Agenda and draft minutes

To record the names of apologies given and Deputy Members who are attending the meeting in place of appointed Members.

Apologies were noted as above.

To receive any disclosure of interests from Councillors or Officers in matters to be discussed.

Note: Councillors are reminded of their obligations to declare disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs), other registerable interests (ORIs), non-registerable interests (NRIs) and on Pre-determination or Bias in accordance with legislation and the Council’s Code of Conduct.

If you require advice, please contact the appropriate Democratic Services Officer, prior to the meeting.

Councillor Jonathan Williams declared a disclosable pecuniary interest due to his role as a Hampshire County Councillor. However, as there was no material conflict of interest, he remained in the room, spoke and voted under the dispensation granted on behalf of the Audit and Governance Committee.

Councillor Brian Laming made a personal statement that he was a Ward Member in respect of the item: 1 Sussex Close Hursley Winchester Hampshire SO21 2JQ (Case Ref: 25/01003/HOU) (Pages 63 - 90). However, he had taken no part in discussions regarding the application, therefore he took part in the consideration of the item and voted thereon.

Councillor Paula Langford-Smith made a personal statement that she was a Ward Member in respect of the item: Land to the Rear of the Chairmakers Arms Forest Road Worlds End Hambledon (Case Ref: 25/01078/FUL) (Pages 15 - 42). However, she had taken no part in discussions regarding the application, therefore she took part in the consideration of the item and voted thereon.

Councillor Jerry Pett declared a disclosable pecuniary interest due to his role as a member of the South Downs National Park Authority. However, as there was no material conflict of interest, he remained in the room, spoke and voted under the dispensation granted on behalf by the Monitoring Officer.

 Minutes of the previous meeting held on 24 September 2025.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 24 September 2025 be approved and adopted.

The committee agreed to receive the Update Sheet as an addendum to the

report

A copy of each planning application decision is available to view on the council’s website under the respective planning application.

The committee considered the following items:

Proposal Description: Material Change of Use of Land to a 2 Pitch Gypsy/Traveller Site comprising the siting of 1 Mobile Home, 1 Touring Caravan, and 1 Utility Room per pitch. Retention of hardstanding and fencing. (amended description).

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the update sheet which provided additional information regarding a relevant appeal, ref: APP/L1765/C/23/3320989 (Plot 2, Pony Paddock, Land adjacent to the Chairmakers Arms) which was determined by the Planning Inspectorate on the 1st of October 2025. It was advised that this decision was relevant to this application as the site was closely related to this application and was for a single gypsy/traveller pitch. Further details were set out within the update sheet.

In addition, the case officer informed the committee that the applicant's agent had confirmed that the site was occupied and so recommended that Condition 2 be re-worded to reflect this.

During public participation, Denise Searle spoke in objection to the application, and Councillor Chris Ranger on behalf of Denmead Parish Council spoke in objection to the application and answered members' questions.

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application. The committee received advice from the Legal Adviser regarding the 5-year supply of traveller site provision and the resulting engagement of the ‘tilted balance’ principle. He also clarified the status of ongoing enforcement appeals, the basis for temporary planning permission, and the considerations related to setting a planning precedent.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report and the update sheet, and subject to the following:

a)    That permission be granted for a temporary, 5-year period.

b)    That an additional condition be included that the site be returned to its original state at the expiry of the five-year period.

c)    That Condition No 2 be amended to require compliance within three months of the date of permission.

Proposal Description: Change of use of 86 Thurmond Crescent from its current classification under Use Class C4 (House in Multiple Occupation) to Use Class C2 (Residential Institution). The proposed change will facilitate the establishment of a small children’s residential care home.

The application was introduced and during public participation, Mrs Ifeoma Ozoemena spoke in support of the application and answered members' questions. The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

Proposal Description: Single storey rear extension (amended plans).

The application was introduced and during public participation, Claudia Wellner spoke in objection to the application, and Mark Benzie spoke in support of the application and answered members' questions.

Councillor Adrian Brophy spoke as a ward member and expressed several points on behalf of residents which could be summarised as follows.

1. He stated that he had called the application to the committee because he believed the design would have an adverse impact on neighbouring homes.
2. Whilst acknowledging the applicant's willingness to modify plans, he felt the changes did not sufficiently address the loss of light and overshadowing issues for the garden and windows of the neighbouring property at Number 2 Sussex Close.
3. He noted that the proposed extension was built up to the shared boundary, and he agreed with neighbours' fears that it would be too tall and block sunlight.
4. Although the application passed the 45-degree elevation test, he argued that due to the narrow nature of the gardens and proximity to the boundary, nearly half of the neighbouring garden would be overshadowed, particularly affecting evening light in certain seasons.
5. He believed the design complied only with the "letter" of the 45-degree guideline, not its "spirit," and reminded the Committee that it was a guideline, not a law.
6. A secondary issue was raised concerning the overall impact on the street scene, as the side elevation was highly visible from Main Road and Port Lane within a conservation area.
7. In conclusion, he asked that the committee consider the wider impacts of its size, proximity to the boundary, and the overall effect on the street scene and the neighbouring property.

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application. The committee received advice from the Legal advisor, who clarified that the Party Wall Act, the right to light, and light pollution are matters that could be dealt with under private law and parallel regimes such as Environmental Health.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

Proposal Description: That, having taken into consideration the representations received, Tree Preservation Order 2360 be confirmed.

The application was introduced, and members were provided with a presentation which included photographs provided by an objector. The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

RESOLVED

That, having taken into consideration the representations received, Tree Preservation Order 2360 be confirmed, as set out in the report.

The report set out a summary of the 15 planning appeal decisions for the period 1 July 2025 to 30 September 2025.

RESOLVED:

That the summary of planning and enforcement appeal decisions received during the period 1 July 2025 to 30 September 2025 be noted.