonably expect to enjoy. The
Inspector felt the occupiers of 2 of those properties would suffer the considerable
additional problems of noise and disturbance due to the proposed access road running
between their dwellings, little more than 1m from their living accommodation.

In reaching his conclusions the Inspector was aware that the layout presented was not
for approval at this stage. However given the number of units for which permission
was sought and the limitations and configuration of the site, he could not envisage any
alternative form of layout.

The Inspector concluded that the proposal was inconsistent with those provisions of the
Council‟s policies which seek, essentially, to avoid overdevelopment, damage to the
urban environment and harm to the quality of living.

Regarding the second issue, the River Wey Conservation Area stretches along a
considerable length of the river which runs to the east of the present site. The
Council‟s objection is based on its view that trees on the northern and eastern site
boundaries would be felled to accommodate the present scheme. However, the
Inspector felt that the trees on those site boundaries were not so significant within the
wider surroundings as the Council asserts and he was satisfied that if as a result of this
scheme certain of the boundary trees were to be felled then this would not have any
serious harmful impact.

As for the third issue, a little distance to the north of the appeal site is the A3 Trunk
Road. This appears to carry a fairly high volume of traffic and while on site The
Inspector found that traffic noise from this road was clearly audible.

However, The Inspector felt that there was compelling evidence which demonstrates
that unacceptable harm would in fact arise.

In terms of the fourth issue, the Inspector felt that adequate sight lines could be
provided and a 2.4m distance would seem adequate and thus the achievable range of
visibility in both directions would be satisfactory. He considered that the proposed
access road would be suitable and adequate to serve the amount of traffic likely to
arise from this scheme. The Inspector also considered Tunbridge Crescent suitable to
serve the additional dwellings. The Inspector was not convinced that this would be of
such a scale as to worsen seriously the present standards of highway safety
hereabouts.

Finally in regard to the fifth issue, the Inspector supported the Council in that there is
conflict with Local Plan Policy RT3 since no provision has been made within this
proposal for public open space.




                                    102
4)   F.23936/026/FUL - Variation of condition 23 of F23936/23 (restriction on items sold),
     Land South of Buckmore Farm, Winchester Road, PETERSFIELD – BP Oil (UK) Ltd
     (Written Representations)

     Committee decision – Recommendation Permission

     This appeal relates to non-compliance with condition no 23 which stated that the sale
     of goods from the site shall be restricted to motor vehicle fuels, oil and other vehicle
     lubricants, motor accessories and spare parts, confectionery and non-alcoholic drinks,
     tobacco and cigarettes, newspapers and magazines, sandwiches, pies and other
     hot/cold snack foods, cut flowers, household fuels and charcoal, and a single internet
     terminal only. There shall be no variation in the goods sold without the prior consent of
     the Planning Authority.

     The appellant gave a planning obligation by Unilateral Undertaking to cover any
     obligation the appellant might have under the Petersfield Transport Strategy. This
     appeal relates to an application to vary condition 23 of F.23936/023 to provide for the
     sale of all cold drinks, groceries, household goods and an additional Internet terminal.
     During the course of the appeal the appellant submitted an additional Unilateral
     Undertaking, dated 9 August 2002, in contemplation of this appeal being allowed and
     planning permission being granted to vary the condition to cover the extended range of
     goods permitted to be sold from the shop.

     The Inspector considered that there were two main issues. The first, the effect of the
     proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside. The
     second, the effect on the vitality and viability of Petersfield Town Centre.

     Issue one, the service area at Buckmore Farm was originally granted planning
     permission in 1987, as an exception to the countryside policies, to meet the needs of
     the travelling public. The petrol filling station part of the proposal included a motorists
     shop. Planning permission was granted in 2001 for a petrol filling station, shop and
     carwash, which included a condition restricting the sale of goods from the shop to items
     which might reasonably be expected to meet the needs of the travelling public. The
     further permission granted to the appellant in January 2002 was similarly conditioned.
     The subsequent decision to refuse planning permission for the appeal proposal was
     consistent with these decisions, which were all intended to ensure that the retail facility
     would remain attractive primarily to the travelling public, as originally envisaged.

     Development plan policies seek to avoid new development in the countryside and limit
     proposals to development that has an overriding need to be there. Furthermore, the
     site lies within the East Hampshire AONB where the protection of the natural beauty of
     the landscape is a major consideration. PPG7 notes that decisions in such areas
     should favour the conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape.




                                       103
The Inspector considered that the need for the appeal proposal arises out of the wishes
of the appellant rather than any overriding necessity and thereby would conflict with
policies concerned with limiting development in the countryside. In this case,
Buckmore Farm was developed as an exception to countryside policies to meet the
need for a service area on the A3 to cater for the needs of the travelling public. The
Inspector felt that the increase in the range of goods for sale would encourage car
borne movements from surrounding residential and employment areas, thereby
changing the character of the shop from a facility for the travelling public to a local
convenience store. He shared the Council‟s concern that the proposal is not easily
reached on foot or by transport other than the private car. The Inspector considered
pedestrian access across Winchester Road would be likely to give rise to serious
conflict, which would further encourage use of the private car, thereby undermining
national and local sustainable development objectives.

The shop as proposed at Petersfield, would largely intercept the travelling public rather
than generate significant local traffic. Whilst a large number of customers may be
drawn from the traveling public, the shop would nevertheless be attractive to car borne
customers from the local residential areas and the employment area, due to the ease
of parking in the service area. The Inspector considered that any increase in activity by
dedicated car visits to the shop, however small, would be unnecessary intrusion in to
the countryside. As such, the proposal would be contrary to policies that seek to
protect the countryside for its own sake and development plan policies that seek to give
protection to the established landscape quality of the area.

The proposal would not increase the built-up form and appearance of the premises.
However, although the appeal proposal does not extend the physical characteristics of
the service area, the harm to the landscape would not necessarily be lessened
because limiting the floor-space to the existing building would not limit the volume of
local car borne movements attracted by easy parking. The Inspector felt that there
would be conflict with policies that seek to protect and enhance the East Hampshire
AONB and ensure that new development within or adjacent to the area respects the
natural beauty of the landscape. He considered that the increased vehicular activity
associated with the proposal would be particularly noticeable in this location, due to its
prominence in this setting in the landscape. Accordingly, he did not consider that the
internal use of floor-space rather than physical extensions and alterations to the sales
building represent sufficient justification for a proposal that would be inappropriate in
the countryside.

The Inspector concluded on the first issue that the proposal would cause significant
harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside and thereby,
would conflict with the aims and objectives of Structure Plan Policies C1, C2 and E7
and Policies GS2 and ENV1 of the Local Plan.

Issue two, the Inspector considered that the town is thriving. There is good choice of
large and small convenience stores, multiple retailers, a healthy balance of other town
centre uses and few vacant shops. There is good accessibility to and within the town
centre and an attractive environment. The Inspector was satisfied that the appeal
proposal would not have a significant impact on the health of the town centre, due to
the scale and function of the centre to meet daily needs and its easy accessibility by a
choice of means of transport. In his view there would be no conflict with national
planning guidance given in PPG6.




                                  104
5)   F.35234/004/FUL - Detached dwelling and detached double garage with new access,
     Land adjacent to Bashford Lodge, Hill Brow Road, Hill Brow, LISS – The Classic Home
     Company Ltd (Hearing)

     Committee decision – Recommendation Permission

     The development proposed is one 4 bed detached house, detached double garage and
     new access on the northern side of Bashford Lodge.

     At the hearing the Council confirmed that a satisfactory unilateral undertaking to
     provide a payment in lieu of the provision of public open space has been deposited,
     and reason for refusal number 4 has, therefore, been satisfied.

     The Inspector considered that the main issues in this case are:

         The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the
          surrounding area.
         The effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers
          of neighbouring properties

     Hill Brow Road, in which the appeal site is situated, connects the centre of the village of
     Liss with the former A3 London Road, now the B2070, and runs uphill through a variety
     of development, mainly residential, situated in heavily wooded surroundings. The
     appeal site is formed from part of the garden of Bashford Lodge, a detached dwelling
     standing in a generous plot amongst others of similar size on the west side of the road.
     The proposed development related to the demolition of a redundant grass covered
     reservoir and an outbuilding to Bashford Lodge and the erection of a new detached
     house that would have a building line similar to its neighbour at Bashford Lodge. A
     detached garage would have been positioned between the new house and the road on
     the north east corner of the plot. A new access onto the highway would have been
     located in the southern half of the road frontage.

     The Inspector noted that the plot sizes on the west side of the road were generally
     larger than those on the east, and many of the properties are set well back in their
     gardens and are hidden from the road by the dense screen of trees. Apart from one or
     two exceptions, the dwellings in the part of Hill Brow Road in the vicinity of the appeal
     site could only be glimpsed from the public highway.

     The Inspectors who determined recent appeals on nearby sites in Hill Brow Road, at
     Eastcourt and Rudloe Cottages (refs: APP/M1710/A/00/1050198 and
     APP/M1710/AA/01/1057318, documents 9 & 10) concluded that characteristics such as
     gaps between the dwellings and the wide plot boundaries adjacent to this part of Hill
     brow Road do not give the appearance of a built up frontage, but rather of an unbroken
     rural landscape. The Inspector felt that this is an accurate assessment of the character
     of the area, and the environs of the site so not to amount to a built-up frontage.




                                       105
     The Inspector also considered the particular features of this site and felt that while
     views of the proposed dwelling itself would not, in themselves, be harmful in this
     location the extent of the additional built form would reduce the spacious feel that
     presently characterises the area. Although the proposed building plot would have a
     similar area to others in the locality, it would, nevertheless have an uncharacteristically
     long harrow shape. He noted that the site also slopes quite steeply down towards the
     west and the lower part of the proposed rear garden is densely planted with trees,
     which, if removed, would, in his opinion, be detrimental to the landscape characteristics
     of the area. However, if retained, the useable garden area of the new plot would be
     substantially reduced, leaving, in effect, a large house on a limited plot.

     The Inspector considered that these factors, combined with the proximity of the
     proposed dwelling to each side boundary and to Bashford Lodge, would reduce the
     space around the building to an extent that would, in his opinion, cause it to appear
     cramped on the site in comparison to the setting of its neighbours. He found that this
     would be harmful to the established character and appearance of this semi-rural area.

     The Inspector noted the appellant‟s assertion that the proposed development would
     make more efficient use of the land, as required by PPG3. However, PPG3 also refers
     to the need for good design and layout that respects and enhances the local character
     and, in his view, this development would fail to meet these criteria. On this site the
     Inspector felt that the relatively small increase in density that the scheme would provide
     is not sufficient to outweigh the harm caused to the character and appearance of the
     surrounding area that would result. The Inspector considered that the proposed
     development would not meet the aims and objectives of Local Plan policies GS3c.i,
     GS5a.1 and emerging Local Plan policy H9.

     The proposed new house would be situated some 3m from the boundary of the
     neighbouring property at Bashford Lodge, which in turn would be about 1.5m from a
     new 1.8m high boundary fence. There are two windows to a ground floor sitting room
     in the elevation facing this fence and the appeal site, and the Inspector considered that
     the sense of enclosure to these windows would be increased considerably by this
     proximity. Although the room in question has a triple aspect, the other windows admit
     only a small amount of light. The closeness of the new fence, combined with the bulk
     of the proposed new house would, in his opinion create an overbearing visual intrusion.
     This would be harmful to the living conditions of the occupants of the property, contrary
     to the aims of Local Plan policy GS5b.i.

6)   F.26927/004/FUL - Change of use from detached garage to bungalow, 71 London
     Road, LIPHOOK – C F Kennard (Written Representations)

     Delegated decision

     This appeal relates to the refusal of the change of use of the existing detached garage
     to a bungalow.

     The main issues are the effect of the proposed development on the character or
     appearance of the River Wey Conservation Area and the surrounding countryside.

     The Inspector accepted that the whole site is now considered to be within the curtilage
     of the dwelling house. He also noted that at the time of the site visit there were only
     two cars outside and one car within the garage, but he saw nothing to convince him
     that there is any significant commercial use of the premises. Little weight was
     therefore given to the possibility of the premises being used for commercial purposes.



                                       106
     The Inspector considered the River Wey Conservation Area and the reasons behind its
     designation. He also considered that the site retained its distinctive and well-wooded
     rural character which is different to that of the adjoining urban area. The Inspector
     stated that except for the internal fence, the general internal appearance of most of the
     garden between the buildings and the river is of informal open areas that are
     reasonably sympathetic to the character of the river valley. He also describes the
     fence as an unnatural addition to the landscape character of the area.

     The primary concern attached to the proposal is the duplication of domestic
     paraphernalia that is likely to adjoin the additional dwelling, such as cars, touring
     caravans, patios, pergolas, garden sheds, fences, garden seats and tables and
     children's play equipment. The potential for further development on the site (such as a
     garage) could not be ruled out. This would be particularly intrusive in an area which
     has a generally natural and undomesticated character.

     The Inspector concluded that PPG3 encourages the reuse of rural buildings, however
     considered that the protection of the conservation area and the countryside is a matter
     of compelling and overriding concern.

7)   F.37160/FUL - Pitch roofed two storey extension to side and rear, 104 Headley Road,
     LIPHOOK – Mr & Mrs Clegg (Written Representations)

     Delegated decision

     This appeal relates to the refusal of a two storey side extension.
     The main issues are the impact of the proposal in the street scene when view from
     Headley Road and Tunbridge Crescent and the effect on the character of the group of
     semi detached dwellings.
     Relevant Policy is Policy GS5 of the East Hampshire Local Plan, First Review.

     The Inspector noted that the extension would be lower in height and set than the
     original but would still appear incongruous in the street scene and would detract from
     the balance and character of the group of semis. Its close proximity to Tunbridge
     Crescent would have an adverse visual impact on the character and appearance of the
     surrounding residential area.

8)   F.31172/006/FUL - One detached and one pair of two storey dwellings, North, 20
     Station Road, LISS – Mayserve Ltd (Written Representations)

     Delegated decision

     There are two main issues. The first is the effect of the proposed development on the
     character and appearance of the area and the setting of the adjacent Liss Conservation
     Area. The second is its effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of the adjoining
     dwelling, Avoca, with particular regard to overlooking, outlook and light.

     The proposed detached and semi-detached houses would have little affinity with the
     Victorian and Edwardian terraced cottages that characterise development within the
     core of the village. The elevations and roofscape would include a variety of detailing
     that would pay little regard to other buildings nearby. The new driveway, parking and
     turning areas would be an unattractive feature that would dominate the frontage of the
     site when viewed from Limes Close.




                                       107
      The proximity of the building would result in a dominant feature at close quarters. This
      would appear unduly overbearing both when seen from the rear windows of Avoca and
      also from its garden.

North

1a)   F.23708/016/FUL & F.36364 -

      Notice 1

      Appeal against the issue of an Enforcement Notice to secure: the reinstatement of the
      land to its former condition by recontouring the land to a continuous slope. To plant a
      mix of Pine, Silver Birch and Beech trees at a spacing of one tree in every four metres
      squared.

      Notice 2

      Appeal against the issue of an Enforcement Notice to secure: the cessation of the use
      of the land for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles.

      Land at: Follyfield and Bridges Wood, Whitmore Vale, Grayshott, Hindhead, Surrey.

      Delegated decision

      The appeal proceeded on grounds (b), (c), (d), and (f) in respect of the notices.

      Ground (b): that those matters have not occurred as a matter of fact.

      The appellants withdrew Ground (b) during the Inquiry in respect of both notices.

      Ground (c): that the matters (if they occurred) do not constitute a breach of planning
      control.

      The appellants indicated that the engineering works undertaken at the site were
      required in connection with the management of the woodland and for recreation
      purposes, and that changes made to the land did not amount to development for the
      purposes of the 1990 Act. During a site visit to the land, the Inspector observed that the
      engineering works were extensive and had involved the cutting into the land to form a
      level plateau approximately 19 metres long and 12 metres wide. The Inspector also
      found that an access leading down to the road had been formed by scraping and
      cutting into the top surface of the ground.
      The Inspector found that the sheer scale of these earth works was such that they
      represented development for the purposes of Section 55 (1) of the 1990 Act, and
      therefore planning permission was required for these works. Ground (c) appeal failed.

      Ground (d): that, at the date the notice was issued, no enforcement action could be
      taken in respect of any breach of planning control which may be constituted by those
      matters.

      The appellants stated that they had purchased the land in 1979 and at that time it
      contained a small level area of open land. In 1980 engineering operations were carried
      out to enlarge this level area to form a plateau on the land and to improve the existing
      track way leading from the plateau down to the lane. The plateau was used for
      recreational purposes and the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles. In 1987 the
      appellants moved away from the area, and so trips to the area became less frequent.


                                        108
      In 2001 the plateau land was cleared of trees and was enlarged, and the access from
      the road was cleared and excavated in places to allow for vehicular access.

      The Inspector was aware that the appellants‟ witnesses had only walked onto the land
      and had never seen a vehicle parked on the plateau. Local residents gave evidence
      that until last year there had never been any plateau area on the land being used for
      recreational or car parking purposes. The Inspector found that on the balance of
      probability the formation of the plateau and access for the parking and manoeuvring of
      vehicles was undertaken in 2001 and therefore the engineering works along with the
      use of the land were not immune from planning control by either the 4-year rule or the
      10-year rule. Ground (d) appeal failed.

      Ground (f): that the steps required by the notice to be taken, or the activities required
      by the notice to cease, exceed what is necessary to remedy any breach of planning
      control.

      The Inspector was concerned with the requirement in paragraph 5(ii) of Notice No. 1,
      which required the blanket replanting of the entire land with a mix of Pine, Silver Birch,
      and Beech Trees. The Council presented no evidence that the land was previously
      completely wooded and the appellants indicated that of the trees that were felled in the
      plateau area many were dead, dying or dangerous. The Inspector found that after the
      land had been remoulded back to its original contours the area would quickly
      regenerate, and therefore there was no justification for replanting work. The Inspector
      deleted paragraph 5(ii) in its entirety, and added at the end of paragraph 5(i) “including
      the reinstatement of the embankment close to the highway to its former landform i.e.
      before the works took place”. Ground (f) appeal succeeded to this extent.

1b)   F.23708/016/FUL

      Appeal under Section 78 against the refusal to grant planning permission to secure the
      retention of the enlarged area for parking and manoeuvring.

      Land at: Follyfield and Bridges Wood, Whitmore Vale, Grayshott, Hindhead, Surrey.

      The Inspector found that there was one main issue in the appeal, namely the impact of
      the development on the character and appearance of this part of the Area of Special
      Landscape Quality (ASLQ). The Inspector concluded that the development had
      seriously harmed the character and appearance of this part of the ASLQ and had
      undermined the objectives of local planning policies that seek to protect the countryside
      and the special landscape of the area. The Inspector refused to grant planning
      permission and dismissed the appeal.




                                        109
2)   F.23704/008/FUL - Change of use from barn to storage, Weathermore Cottage,
     Weathermore Lane, FOUR MARKS – Mr B Wren (Written Representations)

     Committee decision – Recommendation Permission

     The Inspector considered that the main issue in this appeal is the effect of the
     proposed development on the character and appearance of the rural locality.
     The Inspector saw that access to the site is from Weathermore Lane. Apart from the
     final section close to its junction with Telegraph Lane, this route comprises a narrow,
     unmade track. From the information that he had been given it is evident that this green
     lane and bridleway is greatly valued as an amenity by walkers and horse riders and it is
     frequently used to gain access to the adjoining woodland. The surface is potholed and
     rutted and to her mind it is unsuitable for use by commercial traffic. Vehicles generated
     by the storage use would cause further deterioration of the surface of the track and
     damage to the soft verges and this would significantly diminish its amenity value and its
     character and appearance within this sensitive rural locality.

     The barn was erected to meet the needs of the agricultural holding and she
     acknowledged that there would be some associated vehicular activity. However, the
     acreage is very small and she anticipated that such traffic would be relatively modest.
     Whilst agricultural storage is not restricted to this holding it is clear from the
     representations that there is not a demand from other farms in the locality. The
     potential tenant is a local removals firm who wishes to use the barn for long term
     storage. Although the firm only anticipates generating a very small amount of traffic
     this may not be the case with another operator. There is no guidance that this firm will
     occupy the building or retain occupancy in perpetuity.

     She considered whether the use could be controlled by the imposition of planning
     conditions. It has been suggested that the number or type of vehicle movements could
     be restricted and that the period over which goods would be stored could be controlled.
     She considered that such requirements could not be adequately monitored or
     practicably enforced. The appellant suggested a temporary time limit of three years.
     However, no evidence has been submitted to satisfy her that at the end of this period
     the agricultural use would be likely to resume. If the limited period is intended as a
     “trial run” she considers that it is unlikely to be effective. The impact of the use will
     depend on the requirements of the particular operator.

     Taking all of the above factors into account, she concluded that the proposed
     development would cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the
     rural locality.
     Finally, she noted that PPG7 encourages the re-use and adaptation of existing rural
     buildings for business purposes in order to support the rural economy, avoid vandalism
     and dereliction and reduce demands for new building in the countryside. However, the
     advice does not suggest that such proposals will always be acceptable. In this case
     she considered that any advantages are outweighed by the serious environmental
     objections that she has identified to the main issue.

     PPG7 also encourages farm diversification and the Appellant considered that the
     proposal would enable the farm to remain economically viable until the agricultural
     economy improves. However, it seems to her that this proposal is not intended to
     support the existing agricultural operation but rather to provide an alternative to it. No
     indication has been given as to the circumstances in which the farming enterprise
     would be re-established, especially bearing in mind the poor health of the farmer and
     his wife.



                                        110
3)   F.37093/001/ADV - Retention of illuminated projecting sign, Pharmacy, 4 Oak Green,
     Winchester Road, FOUR MARKS – Four Marks Pharmacy (Written Representations)

     Delegated decision

     The Inspector considered the main issue to be the visual impact of the display.

     The appeal site is the frontage to the pharmacy within a parade of set back commercial
     properties facing the main A31 Road in the village of Four Marks. The road is well lit
     and the shop frontages undistinguished. There is a petrol filling station to the
     immediate south west.

     The projecting sign in place measures about 0.6m x 0.9m. It is a box-like structure,
     capable of internal illumination, containing a green cross in a translucent surround.
     The sign is attached to a slim metal bracket projecting about 0.6m from the wall above
     fascia level, which gives the sign an overall projection of about 1.5m. This not only
     makes it a very prominent, but also makes it appear as a rather clumsy and top-heavy
     addition to the frontage.

     Furthermore, two other smaller projecting signs remain in place immediately below the
     appeal sign. The resultant combined impact is one of unsightly clutter and excess.

     He accepted that the sign is of the type commonly used to indicate the location of a
     pharmacy and has no objection to it in principle. However, the combination of degree
     of projection and number of signs makes it visually unacceptable, even in this
     commonplace commercial setting.

4)   F.23704/008/FUL - Change of use from barn to storage, Weathermore Cottage,
     Weathermore Lane, FOUR MARKS – Mr B Wren (Written Representations)

     Committee decision – Recommendation Permission

     The Inspector considered that the main issue in this appeal is the effect of the
     proposed development on the character and appearance of the rural locality.

     She found that the appeal site is within an attractive area of countryside to the east of
     the settlement of Four Marks. The barn stands within a farmyard close to
     Weathermore Cottage. It is a modern, metal clad structure that was previously used
     for the storage of animal feed, machinery and equipment in association with the
     adjoining farm holding. This comprises several fields of rough grassland to the south
     and east, totaling some 3 hectares. At the time of her visit she observed no livestock
     present apart from a small pony and she understood that the agricultural activity has
     now ceased. The proposal is to re-use the barn for commercial storage.

     Access to the site is from Weathermore Lane. Apart from the final section close to its
     junction with Telegraph Lane, this route comprises a narrow, unmade track. From the
     information that she was given it is evident that this green land and bridleway is greatly
     valued as an amenity by walkers and horse riders and it is frequently used to gain
     access to the adjoining woodland. The surface is potholed and rutted and to her mind
     it is unsuitable for use by commercial traffic. Vehicles generated by the storage use
     would cause further deterioration of the surface of the track and damage to the soft
     verges and this would significantly diminish its amenity value and its character and
     appearance within this sensitive rural locality.




                                       111
                 The barn was erected to meet the needs of the agricultural holding and she
                 acknowledged that there would be some associated vehicular activity. However, the
                 acreage is very small and she anticipated that such traffic would be relatively modest.
                 Whilst agricultural storage is not restricted to this holding it is clear from the
                 representations that there is not a demand from other farms in the locality. The
                 potential tenant is a local removals firm who wishes to use the barn for long term
                 storage. Although this firm only anticipates generating a very small amount of traffic
                 this may not be the case with another operator. There is no guarantee that the firm will
                 occupy the building or retain occupancy in perpetuity.

                 She considered whether the use could be controlled by the imposition of planning
                 conditions, in accordance with advice in Circular 11/95: The use of Conditions in
                 Planning Permissions. It had been suggested that the number or type of vehicle
                 movements could be restricted and that the period over which goods would be stored
                 could be controlled. She considered that such requirements could not be adequately
                 monitored or practicably enforced. Furthermore, neither the Council nor the Appellant
                 has given any indication as to what level of restriction may be considered reasonable.
                 The Appellant has suggested a temporary time limit of three years. However, no
                 evidence had been submitted to satisfy her that at the end of this period the agricultural
                 use would be likely to resume. If the limited period is intended as a “trial run” she
                 considered that it is unlikely to be effective. The impact of the use will depend on the
                 requirements of the particular operator.

                 Taking all of the above factors into account, she concluded that the proposed
                 development would cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the
                 rural locality.

(D)        CONFIRMATION OF ARRANGEMENTS

           North

           1)    F.34729/001/ECOU – Unauthorised siting and use of mobile home for residential
                 purposes, Highland Farm, Lindford Road, Bordon (HEADLEY PARISH) – Mr G Watt
                 (Inquiry)
                 Commencing at 10:00 on Tuesday 21 January 2003 at Selborne Village Hall, Selborne

           2)    F.36928/OUT - Outline - residential development with associated access, Land to the
                 west of St Lucia Lodge, Lindford Road, BORDON – Secretary of State for Defence
                 (Inquiry)
                 Commencing at 10:00am on Thursday 20 February 2003 at The Council Offices,
                 Penns Place, Petersfield and is expected to last for 2 days.

           3)    F.31203/001/FUL - Alterations to east and north elevations and change of use from
                 shop to self contained flat (amended description), The Gateway Buttery, High Street,
                 HEADLEY – Mr & Mrs R Butcher (Hearing)
                 Commencing at 10:00am on Tuesday 10 June 2003 at The Meadow Room, Kingsley
                 Village Centre, Main Road, Kingsley.

Note: Copies of the Inspector‟s Appeal Decision Letters are available for inspection in the Member‟s
room and will also be brought to the meeting.




                                                   112
                         EAST HAMPSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL

                            SOUTH PLANNING COMMITTEE

                    REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING CONTROL

                    DECISIONS MADE UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

                            MATTERS RELATING TO TREES

                                                                               PC.35/2003
                                                                          6 February 2003

SECTION VIII – CONFIRMATION OF UNOPPOSED TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS

1.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (Coldhill Copse, Lovedean Lane, Horndean)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH480) 2002

2.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (Land at Hawks Mead, Liss)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH478) 2002

3.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (Land at Green Lane, Clanfield)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH481) 2002

4.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (Land at the Causeway, Petersfield)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH483) 2002

5.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (Woodland to the north of Corn Rigs, Bell Hill, Petersfield)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH505) 2002

6.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (85 Headley Road, Liphook)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH509) 2002

7.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (Old Bell Cottage, High Street, East Meon)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH513) 2002

8.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (Rookery Farm House, Ramsdean)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH514) 2002

9.0     EAST HAMPSHIRE (32 London Road, Liphook)
        TREE PRESERVATION ORDER (EH536) 2002




                                          113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:9
posted:11/13/2011
language:English
pages:123