Planning Committee Full Reports 16 June 2026

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

• Conservation Area
• Flood Zone

Principal Development Plan Policies

• DP2 General development principles
• DP12 Flood risk
• DP18 Design principles
• DP36 Extensions to dwellings
• DP37 Outbuildings
• SP14 Renewable energy
• SP15 Tranquillity
• SP16 The historic and built environment
• SP17 Local distinctiveness

Supplementary Planning Documents

• Design Guide SPD
• Copythorne Parish Design Statement SPD

NPPF

• Sec 12 - Achieving well-designed places
• Sec 15 - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment
• Sec 16 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Copythorne Parish Council: Recommend permission. Whilst we recognise policy, we find the aesthetic of the proposed works perfectly acceptable as they make the property more functional.

5. CONSULTEES

Building Design and Conservation Area Team: Support subject to condition.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

Single storey rear extension; roof alteration to existing extension (25/01169LDCP)- certificate issued (permitted development) on 04 February 2026.

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 The application site is located on the eastern side of Newbridge Road in Cadnam within the Forest Central (North) Conservation Area. The dwelling has been identified as a Non-Designated Heritage Asset (NDHA) and is therefore afforded a degree of protection proportionate to its status through both national and local planning policy. Residential properties lie to the north and south. The site lies within Environment Agency Flood Zones 2 and 3.

Proposed Development

8.2 This application seeks permission for a single storey rear extension, demolition of an existing single storey element; and an outbuilding. The extension would include two rear gables and bifold doors and five solar panels on each of the south western facing roof slopes. The materials would comprise brickwork to the lower 0.8 metres with smooth cream render proposed to the upper 1.6 metres; natural oak cladding on the apex of the rear gables and slate tiles. An open sided porch is also proposed on the existing front elevation.

8.3 The outbuilding would comprise a single car garage and lean to, located to the south of the dwelling. The materials proposed are to match that of the proposed treatment to the main dwelling with oak timber cladding to the apex, both on the rear and front elevations and render and brickwork to the walls, slate to the roof. Garage doors are proposed to the front elevation and a door to the north eastern elevation under the lean-to addition.

Planning Background

8.4 This application follows a Lawful Development Certificate (reference 25/01169LDCP) for a single storey rear extension and alterations to the roof of an existing rear single storey element. The extent of the original rear wall, for the purposes of applying Class A of Part 1, Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) (herein referred to as the “GPDO”), was considered to comprise the existing single storey rear projection, however, not the conservatory. The resultant floorspace amounted to approximately 107 square metres.

Consideration

8.5 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2024 (herein referred to as the “NPPF”), require that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

8.6 The key considerations in this case are: compliance with Policies DP36 and DP37 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (2019) (herein referred to as the ‘Local Plan’); the design of the proposed development and impact on heritage assets; the impact on neighbour amenity; and flood risk considerations.

Policy Background

8.7 Paragraph 189 of the NPPF states that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and National Landscapes which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. The scale and extent of development within all these designated areas should be limited, while development within their setting should be sensitively located and designed to avoid or minimise adverse impacts on the designated areas. It is the statutory duty of all English National Parks to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the National Park (being the first statutory purpose as set out in the Environment Act 1995).

8.8 The New Forest National Park is the smallest National Park in England and despite this, the New Forest has one of the highest population densities and has one of the highest development control caseloads across the 10 English National Parks. It is therefore under significant development pressure being located between two major conurbations of Southampton and Bournemouth. The designation of the area as a National Park in 2005 helps protect its future and the very qualities that make it special.

8.9 It is also the statutory duty of all English National Parks to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the National Park (being the first statutory purpose as set out in the Environment Act 1995). In addition, Section 5 of the NPPF identifies that planning policies should reflect requirements for a range of housing types and different sizes and affordability. Local Plan Policy SP17 importantly recognises the cumulative impact that individual proposals can have in terms of their harmful urbanising impact which can erode the special rural qualities of the New Forest National Park.

8.10 Policy DP36 of the Local Plan sets out that extensions to dwellings will be permitted provided they are appropriate to the existing dwelling and curtilage and, in the case of dwellings which are not small dwellings, the extension must not result in a total internal habitable floor space exceeding 30% of the floorspace on 1st July 1982. In all cases, the Authority will have regard to the scale and character of the core element of the original dwelling (rather than subsequent additions) in determining whether an extension is sympathetic to the dwelling. The assessment of whether a proposed extension is “appropriate to the existing dwelling and its curtilage” is determined by reference to the respective floorspace limitations. This policy does not permit a broader assessment of whether an extension is ‘appropriate’ and does not invite other material planning considerations to be assessed such that they could outweigh the fundamental policy conflict, aside from in cases where there is a genuine family need. Although not a case being asserted, the genuine family need is defined, for the purposes of the policy, as “an exceptional and unique family need that could not have been reasonably anticipated at the time of purchase of the property”, with the additional floorspace, being that above and beyond the 30% limitation, required to cater for, for example, specialist equipment and facilities in connection with an unforeseen event whilst in occupation of the property.

8.11 Policy DP36 of the adopted Local Plan has been carried forward through successive local plans for the New Forest over the last 30 years. When the National Park's Local Plan (2016-2036) was adopted in 2019, the Inspectors endorsed this policy as an appropriate way to ensure that extensions would not cumulatively erode the modest scale and rural character of the dwellings within the National Park. However, to be effective, it must be consistently applied. Any departure from policy would weaken both its application and the ability of the National Park Authority to meet its statutory purpose to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the National Park.

Consideration

8.12 The property is located outside of the defined New Forest villages and is not a small dwelling. Therefore the 30% floor space restriction contained within Policy DP36 applies. It has been calculated the proposal would result in a total floorspace of 116 square metres, which represents a 38% increase over that which existed on the baseline date of 01 July 1982. The proposal therefore clearly exceeds the relevant floorspace limitation of DP36 and as such, is contrary to policy.

8.13 Whilst the submitted Planning Statement references the 120 square metres which can be permitted in the case of a genuine, exceptional circumstance (see paragraph 8.10 of this report), it fails to correctly justify this need. Paragraph 5.4 of the Planning Statement notes that “the proposed extension to 116 sq. metres represents the minimum floor area required to deliver a high￾quality, architecturally sympathetic design. It remains well within the 120 sq. metre limit permitted for exceptional design circumstances under Policy DP11.” It should be made clear at this point that the policies referred to within the Planning Statement are those within a previous Development Plan, being the Core Strategy. This was superseded in 2019 on adoption of the current Local Plan and therefore forms no part of the current statutory development plan for the National Park. Whilst under DP11 of the Core Strategy, the additional floorspace could, in principle, be used to meet design considerations relating to the special character of the dwelling, this provision was not carried through into the Local Plan, and the primary purpose of the additional floorspace as part of a genuine family need is as set out at paragraph 8.10 of this report. There is clear conflict with the current adopted policy on floorspace contained within Policy DP36.

8.14 Whilst no case in respect of a fallback position has been put forward, the floorspace which could be achieved by means of implementing the permitted development scheme is noted as 107 square metres. As this figure is less than the maximum which could otherwise be achieved under Policy DP36, i.e. it would comply with the 30% limitation, this holds no weight in determining the application. No case for any other material planning considerations to justify a clear departure from one of the key development plan policies has been made.. Policy DP36 was found 'sound' by the two Government-appointed Planning Inspectors who independently examined the draft New Forest National Park Local Plan in 2018 - 19 before issuing their binding report. If this was the approach taken to all applications seeking to enlarge the floorspace, the Policy would become obsolete, the plan-led system would be fundamentally eroded and incremental impacts on the National Park would be enabled. Policy DP36 is consistent with the approach taken in several development plans in other English National Parks and to support such a departure from a key policy undermines the role the planning system plays in protecting National Parks. It is not considered appropriate to consider any purported merits of the development as outweighing the fundamental policy objective and the means by which this is assessed, as set out in the statutory development plan for the New Forest National Park, being the relevant floorspace limitations.

8.15 The dimensions of the proposed porch would exceed those otherwise considered permitted development by virtue of Class D of the GPDO, however, it has been designed to be open￾sided. In accordance with the Authority’s Planning Information Leaflet, to avoid the floor area within the porch from being included within the calculations (thereby resulting in a further breach to the floorspace restriction) a condition could reasonably be imposed securing the design such that the porch would remain open-sided.

8.16 Whilst, in principle, the design of the proposal may not be objectionable and the porch can be excluded from the floorspace calculations, these factors do not outweigh the fundamental policy conflict as set out above. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy DP36 of the Local Plan.

8.17 Additionally, the proposal seeks to construct an outbuilding located to the south of the dwelling, directly adjacent to the boundary with the neighbouring property of Hollybank Cottage. Local Plan Policy DP37 permits outbuildings where they are proportionate and clearly subservient to the dwelling they are to server in terms of design, scale, size, height and massing; located within the residential curtilage of the existing dwelling; used for purposes incidental to the use of the main dwelling, not providing additional habitable accommodation and will not reduce private amenity space to an unacceptable level. In this regard the proposed outbuilding would meet these requirements and there is no policy objection in relation to this element.

8.18 The site is located within the Forest Central (North) Conservation Area. There is a duty imposed by Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requiring decision makers to have special regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area and this is reflected in Policy SP16 of the adopted Local Plan.

8.19 Paragraph 202 of the NPPF sets out that heritage assets including sites and buildings of local historic interest are an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of existing and future generations. Policy SP16 of the Local Plan provides stronger heritage protection than the NPPF, requiring that development within the National Park should conserve and enhance the significance or special interest of designated or non-designated heritage assets. They should: (a)(iii) make a positive contribution to, or better reveal, or enhance the appreciation of, the significance or special interest of a heritage asset or its setting.

8.20 In relation to the impact on heritage assets, the Authority's Building Design and Conservation Team has been consulted and consider that the design of the extension with low ridge ensures the extension remains subordinate and that the number and positioning of PV panels would not be overly conspicuous. The materials proposed would be appropriate and it is noted that the slate roofing would be positive being more in keeping with palette of the conservation area. The garage is also considered appropriate in its context. Comments are made in relation to window details, which could be addressed by condition. Comments are also made in relation to the loss of the chimney stacks.

8.21 Taking into account the above comments and the information provided with the application and from the site visit, it is assessed overall that the proposed design and materials would be in keeping with the Conservation Area and, despite the loss of the chimneys, would not harm the architectural interest of the NHDA to such a degree as to justify a refusal on this basis. However, and whilst there is no overall objection from the Building Design and Conservation Team, this in itself does not outweigh the strong policy conflict in relation to floor space and Policy DP36, as identified above.

8.22 Given the single storey nature of the proposal, the separation distances of the dwelling from its respective neighbours and boundary treatments present, it is not considered that there would be any adverse impact on neighbouring amenity which would arise as a result of the development.

8.23 The site is located within Environment Agency Flood Zone 3. No Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted, and similarly, no information has been provided in respect of finished floor levels or flood resilience measures contrary to standing advice. Whilst the submitted Sustainability Statement sets out that permeable materials would be used within the plot and surface water run￾off from the new roof would be managed through a Sustainable Urban Drainage System to ensure no increase in runoff to the surrounding area, this does not adequately demonstrate that due consideration has been given to the risk. As such, it cannot be determined whether the development would either be adversely affected by a flood event or exacerbate the existing level of risk.

Conclusion

8.24 Whilst no conflict in respect of the proposed outbuilding or the design of the extension has been identified, the enlargement of this dwelling is contrary to the long standing and fundamental local and national planning policies designed to protect the New Forest National Park. Policy DP36, which has been endorsed by Local Plan Inspectors, is an appropriate way to protect the National Park and its housing stock from the successive, cumulative enlargement of dwellings. It must be consistently applied to ensure it remains an effective tool for the protection of the National Park from such inappropriate development, which would individually and cumulatively erode the Park's local character. For all these reasons, the proposed enlargement of the dwelling is contrary to long standing local and national planning policies designed to protect the New Forest National Park. In addition, insufficient information has been provided in relation to flood risk matters.

8.25 It is therefore recommended that permission be refused.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Refuse

Reason(s) for refusal:

1. In order to help safeguard the long term future of the countryside and the intrinsic character of the National Park, the Local Planning Authority considers it important to resist the cumulative effect of enlargements being made to rural dwellings. Consequently, Policy DP36 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019) seeks to limit the proportional increase in the size of such dwellings in the New Forest National Park recognising the benefits this would have in minimising the impact of buildings on a nationally important landscape and activity generally in the countryside as well as maintaining a balance in the housing stock. The proposal would result in an extension that would increase the floor space of the existing dwelling by more than 30% and in doing so would add to pressures for change and larger extensions in the countryside which, individually and cumulatively, would result in a gradual suburbanising effect and erode the National Park's special character. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policy DP36 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan (August 2019). Furthermore, the proposed development would not seek to further the purposes of the National Park, contrary to the requirement of Section 245 of the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023, which amended Section 11A of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949
2. The proposed development comprises a minor extension in Environment Agency Flood Zones 2 and 3. Insufficient information has been provided to ascertain the flood risk impacts of the proposal and whether it would be appropriately flood resistant and resilient contrary to standing advice. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policy DP12 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan (August 2019) and Section 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

No specific designations.

Principal Development Plan Policies

• DP2 General development principles
• DP18 Design principles
• DP36 Extensions to dwellings
• SP7 Landscape character
• SP15 Tranquillity
• SP17 Local distinctiveness

Supplementary Planning Documents

• Design Guide SPD

NPPF

• Sec 12 - Achieving well-designed places
• Sec 15 - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received.

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Landford Parish Council: Recommend refusal.

Comments:

Councillors visited this site on 08.04.26 and commented that this is a retrospective planning application. The applicants have already done the work, built it, and then put a planning application in. As far as the Councillors were concerned, from a material planning consideration, it is not in keeping with the local character of the area and on that basis, they are mindful to say that it should be refused. Councillors felt that design principles DP18 has not been met. It does not enhance the area, nor copy sustainability and design, the roofing materials are completely different and not in keeping with the main part of the building. It has not met SP17 local distinctiveness, and Councillors wanted to request that the Planning Officer checks the dimensions as there is a concern that they may not be as stated.

On visiting the site, Councillors became aware that there are caravans on site which are clearly being used for the purposes of living in and no applications appear to have been received concerning this. Caravans have been fenced and partitioned off from 2 no. single story extensions with foliage planted in front of the fenced area. It is requested that the Planning Officer who visits the site, notes within the curtilage there is a mobile home and caravan, fenced in as if for permanent, long-term occupation, creating multiple occupancy within the curtilage. It was also noted that there is a lot happening on that site, including a construction and ground works, which need to be fully investigated by the Planning Officer.

5. CONSULTEES

None required.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

No relevant planning history.

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 The application site is located to the north of Hamptworth Road and comprises a semi-detached pair of two storey dwellings owned by the Hamptworth Estate. Access into the site is to the west of the dwellings; a large hardstanding area is located to the immediate north and north west, with the garden areas to the south west, south and north east. The properties are well screened from the highway by mature hedgerows, and the rear of the properties adjoins land at Hamptworth Golf Club.

Proposed Development

8.2 This application seeks permission for the erection of single storey extensions to each dwelling. The development commenced in September 2025 and was completed in October 2025; as such, the application is retrospective. While noting the comments and concerns of Landford Parish Council, national planning policy confirms that the fact the application is retrospective is not material to its determination.

Consideration

8.3 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and paragraph 48 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) require that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

8.4 The key considerations in assessing the application relate to compliance with Policy DP36 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (2019) ("the Local Plan"); the impact upon neighbouring amenity; and the impact upon the character and appearance of the area. As the development is retrospective, the actual impacts can be assessed.

8.5 The properties are located outside of the defined New Forest villages as identified within Policy SP4 of the adopted Local Plan and are not small dwellings as per the definition within the supporting text to Policy DP36. Therefore the 30% floor space restriction contained within Policy DP36 applies to each respective dwelling. As such, it has been calculated that the extensions do not exceed this requirement. By reason of the ‘stepped’ original rear elevation, the utilisation of permitted development rights to further enlarge the dwellings would not be possible. As such, it is not considered reasonable or necessary to remove such rights.

8.6 Policy DP18 of the Local Plan requires all new development to achieve the highest standards of design, including location, layout, size, scale, details and materials, with particular regard to, relevant to this application, ensuring development is contextually appropriate and does not harm key visual features, landscape setting or other valued components of the landscape. The dwellings, being a semi-detached pair, are symmetrical in their design and appearance, with the original rear elevations comprising three rear walls as a result of single storey projections of varying depths. These single storey elements were demolished, and the extensions the subject of this application adjoined to the outer-most elevation which forms each respective side elevation. As such, the rear extensions measure approximately four metres in depth and span the entirety of the rear elevation. Each extension features one pedestrian door and one window; the extensions have been built in brick and painted white, to match the remainder of the dwellings. It is noted that this was likely undertaken on completion of the extensions, as publicly available imagery shows the dwellings were previously unpainted.

8.7 The Parish Council have raised an objection in relation to the design of the development, and do not consider it to be in keeping with the local character of the area. The grain of development along the length of Hamptworth Road is sparse, with properties located to the north of the highway. There is a prevailing rural, verdant character, reinforced by mature boundary hedgerows. In respect of the character of the surrounding built environment, Hamptworth Golf Club is located to the rear of the site, which comprises various buildings constructed of a range of materials. The closest residential property of Elmtree Farmhouse, to the west, is of brick construction, and can reasonably be said to not be of any historic or architectural interest. The nearest listed buildings are not viewed in the context of the application site by reason of the separation distances and intervening buildings and vegetation. Prior to the development occurring, the subject dwellings were of no architectural merit. It is considered that the white painted brickwork results in a more sympathetic appearance, enhancing the character of the area. The extensions can be glimpsed from the highway by reason of the driveway access, however, are otherwise screened from public views by the dense vegetation along all boundaries. Whilst this in itself is not an indicator in respect of the acceptability of any proposal, the scale and appearance of the extensions is modest and within the policy limits set in the adopted Local Plan. The development is therefore considered to conserve, and not detract from or result in harm to, the natural beauty of the National Park, and therefore would not have any adverse impact upon the intrinsic landscape character of the local or wider area. As such, the development is considered to adhere to the requirements of Policies DP18, SP7 and SP15 of the Local Plan.

8.8 As a semi-detached pair, the extensions have an identical impact on each respective dwelling, however given the identical nature of the extensions, in combination with the single storey scale, it is not considered that any significantly exacerbated impact in respect of loss of light, loss of privacy or overbearing impact has occurred. There are no other immediately adjacent residential properties which would be impacted by the development. The development therefore accords with Policy DP2 in this respect.

8.9 Overall, the development is modest and appropriate in scale, resulting in no adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the area, or upon the intrinsic landscape character. There are no adverse impacts upon neighbouring amenity. Whilst no external lighting is proposed, as the site is located within a notably tranquil area of the National Park, it is considered reasonable and necessary to condition external lighting in accordance with policy SP15 and paragraph 198 of the NPPF (2024).

Conclusion

8.10 It is therefore recommended that permission be granted, as the proposal accords with Policies DP2, DP18, DP36, SP7, SP15 and SP17 of the New Forest National Park Authority Local Plan 2016-2036 (adopted 2019).

9. RECOMMENDATION

Grant Subject to Conditions

Condition(s)

1. Development shall only be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers:

   DR1, DR2, 2026-01 Rev A

   No alterations to the approved development shall be made unless otherwise agreed in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority.

   Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with Policies SP16, SP17, DP18 and DP2 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016- 2036 (August 2019).

2. No external lighting shall be installed on the site unless details of such proposals have been submitted to and approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority.

   Reason: To protect the amenities of the area in accordance with Policies DP2 and SP15 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).