Planning Committee Full Reports 18 August 2026

Summary

AI generated summary

Planning officers’ reports for the New Forest National Park Authority Planning Committee meeting on 18 August 2026 assess six applications, mainly against amenity, public safety, design, heritage, tranquillity and flood risk policies. They recommend granting advertisement consent for new non-illuminated Skoda dealership signage in Brockenhurst, and for two non-illuminated tourist noticeboards in the Brockenhurst public car park within the conservation area. They also recommend approval for works at the Grade II listed Yew Tree Cottage, Minstead, including an amended outbuilding extension, solar panels, heat pump, window and door changes, and internal alterations, with conditions to protect heritage character and limit lighting. Removal of conditions restricting permitted development and garage conversion at Walden Cottage, Brockenhurst is recommended. A rear extension at Cardan House, Cadnam is recommended despite exceeding small-dwelling size limits, due to exceptional health-related needs and acceptable flood-risk mitigation.

Download PDF Download PDF Contact us for other formats Contact us for other formats

Document Viewer

Planning Committee - 18 August 2026 Report Item 1

Application No: 26/00190ADV Advertisement Consent
Site: Meadens Ltd, Meadens Skoda of Brockenhurst, Sway Road, Brockenhurst SO42 7SH
Proposal: Display of 2no. facia signs (non-illuminated); 1no. entrance portal (non-illuminated); 1no. double sided flag sign (non-illuminated); removal of existing signage (Application for Advertisement Consent)
Applicant: Meadens SKODA
Case Officer: Liz Young
Parish: Brockenhurst Parish Council

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view.

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

Defined New Forest Village

Principal Development Plan Policies

Policy SP1 Supporting sustainable development
Policy DP2 General development principles
Policy SP4 Spatial strategy
Policy SP7 Landscape character
Policy SP15 Tranquillity
Policy SP17 Local distinctiveness
Policy DP18 Design principles

Supplementary Planning Documents

Design Guide SPD

NPPF

Sec. 2. Achieving sustainable development
Sec. 4. Decision-making
Sec. 8. Promoting healthy and safe communities
Sec. 9. Promoting sustainable transport
Sec. 12. Achieving well-designed places
Sec. 15. Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Brockenhurst Parish Council: Recommend refusal.

Whilst improved, the proposal remains contrary to the street scene and the rural village setting.

5. CONSULTEES

None required.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

Two comments received (including one from Friends of Brockenhurst) raising the following concerns:

All the signs subject to the current application were previously rejected under case 25/01471ADV.
This is a retrospective application.
The double-sided flag sign now in place is illuminated.
There has never been planning approval granted for an illuminated flag sign, or for that matter any illuminated signage or facias at this site.
Previous decisions have determined that metal rather than a vinyl would be more appropriate on this site.
Harmful impact on dark skies / suburbanising impacts.
The application does not reflect what is currently on site.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

Display of 2 no. illuminated fascia sign; 1 no. illuminated pylon sign; new illuminated entrance portal; removal of existing signage (25/01471ADV) refused on 12 February 2026
Installation of 1no. non-illuminated Skoda projecting Flag sign mounted on a 3.7 metre high pole (Application for Advertisement Consent) (17/01038) granted on 30 January 2018
Application to vary condition 7 of planning permission reference 17/01037 for formalisation of car park; alterations to access; associated landscaping to allow commencement of work using existing access and visibility splays (20/00077) granted on 01 April 2020
Formalisation of car park; alterations to access; associated landscaping (17/01037) granted on 20 February 2018
Installation of 1No. Internally illuminated pylon sign (Application for Advertisement Consent) (17/00619) withdrawn on 21 September 2017
Creation of car park; alterations to access; associated landscaping (17/00618) withdrawn on 21 September 2017
Demolition of Garage/Showroom (Application for Prior Notification under Part 11 (Class B) Town and Country Planning (GPDO 2016) (17/00358) details not required (Prior) on 24 May 2017
Application to vary conditions 2 and 3 of planning permission reference 15/00485 (to allow a minor material amendment to roofing materials and cladding) (16/00012) granted on 23 February 2016
1No. non-illuminated fascia sign; 1No. non-illuminated hoarding sign; 1No. non-illuminated hanging sign (Application for Advertisement Consent) (15/00512) granted on 23 February 2016
Alterations to showroom; Demolition of existing extensions (15/00485) granted on 04 August 2015
Display of 3no internally illuminated fascia signs; 1no internally illuminated sign; 3no non illuminated static banners (Application for Advertisement Consent) (14/00373) refused on 31 July 2014
5 no. internally illuminated facia signs (13/98930) refused on 10 December 2013
3 no non-illuminated fascia signs; 2 no non-illuminated sets of corner lights; 1 no non-illuminated portico entrance surround; 1 no non-illuminated totem pole (12/97854) split decision on 15 November 2012
1 free standing illuminated totem sign; 3 non-illuminates fabric flags; 1 illuminated fascia including portico entrance surround (12/97589) refused on 10 August 2012

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 The Application site measures approximately 0.2 hectares in size and comprises a car sales establishment located within the defined village boundary of Brockenhurst. The main building is prominently sited and fronts onto Sway Road, a B Classified highway, which bounds the western extent of the site. The main external display areas lie immediately to the front of the building on the boundary with Sway Road and also to the south of the main building.

8.2 The immediate locality comprises predominantly residential uses. The Brockenhurst Conservation Area lies approximately 70 metres to the north-west.

Proposed Development

8.3 Advertisement consent is now sought to retain two fascia signs, one entrance portal (all these being located on the front façade of the building), and a double-sided pole sign (in the south-west corner of the site). The signs to the building frontage reach a maximum height of 4.1 metres. The pole sign measures 4.5 metres in height. All of the signs are acrylic and the applicant has stated that they are not illuminated

Planning Background

8.4 By way of background, this application has been submitted in order to address a previously refused application for advertisement consent. The earlier scheme comprised two illuminated fascia signs extending along the majority of the building frontage and an illuminated feature surrounding the main entrance door (application reference: 25/01471ADV). The application was refused on the grounds that it would have an unacceptably adverse impact upon the character of the area through the erosion of both local character and the dark skies of the New Forest, also giving rise to loss of night-time tranquillity.

Consideration

8.5 Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 requires that local planning authorities control the display of advertisements in the interests of amenity and public safety, taking into account the provisions of the development plan, in so far as they are material, and any other relevant factors. Unless the nature of the advertisement is in itself harmful to amenity or public safety, consent cannot be refused because the local planning authority considers the advertisement to be misleading or unnecessary.

8.6 The adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (2019) (herein referred to as the 'Local Plan') does not rule out the general principle of introducing signage to existing commercial premises and therefore the general principle of the proposal is considered acceptable subject to having regard to all relevant development plan policies alongside any material planning considerations, including the provisions within the NPPF.

8.7 Paragraph 141 of the NPPF states that advertisements should be subject to control only in the interests of amenity and public safety, taking account of cumulative impacts. Planning Practice Guidance similarly advises that advertisements are controlled with reference to their effect on amenity and public safety only. These therefore form the key issues to consider for the purposes of this application for advertisement consent.

Public Safety

8.8 With regards to public safety, Planning Practice Guidance recognises that all advertisements are intended to attract attention but states that proposed advertisements at points where drivers need to take more care are more likely to affect public safety, for example at junctions, roundabouts, pedestrian crossings or other places where local conditions present traffic hazards. It states that there are less likely to be road safety problems if the advertisement is on a site within a commercial or industrial locality, if it is a shop fascia sign, name-board, trade or business sign, or a normal poster panel, and if the advertisement is not on the skyline.

8.9 The guidance also states that the Highway Authority must be consulted by the local planning authority if an application for express consent relates to a proposed advertisement that is visible from the highway and has moving features, moving parts or flashing lights.

8.10 In this instance (as identified at the time of the previous application), the signs are not located on a prominent road junction. Whilst the signage is visible from the highway, it replaces pre-existing signage of a similar layout, and the signage now applied for is set back from the main frontage. No moving features are included within the design and impacts upon highway safety have not been raised as a specific concern in the case of the previously refused application for advertisement consent on the site under reference 25/01471ADV. On this basis, it is concluded that in accordance with Policy DP2, the signs do not result in unacceptable adverse impacts associated with traffic or public safety.

Amenity

8.11 With regards to amenity considerations, Planning Practice Guidance clarifies that when assessing advert proposals, amenity includes aural and visual amenity and that relevant factors include the general characteristics of the locality, including the presence of any features of historic, architectural, cultural or similar interest. It advises of the need to consider the local characteristics of the neighbourhood, for example, if the locality where the advertisement is to be displayed has historic features, the local planning authority would consider whether it is in scale and in keeping with these features.

8.12 Pages 35 and 36 of the Authority's Design Guide SPD promote the use of traditional materials in the design of advertisements, particularly in Burley, Brockenhurst and Lyndhurst. It states that where new fascias and signs are proposed, these should be as small as possible, in proportion to the scale of the building and should not be internally illuminated. It states that the colour of lettering is often crucial to the impact, and that oversized lettering should always be avoided. It states that external lighting should be avoided unless it is for a business which needs to open at dusk and in the evening. With regards to materials, it states that the use of timber rather than acrylic fascias, will be supported, as will hand-painted fascias over acrylic applied lettering, and that such “shiny, plasticky signs look poor”.

8.13 The Local Plan is consistent with paragraph 141 of the NPPF which states that the quality and character of places can suffer when advertisements are poorly sited and designed.

8.14 Whilst the site lies relatively close to the conservation area, due to the presence of intervening development between the designated heritage asset (the Conservation Area) and the application site, it is considered that the advertisements do not give rise to any significant adverse impacts in this respect. There are also no notable historic features within the immediate vicinity of the application site.

8.15 It is recognised that there is already a precedent for signage both within the site and within the immediate locality. However, third party concerns have been raised in relation to the materials used within the signs in this case and also that the use of acrylic signage is generally not considered acceptable in most instances. It should be recognised that the general principle of using both plastic and metal / chrome signs within the site has been established through previous planning decisions on the site. The application previously refused under application reference 14/00373 proposed a combination of chrome and acrylic signage but the scheme was refused primarily due to concerns over the extent of illumination. Prior to this, application reference 13/98930 was approved in part with signs incorporating moulded perspex with chrome finish. The 2012 application (reference 12/97589) also proposed moulded perspex and chrome but was refused primarily due to the extent of illumination and also due to concern that the size and scale of the proposed free-standing advertisements (the totems and flags) would appear overbearing and overly-dominant in the street scene. No specific concerns were raised in relation to the materials.

8.16 The main building itself (characterised by modern materials and extensive glazed areas) is not of any notable architectural or aesthetic interest (this also being the case for the petrol station opposite) and there is also no intervisibility between the site and the nearby conservation area. The immediate setting to the building is primarily influenced by the presence of hard surfacing and parked cars. The immediate street scene would therefore not be adversely compromised by the use of acrylic given the presence of modern materials. When set against this baseline, the use of acrylic signage can reasonably be supported in this specific circumstance, subject to ensuring the proposal would not give rise to a harmful impact upon the character of the area, having particular regard to any impacts associated with design and illumination and also the overall extent of signage proposed / cumulative impacts. This approach is consistent with the conclusions reached at the time of the previously refused application.

8.17 With regards to lighting impacts, as identified at the time of the previous application, the immediate locality is of a predominantly semi-rural, residential character and whilst street lighting is present, there are no illuminated signs except the petrol prices at the garage to the west of the site, which is also the only other notable commercial establishment within the immediate vicinity. With these points in mind, it has been concluded that the introduction of significant amounts of illumination to the site cannot reasonable be supported.

8.18 The previous scheme would have resulted in the introduction of just under 60 square metres of internally illuminated signage across the length of the site frontage. Concern was raised that this would significantly exceed the amount of illuminated signage proposed under the previous applications which were refused primarily due to the nature and extent of illumination. It was also identified that, contrary to requirements of the Design Guide SPD, the signage would incorporate extensive and unnecessary internal illumination across the majority of the building façade.

8.19 In the case of the current scheme, no form of illumination is proposed and, on this basis, the proposal in its amended form is considered to adequately overcome the concerns raise previously in relation to illumination and resulting light pollution.

8.20 With regards to the amount and layout of signage proposed, whilst the overall amount and layout of signs has not changed from the previous scheme, it is recognised that the signs are predominantly focused around the main building frontage (which is set back from the highway) and the scheme does not lead to a harmful increase in overall prominence of signage or clutter along the front of the site. As required by the Design Guide SPD, the signs are in proportion to the scale of the building and also do not include oversized lettering. The fact that that the signs would not be illuminated also limits their potential harm and prominence. Therefore, whilst it remains the case that the overall extent of signage is substantial, its general scale and form is therefore considered acceptable.

8.21 In having regard to the above assessment and the local characteristics of the neighbourhood, the signage in its amended form is considered to be of an appropriate design and therefore complies with Policies DP2 and DP18 of the Local Plan, the Design Guide SPD and paragraph 141 of the NPPF, along with accompanying planning practice guidance. The absence of any form of illumination also ensures the signage does not result in unacceptable adverse impacts associated with light pollution as required by Policy SP15. The revised scheme is considered to be a significant improvement on the previously refused scheme.

Conclusion

8.22 In conclusion, no significant adverse impacts in relation to public safety have been identified. Furthermore, the signs are considered to respond appropriately to the local characteristics of the neighbourhood in accordance with Policies SP1 and DP2.

8.23 It is therefore recommended that advertisement consent should be granted subject to conditions.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Grant Subject to Conditions

Condition(s)

Any advertisement displayed, and any site used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a clean and tidy condition to the reasonable satisfaction of the local planning authority.
Any structure or hoarding erected or used principally for the purpose of displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a safe condition.
Where an advertisement is required under these Regulations to be removed, the removal shall be carried out to the reasonable satisfaction of the local planning authority.
No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.
No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to obscure, or hinder the ready interpretation of, and road traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air, or so as otherwise to render hazardous the use if any highway, railway, waterway or aerodrome (civil or military).
The advertisements shall only be carried out in accordance with drawings: page 1 Site Location Plan; page 3 Proposed Elevations; and page 4 Elevation of Post Sign. No alterations to the approved signage shall be made unless otherwise agreed in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority.
Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the advertisements in accordance with Policies SP16, SP17, DP18 and DP2 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (August 2019).

Planning Committee - 18 August 2026 Report Item 2

Application No: 26/00366ADV Advertisement Consent
Site: New Forest District Council Car Park, Brookley Road, Brockenhurst SO42 7RA
Proposal: Installation of 2no. single-sided noticeboards
Applicant: New Forest District Council
Case Officer: Julie Blake
Parish: Brockenhurst Parish Council

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

Defined New Forest Village
Conservation Area

Principal Development Plan Policies

DP2 General development principles
DP18 Design principles
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
Sec 16 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Brockenhurst Parish Council: Recommend refusal with the following comments:

Councillors approved the sign but were concerned about the proposed location and wanted clarification that pedestrians would not be compromised by traffic entering and exiting the car park.

5. CONSULTEES

Building Design and Conservation Officer: No objections
Hampshire Highways: no objection in principle to the proposal from a highway perspective.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

Erect new block of public conveniences in revised location with amended car parking layout (demolish existing) (02/74986) granted on 09 October 2002
Pipe existing ditch and form 16 additional parking spaces (NFDC/92/50750) granted on 11 November 1992

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 The application site is located towards the entrance of the main public car park, within the Defined Village boundary and the Brockenhurst Conservation Area. In the near vicinity is a range of functional and decorative street furniture, signage associated with car park and retail businesses in the High street, cycle stands, lamp posts and litter bins.

Proposed Development

8.2 The application seeks planning permission and advertisement consent to install and display 2no non-illuminated single-sided noticeboards. The purpose of the notice boards would be to display tourist information and notices that deliver key New Forest messaging such as the New Forest Code.

8.3 The notice boards would replace existing signage for which there is no planning permission. It is likely that this signage was installed by New Forest District Council (NFDC) under their permitted development rights. Planning permission and advertisement consent are now required because the notice boards would be associated with a separate tourism business (Go New Forest). Although subsidised by NFDC, the private business no longer benefits from local authority permitted development rights, hence the requirement for permission.

Consideration

8.4 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.

8.6 The adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (2019) (herein referred to as the 'Local Plan') does not rule out the general principle of introducing signage and therefore the general principle of the proposal is considered acceptable subject to having regard to all relevant development plan policies alongside any material planning considerations, including the provisions within the NPPF.

8.7 Paragraph 141 of the NPPF states that advertisements should be subject to control only in the interests of amenity and public safety, taking account of cumulative impacts. Planning Practice Guidance similarly advises that advertisements are controlled with reference to their effect on amenity and public safety. These therefore form the key issues to consider for the purposes of this application, together with relevant development plan policies and any other material considerations.

Amenity

8.8 The notice boards would provide functional signage for a private tourism enterprise (Go New Forest) and they would not be illuminated. Planning Practice Guidance advises that amenity includes aural and visual amenity and states that factors relevant to amenity include the general characteristics of the locality, including the presence of any feature of historic, architectural, cultural or similar interest. Section 141 of the National Planning Practice Framework states that the quality and character of places can suffer when advertisements are poorly sited and designed.

8.9 With regards to general design considerations, Policy DP2 relates to general development principles and requires all new development within the National Park to uphold and promote the principles of sustainable development. It also requires development to enhance local character and distinctiveness including making sure development is appropriate and sympathetic in terms of scale, appearance, form, siting and layout and does not result in unacceptable impacts. Policy DP18 sets out the Authority’s key design principles and identifies the need to ensure development is appropriate in the context of its site and does not cause visual harm to the protected landscape of the National Park.

8.11 In terms of design, the notice boards would be a modest post mounted structure, measuring around 1.7 metres wide and two metres high, and would have a wooden name plate within the metal frame. Both notice boards would be installed completely within the existing hedge line alongside an area demarcated as no parking. There would be no changes to the existing walkway arrangements, and the surface treatment would remain tarmac and the kerb-lines are untouched.

8.12 The single-sided noticeboards would be an appropriate design within their intended location. The proposed materials would be appropriate, low maintenance and less likely to need replacing on a frequent basis. The notice boards would not include any plastic materials or any form of illumination.

8.13 The presence of the wooden header would soften the solid appearance of the metal signage. Given the location set amongst a variety of parking infrastructure, it would not materially add to the overall level of visual clutter which already exists. Overall, the noticeboards would comply with Policies DP2, SP17 and DP18 and would not detract from the area's amenity.

Heritage

8.14 With regards to the historic environment, as identified above, the site is located within the Brockenhurst Conservation Area - a designated heritage asset. 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.

8.15 Non-designated heritage assets lie on the east and west side of the application site. The signage would be located in an existing car park and would be of an appropriate size and design. In this respect, it is concluded that the proposal would have a neutral impact. For the same reasons it is concluded that the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area in accordance with Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act 1990) and Policy SP16. The Authority's Building Design & Conservation team were consulted on the application and raised no objection.

Public Safety

8.16 With regards to highway safety considerations and Parish Council concerns, the speed of traffic passing along the High Street is naturally restricted due to traffic calming measures. The notice boards would be set back from the vehicle entry point and away from circulation space and parking bays within the car park. The notice boards would not interfere with or visually impede vehicle traffic movement or pedestrian walkways. The road accessing the entrance and exit to the car park is not an adopted highway and is maintained by NFDC. The car park is monitored by NFDC parking wardens ensuring the parking and traffic flows are appropriate and safe for pedestrians. Overall, the modest scale and absence of illumination would ensure that the notice boards would not distract motorists entering or manoeuvring within the car park.

8.17 Hampshire Highways have been consulted and note that the new signage would not result in physical changes to the highway network or significant impact on highway users. On this basis, they are satisfied that the proposal would not introduce any new highway safety concerns. They have also noted that, notwithstanding the above, any notice board installed within spaces primarily used by pedestrians should be located at the edge of the public realm to maintain inclusive access for all users (e.g. pedestrians, wheelchair users, those using mobility aids, or pushchairs). They also state that alternatively, a minimum unobstructed width of 2-metres should be maintained on either side of the notice board to ensure users can pass safely. The notice boards, being within the recessed no parking layby and set back from the main traffic access road by around 2m, would comply with this advisory.

8.18 Overall it is concluded that the proposal would not give rise to any significant harmful impacts in relation to public safety.

Conclusion

8.19 The proposed signage would replace existing signage and would be of an appropriate size and design and would accord with the relevant policies contained within the Development Plan along with the New Forest National Park Design Guide 2022. It would not result in any adverse impact on public amenity, highway safety and would be appropriate to its setting within the Brockenhurst Conservation Area.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Grant subject to conditions

Condition(s)

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Any advertisement displayed, and any site used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a clean and tidy condition to the reasonable satisfaction of the local planning authority.
Any structure or hoarding erected or used principally for the purpose of displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a safe condition.
Where an advertisement is required under these Regulations to be removed, the removal shall be carried out to the reasonable satisfaction of the local planning authority.
No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.
No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to obscure, or hinder the ready interpretation of, and road traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air, or so as otherwise to render hazardous the use if any highway, railway, waterway or aerodrome (civil or military).
Development shall only be carried out in accordance with Drawings DR1 (Location Plan), DR2 (Block Plan), 15023 (Notice board details). 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).

Planning Committee - 18 August 2026 Report Item 3

Application No: 26/00455FULL Full Application
Site: Yew Tree, Lyndhurst Road, Minstead, Lyndhurst SO43 7FX
Proposal: Outbuilding extension; solar panels; fenestration alterations; raise chimney height; replacement cladding; pergola; air source heat pump
Applicant: J Jarvis
Case Officer: Joshua Dawes
Parish: Minstead Parish Council

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

Conservation Area
Listed Building

Principal Development Plan Policies

DP2 General development principles
DP18 Design principles
DP36 Extensions to dwellings
DP37 Outbuildings
SP6 The natural environment
SP14 Renewable energy
SP15 Tranquillity
SP16 The historic and built environment
SP17 Local distinctiveness

Supplementary Planning Documents

Design Guide 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

Minstead Parish Council:

07 July 2026: Recommend refusal for the reasons listed below:

Whilst this is an improvement on the past plans, we reference SP15 for light pollution re the bifold doors which we still see as being out of keeping with the property. The garage is still not sufficiently subservient in relation to the main house. We are happy with the chimney, ambivalent about the pergola, happy with the heat pump.

04 June 2026: Recommend refusal for the reasons listed below:

Without the planning officer’s briefing we do not have the guidance we would appreciate to help with deciding on an appropriate response. We think the garage should be subservient to the main house and as shown is too large in proportion to the size of the main house. The design of the windows on the most recent extension is not in keeping considering their proximity to the listed thatched cottage. The triple sliding doors will cause light pollution to the West elevation. We question the proposed height of the chimney.

5. CONSULTEES

Building Design and Conservation Team:

03 August 2026: No objection to amended plan.

26 June 2026: Support subject to further information and or modifications.

Comments (summarised):

There is no in principle objection to the external changes proposed to the modern elements of the building, the installation of the air source heat pump, nor the introduction of a pergola subject to conditions.
The internal staircase to the property is a modern addition and is difficult to navigate due to the slope of the roof. As no historic fabric will be impacted, there is no objection to its alteration.
Following a site meeting and subsequent correspondence over the design and appearance of the chimney stack, the flooring, and the carport, revised and additional plans have been submitted.
Extending the chimney stack to 1.2m with a 600mm pot is a more acceptable appearance and more in-keeping in terms of design then that formally proposed. Conditions will be required for the brick, mortar, and pot.
Detailed comments provided in relation to fuel stoves and thatch roof buildings.
Detailed comments provided in relation to proposed flooring.
Amended drawings for the proposed outbuilding have been provided which greatly reduce the size and massing of the building, and follow the design previously approved in 2015.
There is no objection to the proposed revised design, nor the introduction of inline solar panels subject to condition.
Overall, subject to a revised design for the flooring in the historic core, there is no objection to the proposed works subject to conditions.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

One representation of objection on the following grounds:

Property has changed quite a lot over 25 years but retains its original appearance and character, matching other thatched cottages in the area.
Main concern is that the proposed chimney is out of proportion to the cottage making it look almost top heavy which will detract from its present appearance.
Garage extension doubles the size of the existing garage which is already quite large in proportion to the cottage.
Question if the additional light pollution from the proposed full length sliding doors meets current policy for dark skies in the New Forest.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

Outbuilding extension; Solar panels; fenestration alterations; raise chimney height; replacement cladding; pergola; air source heat pump; internal alterations (Application for Listed Building Consent) (26/00482LBC)- pending decision.
Single storey extension; extension to garage to create car port; replacement shed; internal and external alterations (Application for Listed Building Consent) (15/00641) granted on 22 October 2015.
Single storey extension; extension to garage to create car port; replacement shed; external alterations (15/00642) granted on 22 October 2015.
Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for the retention and use of stables, barn and yard for the purposes of recreational horsekeeping (14/00701) granted on 16 October 2014.
Retention of shed and fencing (11/96950) Granted on 31 January 2012.
Single storey extension; porch; outbuilding (Revised design to 94794) (Application for Listed Building Consent) (10/95259) granted on 15 July 2010.
Single storey extension; Porch; Outbuilding; New Access (Revised design to Planning Permission 94653) (10/95249) granted on 08 July 2010.
Single storey extension; porch; outbuilding (Application for Listed Building Consent) (09/94794) granted on 12 February 2010.
Single Storey Extension; Porch; Outbuilding; New Access (09/94653) granted on 10 February 2010.
Replace patio doors and windows in SW elevation (NFDC/LBC/96/60072) granted on 28 November 1996.

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 Yew Tree is a Grade II listed detached, timber-framed, thatched cottage with brick infill panels. It is therefore a designated heritage asset and this engages various considerations in the NPPF and through primary legislation. The dwelling has been extended in the past. The site is located within character area A of the Forest Central South Conservation Area. The site is set directly adjacent to the roadside and consists of a side plot with a gravelled access drive which leads up to an existing slate roofed, two-bay timber garage building and the front of the dwelling. The site is connected to a plot of grassland which is separated from the site by a traditional post and rail timber fence. The boundary of the site shared with the highway comprises hedgerow.

Proposed Development

8.2 This application seeks planning permission for the extension and recladding of the existing garage outbuilding; solar panels on the rear roof plane of the outbuilding; a timber-framed pergola connecting to the rear elevation of the dwelling; and an air source heat pump. It is also proposed to raise the chimney height, replacement cladding and the following fenestration alterations are proposed:

Replacement of the 1970’s double glazed timber windows with double glazed flush casement windows.
Replacement and enlargement of the double doors on the west elevation with new doors to be in black aluminium.
Replacement of the existing sets of double doors and removal of the fake chimney breast within the 2010 addition with the new set of sliding doors in black aluminium.
Replacement of the existing window on the eastern elevation of the 2010’s addition with full height, slit windows in black aluminium.
Replacement of the existing front door with a hardwood door.

8.3 Internal alterations are also proposed to the dwelling and will be considered within the listed building consent application (reference: 26/00482) as planning permission would not be required for such works.

8.4 It should be noted that, following concerns initially raised, the proposal has been amended to reduce the overall size of the outbuilding extension and amend the design of the new chimney height to be more representative of other chimneys on buildings of a similar style in the local area. An amended plan of the proposed flooring section has also been received.

Consideration

8.5 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.

8.6 The key considerations in this case are compliance with Policy DP37 (Outbuildings); compliance with Policy SP14 (Renewable energy); the impact on heritage assets; and the impact on neighbour amenity.

Principle of Development

8.7 Policy DP37 (Outbuildings) supports domestic outbuildings where they are proportionate and clearly subservient to the dwelling they are to serve in terms of their design, scale, size, height and massing, located within the residential curtilage, required for purposes incidental to the use of the main dwelling, not providing additional habitable accommodation and will not reduce private amenity space. The policy does not prescribe specific floor areas for outbuildings.

8.8 Planning permission reference: 15/00642 granted permission for a single storey extension; extension to garage to create car port; replacement shed; and external alterations. This permission was implemented within its given three-year timeframe but the extension to the garage was not constructed. As the permission remains extant, the carport has the ability to be constructed at any time without requiring any further permission. The proposed carport within this application would match the carport approved within the historic application which can be built at any time.

8.9 It is noted that the proposed carport would be set down from the roof of the garage, displaying an element of subservience to the existing structure. The carport would result in the total footprint of the outbuilding measuring 53 square metres. Compared to the dwelling, with a footprint of 140 square metres, the garage following the addition of the carport would appear clearly proportionate and subservient to the dwelling and its curtilage. It would be for incidental use, would lie within the residential curtilage of the dwelling and would not reduce private amenity space, including parking provision, to an unacceptable level. It is therefore considered that the proposal would comply with Policy DP37.

8.10 The rear roof plane of the garage/carport would host a total of 12 horizontal solar PV panels for power generation to the property. Additionally, a single air source heat pump is proposed to be sited in the north-eastern corner of the plot aside the dwelling. Policy SP14 states that “Development Proposals for, or incorporating, renewable energy generation, other than wind energy, will be permitted where they: a) are small-scale and provide energy for individual households or businesses, or for small local community facilities; b) are located and designed to have minimal visual impact; and c) do not have adverse impact on the landscape character, heritage assets, natural beauty, wildlife, tranquillity or other special qualities of the National Park.”

8.11 The solar panels would be of a scale which would serve the dwelling and not operate on a commercial level. The proposed solar panels would be sited on the rear elevation of the garage, where there would be no clear views from public land or nearby residential plots. The panels would blend with the structure of the outbuilding and would not appear intrusive to the landscape. There is no objection to the panels or to the air source heat pump from the Building Design and Conservation Team.

8.12 The proposed air source heat pump would be a form of sustainable heating/cooling to the property (replacing the existing oil heating infrastructure). The proposed heat pump would be sited between the dwelling and surrounding boundary treatments. The heat pump would be sited 3.8 metres from the northern boundary and 7.5 metres from the highway. The heat pump would not be sited on the dwelling itself and would be a standalone structure, with no interaction with the historic fabric of the dwelling.

8.13 Overall, the proposals are considered to comply with Policy SP14.

Design, Heritage and Impact on Landscape and Character of Area

8.14 Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires Local Planning Authorities to have 'special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses' in considering applications that affect such buildings and this is reflected in Policy SP16 of the adopted Local Plan. Paragraph 202 of the NPPF sets out that heritage assets including sites and buildings of local historic value 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 i.e. they: (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; and (iv) help secure the long-term conservation of a heritage asset. Proposals will be resisted where they would harm the significance or special interest of a heritage asset (designated or undesignated) unless any harm is outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal, proportionate to the degree of harm and significance of the asset, including securing its optimum viable use. In addition, 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.

8.15 The design of the proposed outbuilding and pergola would be traditional in appearance and utilise materials which are highlighted as “traditional” within the Authority’s Design Guide SPD. The design, scale and form of these buildings are considered to be sympathetic to the character and appearance of the Listed Building, its curtilage and the surrounding Forest Central South Conservation Area.

8.16 The proposed works to the dwelling itself are as specified above within paragraph 8.2. The proposed change to the chimney was initially considered to result in a new design which appeared disproportionate to the dwelling and harmed the modest character and appearance of the dwelling due to its scale and height. Amended plans were received following the advice of the Building Design and Conservation Team which showed the brick form of the chimney to be reduced and a clay pot installed on its top. This new design is of a smaller scale, more appropriate to the design and form of the dwelling and would be more representative of similar chimneys on other thatched cottages within the locality. Although the stack will be larger and therefore more visually prominent, the height is required for fire safety and therefore the public benefit of retaining this heritage asset for future generations is considered to outweigh the minor level of less than substantial harm to the historic fabric.

8.17 In respect of the new windows and doors, the use of the dark aluminium framing would be a more contemporary material but would blend well where used in the modern (1970, 2010 and 2015) elements of the dwelling. The modernisation of the windows would not occur on the original thatched cottage which would retain its current windows. The change in design of the windows and doors on the modern elements of the dwelling would update the structure to a modern standard which would enhance the overall character and appearance of the dwelling. A replacement modern front door would be installed into the existing porch, which was part of the later additions in 2010. No historic fabric would be lost in its replacement. The extensions would also be subject to a replacement cladding, which would replace the existing black painted shiplap timber cladding with a natural featheredge timber painted black. The new cladding would be of a traditional material, supported within the Authority’s Design Guide SPD, and painted to match the current appearance of the structure. Overall, the external works to the cladding, windows and doors are considered to conserve and enhance the character and appearance of the listed building and the conservation area, in accordance with Policy SP16 and the NPPF.

Impact and Neighbour Amenity

8.18 The proposed window and door alterations would result in an increase in glazing on the property, particularly on the western elevation. It is noted that concerns have been raised by both the Parish Council and a member of the public in relation to the potential increase in light pollution.

8.19 Policy SP15 states that “New development should avoid, or provide mitigation measures, if the proposal will lead to noise, visual intrusion, nuisance and other unacceptable environmental impacts on the National Park and its special qualities This should include reducing the impacts of light pollution on the ‘dark skies’ of the National Park and control of development to prevent artificial lighting from eroding rural darkness and tranquillity.”

8.20 Whilst the level of glazing would increase, all of the additional glazing would be side facing glazing with no upward view. A condition would be added to ensure no external lighting is installed on the site without prior consent. Given the above and the lack of any significant increase in glazing on any other elevation, overall it is not considered that the proposed increase in glazing would result in an unacceptable impact on the tranquillity of the National Park.

8.21 Beyond the chimney alterations, the proposed development would all be at a single storey level with no additional windows facing towards the adjacent residential properties. Therefore, there are no foreseen impacts by way of shading or overlooking. The increase in the chimney height is not considered to result in any unacceptable level of visual intrusion as it would be of an appropriate design and scale. Overall, the proposal is not considered to harm the amenities of neighbouring properties.

Conclusion

8.22 Overall, it is considered that the proposed development would adhere to the relevant policies of the Authority’s adopted Local Plan, as well as the National Planning Policy Framework. As such, permission should be granted subject to conditions.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Grant subject to conditions

Condition(s)

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Development shall only be carried out in accordance with 582.01 Rev B - Location & Block Plan, 582.05 Rev A - Proposed Garage Elevations, Roof and Floor Plans, 582.07 - Proposed Dwelling Floor Plans, 582.08 - Proposed Dwelling Elevations, 582.11 - Proposed Pergola Elevations, Roof and Floor Plan and 582.12 Rev B - Floor Sections. 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).
No development shall take place above slab level until samples or exact details of the facing and roofing materials, window and door cross sections, details of the air source heat pump and solar panels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority. Development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details approved.
Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with Policy DP2 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).
No development shall take place above slab level until a full mortar specification and a sample/details of the proposed bricks and pot are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details approved.
Reason: In the interests of preserving the character and appearance of the listed building of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).
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).

Planning Committee - 18 August 2026 Report Item 4

Application No: 26/00482LBC Listed Building Consent
Site: Yew Tree, Lyndhurst Road, Minstead, Lyndhurst SO43 7FX
Proposal: Outbuilding extension; solar panels; fenestration alterations; raise chimney height; replacement cladding; pergola; air source heat pump; internal alterations (Application for Listed Building Consent)
Applicant: J Jarvis
Case Officer: Joshua Dawes
Parish: Minstead Parish Council

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

Conservation Area
Listed Building

Principal Development Plan Policies

DP2 General development principles
DP18 Design principles
SP16 The historic and built environment
SP17 Local distinctiveness

Supplementary Planning Documents

Design Guide SPD

NPPF

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

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Minstead Parish Council:

07 July 2026: Recommend refusal for the reasons listed below:

04 June 2026: Recommend refusal for the reasons listed below:

5. CONSULTEES

Building Design and Conservation Team:

03 August 2026: No objection to amended plan.

26 June 2026: Support subject to further information and or modifications.

Comments (summarised):

There is no in principle objection to the external changes proposed to the modern elements of the building, the installation of the air source heat pump, nor the introduction of a pergola subject to conditions.
The internal staircase to the property is a modern addition and is difficult to navigate due to the slope of the roof. As no historic fabric will be impacted, there is no objection to its alteration.
Following a site meeting and subsequent correspondence over the design and appearance of the chimney stack, the flooring, and the carport, revised and additional plans have been submitted.
Extending the chimney stack to 1.2m with a 600mm pot is a more acceptable appearance and more in-keeping in terms of design then that formally proposed. Conditions will be required for the brick, mortar, and pot.
Detailed comments provided in relation to fuel stoves and thatch roof buildings.
Detailed comments provided in relation to proposed flooring.
Amended drawings for the proposed outbuilding have been provided which greatly reduce the size and massing of the building, and follow the design previously approved in 2015.
There is no objection to the proposed revised design, nor the introduction of inline solar panels subject to condition.
Overall, subject to a revised design for the flooring in the historic core, there is no objection to the proposed works subject to conditions.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

Outbuilding extension; Solar panels; fenestration alterations; raise chimney height; replacement cladding; pergola; air source heat pump (26/00455FULL)- pending decision.
Single storey extension; extension to garage to create car port; replacement shed; internal and external alterations (Application for Listed Building Consent) (15/00641) granted on 22 October 2015.
Single storey extension; extension to garage to create car port; replacement shed; external alterations (15/00642) granted on 22 October 2015.
Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for the retention and use of stables, barn and yard for the purposes of recreational horsekeeping (14/00701) granted on 16 October 2014.
Retention of shed and fencing (11/96950) Granted on 31 January 2012.
Single storey extension; porch; outbuilding (Revised design to 94794) (Application for Listed Building Consent) (10/95259) granted on 15 July 2010.
Single storey extension; Porch; Outbuilding; New Access (Revised design to Planning Permission 94653) (10/95249) granted on 08 July 2010.
Single storey extension; porch; outbuilding (Application for Listed Building Consent) (09/94794) granted on 12 February 2010.
Single Storey Extension; Porch; Outbuilding; New Access (09/94653) granted on 10 February 2010.
Replace patio doors and windows in SW elevation (NFDC/LBC/96/60072) granted on 28 November 1996.

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

Proposed Development

8.2 This application seeks listed building consent for the extension and recladding of the existing garage outbuilding; solar panels on the rear roof plane of the outbuilding; a timber-framed pergola connecting to the rear elevation of the dwelling; and an air source heat pump. It is also proposed to raise the chimney height, replacement cladding and the following fenestration alterations are proposed:

Replacement of the 1970’s double glazed timber windows with double glazed flush casement windows.
Replacement and enlargement of the double doors on the west elevation with new doors to be in black aluminium.
Replacement of the existing sets of double doors and removal of the fake chimney breast within the 2010 addition with the new set of sliding doors in black aluminium.
Replacement of the existing window on the eastern elevation of the 2010’s addition with full height, slit windows in black aluminium.

8.3 Additionally, the following internal alterations are proposed:

Alterations to the non-original part of the staircase to allow an easier access to the first floor.
Replacement of the non-original slate floor.
Update to the 1970 kitchen area and alteration to the bathroom and ensuite.

8.4 It should be noted that, following concerns raised, the proposal has been amended to reduce the overall size of the outbuilding extension and amend the design of the new chimney height to be more representative of other chimneys on buildings of a similar style in the local area. Additionally, a revised floor section has been received following the Building Design and Conservation Team's comments.

Consideration

8.5 The key considerations in this case are whether the proposed works would conserve and enhance the character and appearance of the Grade II listed building, its curtilage and the surrounding conservation area.

8.6 Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires Local Planning Authorities to have 'special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses' in considering applications that affect such buildings and this is reflected in Policy SP16 of the adopted Local Plan. Paragraph 202 of the NPPF sets out that heritage assets including sites and buildings of local historic value 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 i.e. they: (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; and (iv) help secure the long-term conservation of a heritage asset. Proposals will be resisted where they would harm the significance or special interest of a heritage asset (designated or undesignated) unless any harm is outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal, proportionate to the degree of harm and significance of the asset, including securing its optimum viable use.

8.7 The design of the proposed outbuilding and pergola would be traditional in appearance and utilise materials which are highlighted as “traditional” within the Authority’s Design Guide SPD. The design, scale and form of these buildings are considered to be sympathetic to the character and appearance of the Listed Building, its curtilage and the surrounding Forest Central South Conservation Area.

8.8 The proposed change to the chimney was initially considered to result in a new design which appeared disproportionate to the dwelling and harmed the modest character and appearance of the dwelling due to its scale and height. Amended plans were received following the advice of the Building Design and Conservation Team which showed the brick form of the chimney to be reduced and a clay pot installed on its top. This new design is considered to be of a smaller scale, more appropriate to the design and form of the dwelling and would be more representative of similar chimneys on other thatched cottages within the locality. Although the stack will be larger and therefore more visually prominent, the height is required for fire safety and therefore the public benefit of retaining this heritage asset for future generations is considered to outweigh the minor level of less than substantial harm to the historic fabric.

8.9 In respect of the new windows and doors, the use of the dark aluminium framing would be a more contemporary material but would blend well where used in the modern (1970, 2010 and 2015) elements of the dwelling. The modernisation of the windows would not occur on the original thatched cottage which would retain its current windows. The change in design of the windows and doors on the modern elements of the dwelling would update the structure to a modern standard which would enhance the overall character and appearance of the dwelling. A replacement modern front door would be installed into the existing porch, which was part of the later additions in 2010. No historic fabric would be lost in its replacement. The extensions would also be subject to a replacement cladding, which would replace the existing black painted shiplap timber cladding with a natural featheredge timber painted black. The new cladding would be of a traditional material, supported within the Authority’s Design Guide SPD, and painted to match the current appearance of the structure. Overall, the external works to the cladding, windows and doors are considered to conserve and enhance the character and appearance of the listed building and the conservation area, in accordance with Policy SP16 and the NPPF.

8.10 The proposed internal works are as highlighted in paragraph 8.3. The Building Design and Conservation Team has confirmed that the works to the staircase would only alter non-original fabric which has no impact on the heritage importance of the listed building. The change to the stairs would be an improvement as it would facilitate easier and less restricted access to the top floor. The update of the kitchen and bathroom would be within the newer extensions to the dwelling which, again, do not impact on the historic fabric of the listed building. The changes would provide for an updated living space to modern standards without any harm to the heritage asset.

8.11 The replacement of the floor within the original cottage would not replace any original historic fabric. Concerns were raised in relation to the proposed floor slab in the historic core – in particular the introduction of insulation and a fibrous cement screed installation of further impervious materials that risks disrupting the moisture balance within the adjacent permeable walling. Due to the potential risks to the construction of the listed building, amended floor sections have been received to ensure that the new flooring would not result in any risk to the structure.

Conclusion

8.12 Overall, it is concluded that the proposed works would conserve and enhance the heritage asset. Therefore, the proposal would comply with the relevant policies of the Authority’s adopted Local Plan, as well as the relevant Sections of the National Planning Policy Framework and it is recommended that listed building consent is granted subject to conditions.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Grant subject to conditions

Condition(s)

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Development shall only be carried out in accordance with 582.01 Rev B - Location & Block Plan, 582.05 Rev A - Proposed Garage Elevations, Roof and Floor Plans, 582.07 - Proposed Dwelling Floor Plans, 582.08 - Proposed Dwelling Elevations, 582.11 - Proposed Pergola Elevations, Roof and Floor Plan and 582.12 Rev B - Floor Sections. 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).
No development shall take place above slab level until samples or exact details of the facing and roofing materials, window and door cross sections, details of the air source heat pump and solar panels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority. Development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details approved.
Reason: in the interests of preserving the character and appearance of the listed building and to ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with Policy DP2 and SP16 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).
No development shall take place above slab level until a full mortar specification and a sample/details of the proposed bricks and pot are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall only be carried out in accordance with the details approved.
Reason: In the interests of preserving the character and appearance of the listed building in accordance with Policy SP16 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).
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).

Planning Committee - 18 August 2026 Report Item 5

Application No: 26/00492VAR Variation / Removal of Condition
Site: Walden Cottage, 9, New Forest Drive, Brockenhurst SO42 7QT
Proposal: Application to remove conditions 2 and 3 of planning permission NFDC/97/60754 for house and garage (demolish existing)
Applicant: Mr S Dabson
Case Officer: Joshua Dawes
Parish: Brockenhurst Parish Council

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

Defined New Forest Village
Tree Preservation Order

Principal Development Plan Policies

DP2 General development principles
DP36 Extensions to dwellings

NPPF

Sec 12 - Achieving well-designed places

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received.

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Brockenhurst Parish Council: Recommend refusal, for the reasons listed below:

Councillors felt that by removing the restrictions the application would conflict with Policy DP2 (General Development Principles) and Policy DP36 (extensions to dwellings).

5. CONSULTEES

None required.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

Garage (26/00374FULL) granted on 26 May 2026.
Application for a Certificate of Lawful Development for proposed Conversion of internal garage to habitable floorspace (26/00158LDCP) Withdrawn on 08 May 2026.
Two Storey Rear Extension; First Floor Extension over Garage (09/93969) granted on 29 May 2009.
House and garage (demolish existing) (NFDC/97/60754) granted on 25 September 1997.
Erection of 2 storey addition (demolish existing garage). (NFDC/88/38637) granted on 02 August 1988.

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 9 New Forest Drive (Walden Cottage) is a detached dwelling within the Defined Village of Brockenhurst. The plot is bordered by tall vegetation and there are a number of tree preservation orders in the locality. The dwelling is located on a generous plot on New Forest Drive.

Proposed Development

8.2 This application seeks to remove conditions 2 and 3 from planning permission reference: NFDC/97/60754. The conditions read as follows:

“2 - Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or subsequent enactment, no building or structure permitted by Classes A, B and C of the Second Schedule of the Order, shall be erected without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason - To ensure the character of the area is retained.”

“3 - The garage shall be retained as a garage and shall at no time in the future be converted into habitable accommodation or used for commercial purposes. Reason - To safeguard the amenities of the area.”

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 removal of condition 2 would allow the use of national permitted development rights for the enlargement, improvement or other alteration of a dwellinghouse; additions etc to the roof of a dwellinghouse; and other alterations to the roof of a dwellinghouse.

8.5 The removal of condition 3 would allow the use of the integral garage for habitable accommodation.

8.6 The key considerations in this case relate to whether the removal of the conditions would allow for development which would conflict with Policy DP2 (General development principles) and Policy DP36 (Extensions to dwellings).

Principle of Development

8.7 By way of background, Walden Cottage has been subject to a number of previous planning permissions. The earliest of which (planning permission reference: NFDC/88/38637) for a two-storey addition, which was not implemented, provides some detail as to the form of the dwelling as it existed historically, prior to its replacement and further extension in 1997 and 2009 respectively. Based on the plans of planning permission reference: NFDC/88/38637, the dwelling would appear to have had an ‘original’ floorspace which exceeds 80 square metres. As such, the dwelling would not comprise a ‘small dwelling’ as defined within Policy DP36.

8.8 As the dwelling is not a ‘small dwelling’ and is located within the boundaries of the defined New Forest village of Brockenhurst, there are no floorspace restrictions to comply with under Policy DP36. The removal of the condition restricting permitted development rights for “the enlargement, improvement or other alteration of a dwellinghouse; additions etc to the roof of a dwellinghouse; and other alterations to the roof of the dwellinghouse” would allow for minor alterations to the external form of the dwelling, and/or a potential single storey extension to the rearmost element of the dwelling. Given the characteristics of this particular plot (as well as the size of the existing dwelling), the potential small-scale works enabled by national permitted development rights are not considered to result in a conflict with Policy DP36 in this particular case.

8.9 The removal of condition 3, allowing the use of the garage as habitable accommodation would similarly not conflict with Policy DP36 as there are no floorspace limitations, the garage is integral to the dwelling and the use of the garage would not result in any significant alterations to the exterior of the dwelling or its form.

Impact on Neighbour Amenity

8.10 There are no foreseen impacts on neighbouring properties due to the removal of the two conditions cited above in relation to visual intrusion, overlooking or shading.

Conclusion

8.11 For the above reasons, it is concluded that the removal of conditions 2 and 3 of planning permission reference: NFDC/97/60754 would not conflict with the relevant policies of the adopted Local Plan. The remaining conditions within application NFDC/97/60754 are no longer relevant, therefore the application should be granted without conditions.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Approval without conditions

Planning Committee - 18 August 2026 Report Item 6

Application No: 26/00543FULL Full Application
Site: Cardan House, Romsey Road, Cadnam, Southampton SO40 2NN
Proposal: Single storey rear extension
Applicant: Ms C Ebbs
Case Officer: Liz Young
Parish: Copythorne Parish Council

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Development Plan

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

Flood Zone

Principal Development Plan Policies

Policy SP1 Supporting sustainable development
Policy DP2 General development principles
Policy SP6 The natural environment
Policy DP12 Flood risk
Policy SP17 Local distinctiveness
Policy DP18 Design principles
Policy DP36 Extensions to dwellings

Supplementary Planning Documents

Design Guide (2022)
Copythorne Parish Design Statement SPD (2025)

National Planning Policy Framework (2024) (NPPF)

Sec. 2. Achieving sustainable development
Sec. 4. Decision-making
Sec. 12. Achieving well-designed places
Sec. 14. Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change
Sec. 15. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Copythorne Parish Council: Recommend permission but will accept a delegated decision; the exceptional circumstances outlined by the applicant justify the granting of permission for alterations requested notwithstanding the limitations of DP36

5. CONSULTEES

None required.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

Application to vary condition 7 of planning permission reference 11/96218 to allow retention of the mobile home (15/00921) refused on 26 January 2016
Application for a Certificate of Lawful Development for Proposed siting of a mobile home for ancillary accommodation (15/00920) raise no objection on 20 January 2016
Erection of replacement dwelling (removal of mobile home) (11/96218) granted on 21 April 2011
Erection of replacement dwelling (Removal of mobile home) (10/95572) granted on 08 November 2010
Outline application for detached house (removal of mobile home) - principle and access, layout and scale to be considered (09/94249) refused on 20 August 2009 (Appeal against refusal dismissed on 18 February 2010)
Application for a Certificate of Lawful Development for existing use of land for use of Building as Dwelling (09/93934) raise no objection on 28 May 2009
Dwelling; new access (07/92438) refused on 19 March 2008
Dwelling (07/92077) withdrawn on 16 January 2008
2 Detached dwellings (06/90523) refused on 29 September 2006

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 The application site (just over 0.1 hectares in size) comprises a detached two storey dwelling, its residential curtilage and associated access (and some adjacent land) which runs off the A31 (the Romsey Road). This access is also a public right of way which runs to the south-west of the site.

8.2 The dwelling was built following the granting of planning consent in 2011 (planning permission reference: 11/96218). A mobile home (associated with the neighbouring site, “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”) lies to the south-east of the site. This neighbouring property is a retail premises which fronts directly onto Romsey Road.

8.3 Residential properties lie to the north-east and south-west and the site backs onto a site known as "The Old Brickyard", which appears to have had a history of storage uses.

8.4 The majority of the site lies within Environment Agency Flood Zones 2 and 3.

8.5 For the purposes of adopted planning policy, the site lies in open countryside.

Proposed Development

8.6 Consent is sought to add a single storey extension to the rear (north-east) elevation of the dwelling. The external facing brickwork would match the existing dwelling. Roofing materials have not been specified.

Planning Background

8.7 By way of background, the existing dwelling was permitted (under planning permission reference 11/96218) as a replacement of a mobile home under the predecessor Local Plan (the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010)). This consent was permitted as an alternative design to a previously approved development (planning permission reference 10/95572). The relevant policies contained within this former Core Strategy (and the current Local Plan) did not support the general principle of replacing mobile homes with permanent dwellings. The officer report in respect of application 10/95572 acknowledged that the development was not supported by the planning policies in place at the time, but made reference to a previous application (to replace the mobile home with a permanent dwelling) which was refused and dismissed on appeal (application reference 09/94249). The main reasoning for dismissing the appeal related to the concern that the proposal was “unduly close and awkwardly related to the adjoining dwelling “Belle Vue””. Notwithstanding the fact that this appeal had been dismissed, the Inspector at the time accepted the principle of a replacement dwelling for the mobile home due to the site specific circumstances of the applicant.

8.8 The general principle of replacing the mobile home was supported as it was concluded that the mobile home offered cramped and relatively poor living conditions – stated to be a particular concern because of the severe health and learning difficulties of the Applicant’s daughter’s young son. It was stated that it was not possible to install specialist equipment in the mobile home due to the general lack of space. The Inspector also concluded that the proposal represented a “modest consolidation and upgrading of the existing residential development at Cadnam”.

8.9 Both the subsequent permissions 10/95572 and 11/96218 were granted under the previous New Forest National Park Core Strategy (2010) policies and sought to limit the overall internal floor area of the dwelling to 120 square metres and included a condition which removed the right to carry out any further enlargements under permitted development rights. A justification for this approach was provided within the officer report to planning permission reference 10/95572 which stated:

“In terms of its size, there was some concern that this would be too large in respect of the mobile home it was replacing, which could be considered a small dwelling, and also the terms of policy NF-H4. That policy states that replacement dwellings should only extend to 100m² in total where it is replacing a small dwelling, ie up to 80m². The policy does however allow a replacement dwelling of no more than 120m² in exceptional circumstances. The initial plans indicated a dwelling in excess of 120m² and no indication where the additional floorspace was required to serve the particular needs of the applicant. Amended plans were received reducing the floorspace and accompanied by a letter setting out the justification. That information clearly demonstrated the need for the additional floorspace, and it was therefore considered that dwelling would meet the circumstances in respect of this applicant and that its size would be acceptable”

8.10 Having regard to this background, the existing dwelling would be considered as a “small dwelling” for the purposes of Policy DP36 of the current Local Plan.

Consideration

8.11 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.

8.12 The main issues to consider for the purposes of this current application are the general principle of adding a further enlargement to the existing dwelling (given its status as a “small dwelling” for the purposes of Policy DP36), alongside impacts upon the character of the area, neighbouring amenity and flood risk. The characteristics of the site and nature of the development proposed are such that the proposal would not give rise to significant impacts in relation to biodiversity, trees or highway safety.

Principle of Development

8.13 With regards to the general principle of extending the existing dwelling, as identified above, the original dwelling on site was previously defined as a “small dwelling” for the purposes of the predecessor local plan. This policy has now been superseded Policy DP36. This policy continues with the same definition of “small dwellings”, and states that “in the case of small dwellings …the extension must not result in a total internal habitable floorspace exceeding 100 square metres.” It then states, “In exceptional circumstances a larger extension may be permitted to meet the genuine family needs of an occupier who works in the immediate locality” (but then sets out that in such instances the total internal habitable floorspace of an extended dwelling must not exceed 120 square metres).

8.14 The dwelling at present has a gross in internal floorspace of 120 square metres and therefore any further enlargement would take it beyond the limit which exceptionally applies under Policy DP36. It is also not evident that the proposal is required to accommodate an occupier who works in the immediate locality. The general principle of the proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policy DP36.

8.15 Given the identified conflict with the Development Plan, it would also be necessary to have regard to any relevant material planning considerations under Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

8.16 It is stated that the Applicant’s son is currently living in the ground floor bedroom, but that this is no longer adequate for his health needs, which are stated to be changing over time. Full details of his living requirements have been provided and it has been evidenced that he requires a specialist bed and adapted bathroom which together require a larger floor area. There is also a requirement for additional carers and family members to stay overnight as his mother (his main carer) also suffers from evidenced health conditions which limit her ability to care for him. The option of installing a lift has been considered but dismissed due to concerns in relation to both fire risk and the specific needs of the Applicant’s son, which would essentially put him at greater risk if he was to occupy the upper floor area, both in the event of a fire but also in normal day-to-day circumstances.

8.17 The proposed extension would allow for the expansion and reorganisation of the ground floor primarily to provide a better-equipped bedroom and an accessible bathroom to suit his needs (which are stated to have changed since the original permission). It has also been indicated that, due to the timing and nature of his diagnosis, it would not have been possible to foresee his current accommodation needs at the time of the original application. In this case, the proposed layout would meet these objectives, through providing a significantly enlarged bathroom and WC and a new larger bedroom (occupying the former lounge area). The resulting loss of living accommodation (which would then be reduced down to just a kitchen area) at ground floor level would then be addressed through the proposed extension. It is therefore considered that sufficient justification has been provided for the proposed extension having particular regard to the day-to-day living requirements of the occupants in this particular case.

8.18 Paragraph 96 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should aim to achieve healthy, inclusive and safe places which enable and support healthy lives, through both promoting good health and preventing ill-health, especially where this would address identified local health and well-being needs. This represents a further material consideration which weighs in favour of granting planning permission.

8.19 Overall, it is concluded that, notwithstanding the identified conflict with the development plan, the general principle of the proposed development is acceptable, having regard to the relevant material considerations in this case, which are specific to this case and not easily replicable on other sites in the National Park.

Design and Impact on Landscape and Character of Area

8.20 With regards to impacts upon local character and landscape, given the modest scale of the development and its location towards the rear of the site, it is considered that it would be appropriate in terms its scale, appearance, form, siting and layout. For the same reason, it is also considered to be contextually appropriate and would not harm key visual features, landscape setting or other valued components of the landscape. Given that the proposal relates to the enlargement of an existing dwelling and lies within a cluster of established development, it is also considered that it would not give rise to a harmful loss of tranquillity through unacceptable environmental impacts on the National Park and its special qualities.

8.21 There are no notable trees or natural features within or adjacent to the site which would be directly impacted by the proposed development.

8.22 On this basis, no conflict with Policies SP1, DP2, DP18, DP36 and SP15 has been identified.

Neighbouring Amenity

8.23 With regards to impacts upon neighbouring amenity, the proposal would be visible from the immediate neighbour to the northeast (Belle Vue). However, given the modest height of the extension, its degree of separation from the boundary with the neighbour and the presence of intervening features, it is considered that it would not result in unacceptable adverse impacts on amenity in terms of visual intrusion, overlooking or shading. The single storey extension proposed would be well distanced from Uncle Tom’s cabin to the south and would not be readily visible from within this site due to its modest roofline. On this basis, no conflict with Policy DP2 has been identified.

Flood Risk

8.24 As identified above, the majority of the site lies within Environment Agency Flood Zones 2 and 3. However, the majority of the footprint of the proposed extension would be located within Flood Zone 1 (lowest probability of flooding).

8.25 The proposal comprises "minor development" in flood risk terms. The application has been accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment which accords with Standing Advice from the Environment Agency.

8.26 It has been confirmed that floor levels of the proposed extension will not be set lower than existing levels, and that flood proofing of the proposed development has been considered and incorporated (with specific resilience measures proposed within the flood risk assessment). These measures can reasonably be secured through conditions.

8.27 On this basis, it is concluded that, in accordance with Local Plan Policy DP12 and paragraph 164 of the NPPF, the proposal would not lead to increased flood risk and would avoid increased vulnerability to the range of impacts arising from climate change.

Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG)

8.28 It is recognised that biodiversity net gain is required under the statutory framework introduced by Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. This seeks to ensure development proposals deliver at least a 10% increase in biodiversity value relative to the pre-development biodiversity value of the onsite habitat.

8.29 In this instance, it has been established that the proposal would be exempt from mandatory BNG under Regulation 5 of the Biodiversity Gain Requirements (Exemptions) Regulations 2024 as it comprises a householder application within the meaning of article 2(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

Conclusion

8.30 In conclusion, it has been identified that the proposed development would be in conflict with Policy DP36 and the Local Plan objective of maintaining a stock of smaller sized dwellings. However, in this instance, the proposal is justified on the basis that it is required to meet the day-to-day living needs of the longstanding occupants of the dwelling. Having regard to this and the NPPF objective of addressing identified local health and well-being needs, it is concluded that in this particular case there are material considerations presented which justify the granting of planning permission.

8.31 The very unique circumstances in this case are such that the granting of planning permission would not set any harmful precedent for other planning decisions across the New Forest National Park or undermine the policies contained within the adopted Development Plan.

8.32 It has also been demonstrated that the proposed development would not give rise to significant harmful impacts upon the character of the area, flood risk or neighbouring amenity.

8.33 It is therefore recommended that planning permission should be granted subject to conditions.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Grant subject to conditions

Condition(s)

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Development shall only be carried out in accordance with the following drawings and documents:
- Block and Location Plan – Reference 2-DCC-25
- Floorplans and Elevations – Reference 1-DCC-25
- Flood risk assessment (Southern Planning Practice April 2026)
- Curtilage Plan – Reference 5-DCC-25
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 SP17, DP2, DP12 and DP18 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016- 2036 (August 2019).
The external facing brickwork to be used in the development shall match those used on the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority.
Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with Policy DP2 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).

Informative(s)

Please be advised that the red line on drawing number 2-DCC-25 is representative only of the application site and not the extent of residential curtilage associated with the applicaiton dwelling.