April 2026 Planning Committee – Full report

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Called in by New Forest District Councillor

2. POLICIES

Principal Development Plan Policies

• DP2 General development principles
• SP6 The natural environment
• SP7 Landscape character
• SP15 Tranquillity
• SP16 The historic and built environment
• SP17 Local distinctiveness
• SP39 Local community facilities

Supplementary Planning Documents

• Design Guide SPD

NPPF

• 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

Beaulieu Parish Council:

Initial Comments (30 January 2026):

Recommends permission for the following reasons but would accept the decision reached by the National Park Authority’s Officers under their delegated powers:

1. The proposal is not considered to have a detrimental effect on the character and visual appearance of the landscape, especially once the proposed trees screening the site have matured. The proposed site is in a field that has a Lawful Development Certificate for 28 days overflow car parking so parking in this area has already been established.
2. The impact on the ancient woods adjacent to the site is unlikely to be material as confirmed by the National Park Authority’s Tree Officer who raised no objection to the proposal. The National Park Authority has confirmed that at the pre-application stage no other significant adverse ecological issues were raised.
3. The impact on neighbouring properties is considered to be modest as only one property has a distant view of the site which should be well screened over time and will have no lighting.
4. Beaulieu Parish Council recognises that the Countryside Education Trust, a well-respected local charity, is under considerable financial pressure following cuts in State educational funding which is necessitating a change in the way the Charity operates. To help the Charity to attract new sources of revenue to enable it to remain viable it is considered that this application for increased accessible car parking providing better accessibility to the site is justified to help secure its future.
5. Local residents' concern that the proposed new car park would result in an increase in non-educational events being run at the Tree House Study Centre has been fully taken into account. However, it is considered that, on balance, the Beaulieu Estate’s assurance that these events will remain limited to the current permitted level offers reassurance that the proposed car parking will be used primarily to support the Trust’s educational purposes.

Suggested Condition:

To safeguard the local ecology and reduce disturbance for neighbouring properties, no lighting on the site should be a condition of approval.

Further Comments (26 March 2026):

Recommends permission but would accept the decision reached by the National Park Authority’s Officers under their delegated powers.

Comment: Confirm that they have reviewed the field west of the Tree House Study Centre Great Crested Newt Further Assessment indicating that the proposed development is unlikely to result in a significant impact on great crested newts and that the recommendations set out within the Planning Committee Report represent an appropriate and proportionate approach for the National Park Authority to fulfil its legal obligation in respect of European Protected Species.

5. CONSULTEES

6. REPRESENTATIONS

NFDC Councillor Poole: Referred application to NPA's Planning Committee due to concerns raised by local residents and considers this warrants a Committee decision.

19 objections received following initial consultation raising the following issues (summarised):

• Inappropriate change of use from agricultural use.
• Unproven need for additional parking.
• No consideration given to the use of less damaging alternative sites.
• Major urbanising development.
• No public consultation before submission of application.
• No discussion of alternative solutions such as a walking path.
• Use of the car park for additional commercial enterprises not related to educational activities.
• Setting a precedent for commercial expansion and intensification.
• Harm to residential amenity, dark skies and light pollution, impacts on ecology.
• Harm to residents' mental health and wellbeing.
• No obligation to provide parking.
• Recent legislation strengthens protection of National Parks.
• Car park is unnecessary and disproportionate in size.
• Already adequate parking for less able patrons, others could easily walk.
• The Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023 impose a duty on the Planning Authority to ‘seek to further’ conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area of outstanding natural beauty.
• Parish meeting did not discuss planning policy only the financial advantages to the study centre.
• The National Park's first purpose would be breached.
• Unproven business need for more parking facilities.
• Insufficient capacity at the Treehouse to increase commercial activity.
• The car park will not save the CET, If the study centre fails it will revert back to the Beaulieu Estate leaving it with a third large unrestricted event venue in ancient woodland.
• Not used solely for the Treehouse Study Centre and no way of enforcing this.
• Not solely for school use.
• Intensification of wedding events unrelated to charitable work.
• Current 17 spaces is adequate according to application 07/91713, they have not been needed.
• Spaces should be designated as disabled if it for accessibility requirement.
• 40 new spaces are only needed for large scale events.
• Expansion of car park goes against their green credentials
• The study centre has operated with its current arrangement for over 25 years and the underlying activities have not changed.
• Continuous development on agricultural land causing permanent harm.
• Application is made by a separate organisation.
• Not in keeping and contrary to Policies SP3 (Major development in the National Park), SP5 (Nature conservation sites of international Importance), SP7 ( Landscape Character) SP15 (Tranquillity), SP17 (Local Distinctiveness), SP46 (Sustainable tourist development) of the Local Plan 2016 – 2036.
• The car park is a major development with no exceptional circumstances or public interest in a car park of this size.
• Existing Treehouse permission has conditions concerning parking provisions to prevent ‘creep’ in the area.
• If permitted, the proposal ignores guarantees not to increase development of the Treehouse site and restrictions regarding operating in darkness.
• The following conditions must be applied:
  • Parking in association with the Treehouse only
  • Car park not to be used by the Beaulieu Estate or Motor Museum for event days.
  • Car park not to be used for commercial activity e.g. Parking, operating fast food wagons, provision of temporary toilet facilities.
  • No lighting and no night-time car park movements.
  • No overnight parking.
• In breach of condition 7 of application 07/91713.
• Erosion of landscape character, no conservation or enhancement of the character of the landscape.
• Increased visitors and visitor activity would have adverse impacts.
• CET has no legal interest in the land, does not own it nor has any interest by way of lease or licence.
• Site is bound by Ancient Woodland.
• Light pollution, increased traffic and noise would affect neighbour amenity.
• Lighting will affect Bats and dark skies of the National Park.
• Increase in litter.
• Proposed BNG and its new planting will greatly reduce the open aspect of Hides Field.
• Land contamination caused by oil spillage and other vehicle residue is inevitable.
• Additional car parking encourages car dependency and undermines efforts to reduce emissions in line with the Climate Change Act 2008.
• Transport could be provided by the CET minibus.
• Beaulieu Estate have tried to introduce non-agricultural and non-forestry operations on Hides Field with other enterprises in operation without planning permission. The land known as ‘Event fields’ operates non-agricultural use on this land for 90 days per year. Planning breaches in the near vicinity are clear and have increased commercial activity.

14 representations in support following initial consultation (summarised):

• The proposal is not about convenience, but about inclusion, opportunity and sustainability.
• New car park keeps an elegant separation between the woodland area and treehouse site, enhancing the woodland setting.
• Treehouse is an amazing facility built with public money and their usage is restricted by difficult and narrow access.
• The proposal enhances access, safety, and inclusivity while supporting the Trust's important work.
• Current parking facilities are inadequate, unsuitable and dangerous on a road that serves commercial and residential properties.
• Better access will help the survival of a charitable organisation and venue.
• There is a need to support countryside education and remove physical barriers excluding those with physical disabilities.
• Lack of access restricts education events.
• CET providing excellent education for schools and the local community in all aspects of conservation and biodiversity.
• Parking already has permission.
• Car park would be well screened in a discrete area causing no impact on neighbours.
• New car park will divert traffic away from the single track serving neighbouring properties.
• Biodiversity Net Gain target is met.
• No negative environmental impacts.
• Currently has inadequate access, as a result, many are unable to attend at all, meaning they are excluded.
• Access to nature, significantly improves metal health and wellbeing which is vital.
• Better access to the treehouse would also safeguard the future of the charity.
• Will not cause any noise, harm or disruption to the immediate area.
• Proposal delivers one of the purposes of the National Park: to promote opportunities for the public to enjoy and understand the special qualities of the parks.

Three additional objections received following further consultation period raising the following new concerns:

• The suggested conditions will not be adequate.
• Regular footfall and vehicle movements will bring unknown individuals into close and sustained proximity to my home. This creates opportunities for loitering, antisocial behaviour, and unauthorised access.
• Green Policy Statement has not changed.
• Granting the change of use will create environmental harm for no justifiable benefit.
• The Applicant’s initial “hurried” report in reply to NatureSpace's concerns fails to identify the many run-offs and streams from Hides Field and how these all drain into Hartford Stream.

One additional comment following further consultation period:

A financial report undertaken in 2025 indicates that the charity would likely be considered financially unsustainable without intervention. It would be helpful to your planning department, if the 2025 report could be made available to you before any decision is made. If this report shows no income recovery, then the charity will not be able to continue to function at the current levels and an additional car park would be completely unnecessary.

No letters of support received following further consultation period.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

• Application for a Certificate of Lawful Development for Existing use of land for events and parking (14/00415) – certificate issued (lawful) on 16 December 2014
• Tree House Study Centre; demolish existing (07/91713) approved on 23 August 2007

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 The application site is land within the Beaulieu Estate and National Motor Museum, situated to the north of the main attraction. The Treehouse Study Centre is accessed through the main entrance of the museum, through the route towards the museum parking areas and continuing along to a private gravelled track which provide vehicular access to several residential dwellings. The site comprises a grass field currently used as overflow parking for events. The wider site known as Hides Field is used for camping on an occasional basis. Centrally within Hides Field is a gravel extraction pit and the wider surroundings comprise of woodland, some of which are ancient trees forming the boundary on the eastern edge of the site. There is an existing pedestrian footpath from the fields, through the ancient woodland directly adjacent and leading to the Treehouse Study Centre.

Proposed Development

8.2 The proposal is for a change of use to permanent car park with access track, including surfacing, to serve the Countryside Education Trust Treehouse Study Centre.

8.3 The application site includes the proposal and an area dedicated to planting to provide onsite biodiversity net gain (BNG). The car park, new access track and extended footprint would be around 1,562sqm (0.15 Hectares) comprising of permeable gravel surfacing. The area that would accommodate 46 unmarked vehicle spaces alone would be around 996sqm (0.1 hectares). Development of this modest scale is not considered to engage the major development 'tests' set out in national and local planning policy.

8.4 The site is adjacent to a private road west of the Treehouse Study Centre and a new section of footpath would join an existing footpath which already runs through Goswell Coppice which forms an ancient tree lined boundary on the eastern side of the site exiting immediately adjacent to the study centre. The change of use would only affect the site area as outlined leaving the remainder of Hides Field as grassland used in connection with an agricultural use.

8.5 The route of the new vehicle access would join an existing gravelled route surrounding one of the museum overflow carparking areas and an estate works compound, finally joining a tarmac road linking the wider site to the main route through to the motor museum parking areas and eventually the main entrance onto the B3056.

8.6 The purpose of the car park is to provide safe and accessible off-road car parking, together with minibus and coach access and turning for school visits suitable for year-round use. The car park would be used in association with the Treehouse Study Centre only and would increase the number of parking spaces from 17 existing spaces within the separate site of the Treehouse.

8.7 The application site would provide the only alternative land for additional parking as the study centre itself is surrounded by dense woodland, which is designated as Ancient Woodland

Consideration

8.8 By way of background, the application was deferred at the 17 March 2026 Planning Committee due to the receipt of comments from Nature Space UK that required additional work and assessment The merits of the application were not discussed at the 17 March 2026 meeting. The additional information received has been reviewed and consulted on for an appropriate time period. Additional consultee responses and representations have since been received, as summarised above, and have been considered in this report.

8.9 The key considerations are the principle of the proposed development; the impact of the proposal on the character and visual appearance of the landscape, trees, ecology and biodiversity; the impact on amenities of the nearby dwellings; and highway/ traffic considerations.

8.10 By way of further background, under application 2014/00415/LDCE, the wider site known as Hides Field as outlined on the map which accompanied the certificate, benefits from a lawfulness certificate granting the use of the land for the parking of cars and any other purpose permitted by virtue of Part 4, Class B of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995. The location plan that accompanied planning application 07/91713 indicates that area of the land subject to this application was a former gravel pit that has since been restored to its current grassland. This application is a standalone proposal, the site as outlined does not seek to change the use of Hides Field in its entirety.

Principle of Development

8.11 Linked to the delivery of the Authority's statutory duty to foster the socio-economic well-being of communities within the National Park, Local Plan Policy SP39 sets out that the Authority will support the retention of existing community facilities and prevent their loss or redevelopment where they contribute to the sustainability of local communities. It further sets out that the Authority will support the development of essential community facilities where the proposal is of clear and direct benefit to the local village or rural community; the scale of the proposed facility is proportionate to local areas; and they are accessible to the local communities they serve. The proposal is not a new facility as such but is proposed in connection with an existing facility. The Treehouse Study Centre provides education for schools and a wide range of local community groups in all aspects of conservation and biodiversity and provides event facilities to a wide range of users in all demographic profiles. It is a facility that promotes opportunities for the public to enjoy and understand the special qualities of the National Park in line with the second statutory National Park purpose. The current parking provisions and accessibility arrangements are unsuitable and can act as a barrier, excluding those with physical disabilities. Although there is no obligation for the applicants to provide car parking facilities, this is considered to be a reasonable requirement for the facility to support its users. The proposal seeks to improve the facilities to offer better, safer and closer alternatives to all users within the local community. In this respect, it would accord with the aims of Policy SP39 and the principle of development is considered acceptable subject to the other policy considerations set out below.

Impact on the Landscape

8.12 Paragraph 189 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2024) sets out that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. The conservation and enhancement of wildlife and cultural heritage are also important considerations in these areas and should be given great weight in National Parks. The scale and extent of development within nationally 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. The application is not considered to be 'major development' and therefore the tests set out in paragraph 190 of the NPPF (2024) and the policy requirements of Policy SP3 in the adopted Local Plan are not engaged.

8.13 The proposal is a site located sensitively within its landscape. General characteristics of the Hides Field Landscape comprise of grassland which gently sloping on the south-east side towards the proposed site. Land levels continue to gently slope towards land on the north-east side between the gravel extraction site which is at the highest point of Hides Field and towards two dwellings known as Hides Close Cottage and Hides Close. The car park would be sited on level ground at the lowest point of Hides Field, and lower than an existing bank surrounding the estate works compound. There is an established tree line boundary on its eastern side and the car park would be predominantly remain accessed through an international tourist attraction. Being in close proximity to the tourist attraction, adjacent to a well-used road and the study centre development, the site is not visually intrusive and the use would be appropriate with its landscape setting. There is no wider landscape impact on the New Forest National Park given the site's location.

8.14 In terms of materials, gravel sourced from the extraction pit to the north of the site would be used and would not require material to be brought onto the site from unknown sources, which is a particularly sustainable approach. Permeable gravel would not increase the risk of flooding and is an appropriate material in a rural setting. The expanse of the permeable gravelled surface would not result in a major urbanising development, and it should also be noted that, being constructed on the site of the former gravel pit, the car park could be restored again to grassland again if no longer required. To enhance the landscape and to achieve biodiversity net gain, the proposals include the planting of perimeter hedgerows along the north-west side of the car park. Planting would comprise a mix of native species (Beech, Hawthorn, Holly, Blackthorn and Hornbeam). The proposal does not include fencing, lighting or signage of any description therefore the landscape would not be detrimentally affected by artificial light sources or unnecessary structural clutter. There is no objection from the Authority's Landscape Officer.

8.15 Overall, subject to conditions, it is concluded that the proposal would accord with Policies SP7 (Landscape Character) and SP15 (Tranquillity) and accords with paragraph 189 of the NPPF.

Impact on Trees

8.16 The Authority’s Tree Officer has noted that there are no Tree Preservation Orders affecting this site. It is considered that the gravel car parking area will have little or no impact on the health and condition of the ancient trees in this part of Goswell Coppice. It was agreed at the pre application site meeting that a 6m exclusion zone from the woodland edge would be acceptable. At this distance, the car park is now proposed at a lower land level then initially presented. There are no changes to existing footpath through Goswell Coppice, thus protecting the trees within the existing Ancient Semi-Natural Woodland and their root systems. There is no objection from the Tree Officer.

Impact on Ecology

8.17 The proposal triggers statutory BNG requirements. BNG metric calculations indicate that site enhancements and mitigation would exceed the minimum 10% gain required and this provision would be subject to future monitoring. This would be secured through conditions and an appropriate mechanism.

8.18 In relation to impacts on designated sites (SPA, SAC, Ramsar and SSSI), the Authority's Ecologist is satisfied that will be no detrimental impacts. In respect of locally designated sites, the Ecologist is minded that the Site of Interest for Nature Conservation (SINC) will not be harmed and that proposals for habitat enhancement will offer some potential enhancement of habitats on its edge.

8.19 In relation to impacts on protected species, the field has been used for grass cutting. The Preliminary Ecology Report concludes that the proposal will be capable of achieving BNG, the application site provides no habitat for roosting bats, and the main car park site has poor habitat for feeding bats and no habitat for nesting birds and there is no evidence of badger sets. The 6m buffer zone between the site and the woodland strip will be managed to conserve and extend the narrow strip of more species rich grassland found along this woodland edge and manage the woodland edge scrub to maintain is ecological value. The report makes no recommendations or further mitigation or enhancements to the site than are already proposed for BNG purposes, however, having regard to the advice of the Authority's Ecologist, there is potential for the Authority to seek enhancements as required by Policy SP6. The Ecologist's initial comments were of no objection subject to securing addressing ancient woodland standing advice in any decision and securing details of a Construction Environment Management Plan to ensure construction activities avoid impacts and plan for control of unforeseen events e.g. liquid/dust pollution; reptile good practice avoidance methods and enhancement being secured via a suitable condition; and advice being obtained from NatureSpace UK and great crested newt avoidance measures being secured prior to decision.

8.20 Comments were then received from NatureSpace UK requesting additional information in relation to potential impacts on great crested newts. Further information has been received from the applicant in this respect, and this has been subject to consultation.

8.21 The Authority's Ecologist supports the conclusions of the recent report in relation to great crested newts that only low suitability habitat is affected by the development phase of the proposal, and that reasonable avoidance measures such as those outlined are capable of managing risks to individuals. In addition, the Ecologist is minded that risks of pollution and wider disturbance from operational aspects are unlikely to represent significant effects in relation to the species due to matters such as the scale, distance and lack of substantive ecological pathways.

8.22 In addition, NatureSpace UK is now satisfied that, if this application was to be approved, it would be unlikely to have any impact upon great crested newts and/or their habitats. Comments received on 31 March 2026 set out that the subsequent information provided has included relevant on site and pond information for surrounding ponds. The report has also suggested that Reasonable Avoidance Measures (RAMS)/ Precautionary Working Method Statement (PWMS) would be appropriate for the development proposals on site. Therefore, the use of a Precautionary Working Methods Statement (PWMS) is recommended and this would be secured by condition. Subject to conditions, the proposed development would accord with Policy SP6 and the Authority is able to fulfil its legal obligations in respect of protected species.

Impact on Heritage Assets

8.23 The Authority’s Archaeologist has noted that historic mapping shows that the area of the proposed development is likely to have been subjected to mineral extraction. Due to the likely disturbance already caused by this, there is likely minimal potential for surviving belowground archaeology. Any encountered remains would likely be of limited significance, such as not to require the imposition of an archaeological condition. The proposal would comply with Policy SP16.

Impact on Neighbour Amenity

8.24 As summarised in section 6 above, objections concerning neighbour impact have been received. From the nearest points of the rear boundaries of neighbouring properties, Hides Close Cottage is around 324m away from the surfaced car park area and 240m from the planting boundary; Hides Close would be 250m away from the surfaced spaces and around 170m from the planting area. These distances are significant. Oldways House is one of two nearest neighbours with around 85m between the property and the site, however, this dwelling has the estate works compound, an existing bank and a high tree screening it from the proposal. Vineyards Cottage would be around 60m with comparable screening and visibility with Oldways. At these distances, with current screening provisions and subject to conditions, the proposal would not have a significant adverse impact on neighbour amenity in accordance with Policy DP2. Suggested conditions have been reviewed in light of the relevant tests contained within the NPPF.

8.25 Whilst the car park would raise the level of activity and some instances of noise beyond its current 28 day use, no lighting is proposed, and the lighting of vehicles at night time would be a significant distance away from the dwellings. The applicant has also put forward a car park management plan in relation to the use and management of the car park. Subject to this and appropriate conditions, it is considered that the levels of additional activity and associated impacts are unlikely to be so significant as to merit the refusal of the scheme. The adopted local planning policies for the New Forest National Park recognise the need to support facilities that benefit local communities in and around the New Forest National Park; and enable people to understand and enjoy the special qualities of the National Park - in line with the second statutory Park purpose and related socio-economic duty.

Highway/ Transport Considerations

8.26 The site is well away from a main road and some existing access arrangements will be utilised. The car park will be used in conjunction with treehouse events and activities. The new access joining the existing route would divert traffic away from the private road used by residents for their own vehicle access to their dwellings and for deliveries to these dwellings as well as to the study centre. The creation of a new car park removes the potential for overspill parking along the roadside and potential off-road parking that has a damaging effect on the root system of the ancient trees and on the verges along the roadside when the layby is full. Overall, unacceptable highway impacts are not anticipated as the proposal relates to the existing tree house facility. A condition would be imposed limiting the use of the car park to events and activities associated with the study centre. As set out above, a car park management plan has been received [This was requested in relation to the original Green Transport Policy Statement from 2007 and has provided additional information and clarifications].

Conclusion

8.27 The site already benefits from a lawful development certificate permitting car parking on the wider site known as Hides Fields for 28 days of the year for use by the Beaulieu Estate. The current parking facilities are inadequate and the provision of this designated and permanent car park, to be used in connection with the Treehouse Study Centre, would allow a safe and all-inclusive means of drop off and parking away from the roadside and would be of benefit to this community and educational facility. At 0.15 hectares the car park anf related access track is modest in scale. The proposal would meet biodiversity net gain requirements and subject to conditions, would comply with Policies DP2, DP18, SP6, SP7, SP15, SP16, SP17 and SP39 of the adopted local plan and the NPPF.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Prior to the completion of a legal agreement to secure the BNG monitoring fee or the prior completion of a conservation covenant, the Interim Head of Planning and Place be authorised to grant planning permission subject to conditions.

Condition(s)

1. 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.

2. Development shall only be carried out in accordance with the following drawings and documents: PA23-135:01 Rev K, DR1, DR2, DR3, Car Park Management Plan (dated February 2026). 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).

3. The surface materials to be used in the development shall be as those set out on Drawing PA23-135:01 Rev K. 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 development in accordance with Policy DP2 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).

4. No development, demolition or site clearance shall take place until the arrangements to be taken for the protection of trees and hedges on the site (to be identified by agreement with the Local Planning Authority beforehand), have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed arrangements shall be carried-out in full prior to any activity taking place and shall remain in-situ for the duration of the development.

   Reason: To safeguard trees and natural features which are important to the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies DP2 and SP6 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016- 2036 (August 2019).

5. No development shall take place until a construction management plan, informed by ecological professionals, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the National Park Authority. The plan shall include:

   • details of a compound to be provided for the storage of materials, machinery, waste materials and spoil
   • details of the disposal of any spoil from the site
   • measures that will be implemented to avoid or mitigate constructional impacts and a plan for the control of unforseen events such as dust and liquid pollution on the adjacent SSSI during the construction phase.

   All materials, machinery, waste materials and spoil shall be stored within the approved compound. Development shall take place in accordance with the approved plan.

   Reason: In the interests of protecting the New Forest Site of Special Scientific Interest in accordance with Policy SP6 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016- 2036 (August 2019

6. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) or any order revoking or re-enacting that order, no access, vehicular or pedestrian, other than that shown on the approved plan shall be formed to the site.

   Reason: In the interests of the protection of the Ancient Trees which run along the east of the site and highway safety and to comply with Policies SP6 and SP55 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019) and Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. The Biodiversity Gain Plan, to be submitted and agreed in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority in accordance with paragraphs 13 and 14 of Part 2 of Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, shall be prepared broadly in accordance with the BNG Metric and draft BNG Plan, dated 28 November 2025, prepared by Jonathan Cox.

   Reason: to ensure delivery of the requisite biodiversity net gain and to accord with Policy SP6 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (August 2019).

8. The development shall not commence until a Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan (the HMMP), prepared in accordance with the approved Biodiversity Gain Plan and including:

   1. a non-technical summary;
   2. the roles and responsibilities of the people or organisation(s) delivering the HMMP;
   3. the planned habitat creation and enhancement works to create or improve habitat to achieve the biodiversity net gain in accordance with the approved Biodiversity Gain Plan;
   4. the management measures to maintain habitat in accordance with the approved Biodiversity Gain Plan for a period of 30 years from the completion of development; and
   5. the monitoring methodology and frequency in respect of the created or enhanced habitat to be submitted to the local planning authority,

   has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority.

   The created and/or enhanced habitat specified in the approved HMMP shall be managed and maintained in accordance with the approved HMMP.

   Reason: to ensure delivery of the requisite biodiversity net gain and to accord with Policy SP6 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (August 2019).

9. No development shall take place until a Precautionary Working Method Statement (PWMS) detailing reasonable avoidance measures for great crested newts has been submitted to and approved by the New Forest National Park Authority.

   The PWMS shall include but is not limited to the following:

   • Toolbox talk for contractors working on site including great crested newt ecology,features, and what to do if a great crested newt is found.
   • Specific timing of works.
   • Definition of a working corridor and access route to ensure that surrounding habitat is not impacted as a result of the proposals.
   • Managing vegetation to ensure it does not become suitable.
   • Removing waste off site, storing materials properly, and excavation best practice for great crested newts.
   • Working practices and housekeeping of the site.
   • As well as additional site-specific best practice measures required to ensure no impacts to great crested newts.

   Works shall only be undertaken in accordance with the approved PWMS.

   Reason: In the interests of ecology and in accordance with Policy SP6 of the New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (August2019).

10. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the National Park Authority, development shall only take place in accordance with the recommendations for ecological mitigation and enhancement which are set out in the ecological reports hereby approved (Countryside Education Trust Car Park, Beaulieu, Hampshire: Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, dated 28 November 2025, and Field West of Treehouse Study Centre Great Crested Newt Further Assessment, dated 13 March 2026).

    The specified measures shall be implemented and retained at the site in perpetuity.

    Reason: To safeguard protected species in accordance with Policies DP2 and SP6 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).

11. 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).

12. No parking shall take place on the site in connection with any other events or activities other than those held in connection with the Treehouse Study Centre.

    Reason: To safeguard the amenities of nearby residential properties in accordance with Policy DP2 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).

Informative(s):

1. All bats and their roosts are fully protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000) and are further protected under Regulation 41 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. Should any bats or evidence of bats be found prior to or during development, work must stop immediately and Natural England contacted for further advice. This is a legal requirement under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and applies to whoever carries out the work. All contractors on site should be made aware of this requirement and given the relevant contact number for Natural England, which is 0300 060 3900.
2. There is a low risk that great crested newts (GCN) may be present at the application site. It is considered to be unreasonable to require the applicant to submit a survey because this could be considered disproportionate to the scale and the likely impacts of the development. However, the application site lies in the red impact zone as per the modelled district licence map, which indicates that there is highly suitable habitat for GCN within the area surrounding the application site. Therefore, anyone undertaking this development should be aware that GCN and their resting places are protected at all times by The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Planning permission for development does not provide a defence against prosecution under this legislation or substitute the need to obtain a protected species licence if an offence is likely. If a GCN is discovered during site preparation, enabling or construction phases, then all works must stop until the advice of a professional/suitably qualified ecologist and Natural England is obtained, including the need for a licence.
3. In considering this application it has been noted that protected trees are within close proximity of the proposed development. You are therefore advised to contact the Authority’s Tree Team on 01590 646620 for further advice as legal proceedings can be pursued if unauthorised works to protected trees (including root damage) occur.
4. The effect of paragraph 13 of Schedule 7A to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is that planning permission granted for the development of land in England is deemed to have been granted subject to the condition ''(the biodiversity gain condition'') that development may not begin unless:
   1. a Biodiversity Gain Plan has been submitted to the planning authority, and
   2. the planning authority has approved the plan.

   The planning authority, for the purposes of determining whether to approve a Biodiversity Gain Plan if one is required in respect of this permission would be the New Forest National Park Authority.

   There are statutory exemptions and transitional arrangements which mean that the biodiversity gain condition does not always apply.

   Based on the information available this permission is considered to be one which will require the approval of a biodiversity gain plan before development is begun because none of the statutory exemptions or transitional arrangements are considered to apply.

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

Principal Development Plan Policies

• DP2 General development principles
• DP18 Design principles
• DP37 Outbuildings
• SP6 The natural environment
• 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

Brockenhurst Parish Council: Recommend permission for the reasons listed below:

Committee members were content with the amended plans, particularly the reduced size of the balcony.

5. CONSULTEES

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

• First floor extension to include balcony and external staircase; alterations to doors and windows (AMENDED DESCRIPTION AND PLANS) (24/00414FULL) refused on 18 November 2025.
• Door & window alterations at the carriages house and conversion to staff room (07/92229) granted on 11 December 2007.
• Entrance gates and fencing with lantern lights; fencing (07/91951) granted on 28 September 2007.
• Extensions and alterations to outbuildings to form car port, garage and office/wc (07/91878) granted on 14 September 2007.
• Walled garden (07/91766) granted on 14 Augus 2007.
• Replacement dwelling (07/91193) granted on 02 April 2007.
• House; demolition of existing (06/90211) refused on 03 November 2006.
• Detached house (06/86899) refused on 16 March 2006. Subsequent appeal dismissed on 03 August 2006.
• Erect staff house with triple garage & enclosed swimming pool (NFDC/94/54472) refused on 05 July 1994. Subsequent appeal dismissed on 12 January 1995.
• Erect house & triple garage & staff accommodation in stables (NFDC/88/40190) withdrawn on 13 January 1992.
• Erection of a house (NFDC/91/46780) granted on 13 January 1992.
• Four applications granted between 1982 and 1988 (and listed below) for a dwelling and (separate) staff accommodation (references 22412, 27558, 30305, 36314) were revoked by a Revocation Order on 24 October 1991.
• Erection of a house and quadruple garage and erect staff house (NFDC/87/36314) granted on 26 March 1988.
• Erection of a house and separate staff accommodation (NFDC/85/30305) granted on 22 November 1985.
• Erection of a house and staff accommodation (siting) (NFDC/84/27558) granted on 12 October 1984.
• Conversion of coach house to residential and erection of a house and garage (NFDC/83/25283) refused on 03 May 1984.
• Addition of a conservatory and erection of a swimming pool enclosure (existing glass house to be demolished). (NFDC/83/24236) granted on 17 June 1983.
• Erection of a house and separate staff accommodation (NFDC/82/22412) granted on 10 December 1982.
• Demolition of fire destroyed house and replacement with new house and new separate staff accommodation (NFDC/79/12862) granted on 23 November 1979.
• Alterations and addition of a sitting room and attached garage block with two bedrooms and a bathroom over (existing glasshouses and outbuildings on site to be demolished) (NFDC/78/11809) granted on 06 December 1978.

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 Hincheslea House site comprises a large site near to the Open Forest, accessed from the south side of Burley Road by a long drive across parkland landscape. A large two storey dwelling of Georgian ‘country house’ character stood on the site until it was demolished in1978 following a fire. It was replaced by a smaller 'log cabin' style dwelling, which was also extensively fire damaged, in the early 1990s. A replacement dwelling received planning permission in 2007, which was constructed shortly afterwards and is the house which exists today.

8.2 Old brick outbuildings associated with the former country house have remained on site, situated within the curtilage to the south of the dwelling. The application the subject of this application comprised the former Coach House/ Stables. This building was conditioned to only be used for purposes ancillary to the dwelling on the site under planning permission reference 07/91878.

8.3 As set out in the comments of the Building Design and Conservation Officer, the building is considered to comprise a non-designated heritage asset contributing to the group value of the site. Paragraph 216 of the NPPF (2024) states that the effect of an application on the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the application. In weighing applications that directly or indirectly affect non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm and the significance of the heritage asset.

8.4 The site borders SAC, SPA, Ramsar and SSSI designations on the south boundary.

Proposed Development

8.5 This application seeks consent for works to the former Coach House/ Stables building, which is situated on the east side of the group of outbuildings. The building has a broadly symmetrical form, with a single storey "outshot" element situated centrally on the east elevation and single storey elements at either end.

8.6 The proposed works would consist of:

• A central window above that of the arched doors to the on the front elevation.
• To the rear ground floor outshot, it is proposed to add a balcony at first floor level. To facilitate this a brick parapet, 1.14m above that of the existing wall height, is proposed with a balcony extending out from this, 3m from the rear wall of the existing ground floor element.
• A glass balustrade on the balcony.
• A new door is proposed in the location of the existing centralised first floor window, roof alterations are proposed forming a gable to allow for glazed French doors to provide access to the outdoor space.
• To the ground floor below the proposed balcony within the existing rear wall of the central outshot, it is proposed to remove the two central windows and replace with two sets of full height doors.
• The proposal seeks to change the existing store into a gym and in doing so, the rear ground floor window changes to form a door, with two windows, matching that of the existing, to be added either side of this door on this rear elevation. The floor plans also indicate a new door on the front ground floor elevation.

Consideration

8.7 This application has been submitted following the refusal of planning application reference: 24/00414FULL on 18 November 2025. The key considerations in this case relate to the proposed design and impact on heritage assets and the impact on ecology.

8.8 Section 15, paragraph 189 of the National Planning Policy Framework (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).

8.9 Section 12 (Achieving well-designed places), paragraph 131 of the NPPF states that the creation of high quality, beautiful and sustainable buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve. In addition, paragraph 139 of the NPPF sets out that development that is not well designed should be refused, especially where it fails to reflect local design policies and government guidance on design, taking into account any local design guidance and supplementary planning documents such as design guides and codes.

8.10 In respect of the impact on heritage assets, the building, also noted as a Coach House, has to date been sympathetically altered and is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset worthy of inclusion in the National Park's Local List and forms part of the National Park's cultural heritage. As set out in the comments from the Building Design and Conservation Team, this is due to factors relating to age, representivity, architectural value, group value and historic value.

8.11 Paragraph 202 of the NPPF sets out that heritage assets including sites and buildings of local historic 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. 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.

8.12 The Authority's Building Design and Conservation Team have been consulted and are unable to support the revised proposals. Whilst the balcony has been reduced in size by circa 2m from the refused scheme, the proposal would still introduce a large balcony to the rear of the building which would create a visually prominent domestic feature that competes with the simple, utilitarian character and form of the former coach house/stable. The total outdoor area created via this proposal would be 27.5 square metres; the area would have a depth of 5m and width of 5.7m. The balcony is considered to erode the historic character and appearance of the building.

8.13 In addition, the change in roof design would interrupt the linear architectural form of the historic roofscape and would introduces an incongruous gable end roof form that would not sit comfortably to the rear elevation. Although it has been reduced in size from the previous proposal, the addition of this roofing element is considered at odds with the simple linear profile characteristic of an 18th century coach house. Concerns have also been raised by the Building Design and Conservation Team in relation to the impact of the proposed fenestration on the historic character and appearance of the building.

8.14 Overall, the proposed development is considered to cause less than substantial harm to the historic and architectural significance of the non-designated heritage asset through the impact of the alterations on the historic character and appearance of the heritage asset. No public benefits have been put forward to offset this harm. The proposals therefore conflict with Policy SP16 of the adopted Local Plan.

8.15 In relation to design considerations, Policy DP2 (General Development Principles) promotes high quality design and construction which enhances local character and distinctiveness. As set out above, the proposed balcony and roof alterations are not considered appropriate or sympathetic in terms of scale and appearance in the context of the existing building. The inclusion of a large, 27.5 square metre balcony is considered excessive and disproportionate, with inappropriate massing. The proposal would fundamentally alter the design of the existing heritage asset through the introduction of incongruous domestic features and would not enhance the built and historic environment, nor be contextually appropriate. It is therefore considered that Policies DP2 and DP18 are not adhered to.

8.16 An ecological survey has been undertaken identifying the presence of bat roosts within the building and that a European Protected Species licence will be required for any works within the building, noted as the Stables within the Ecological Assessment, due to the temporary impact/loss of roost and potential direct impacts to a long-eared roost. The Authority must therefore be satisfied that the three tests for obtaining such a licence would be met. The first and second tests relate to the work being in the public interest, (this is met by its being in compliance with adopted Policy) and there being no satisfactory alternative (the development is the appropriate means of meeting the homeowners' requirements). In this instance, as highlighted above, the proposal is not compliant with Policies DP2, DP18 and SP16 and thus does not meet these tests.

8.17 The third test relates to the maintenance of the conservation status of the population of protected species. Had the initial tests been met, this test would have been capable of being met subject to the work being carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the ecology report and the requirements of a licence.

8.18 The level of glazing has been referenced in paragraph 4.16 of the Ecological Assessment: "The presence of Barbastelle, Myotis and Brown Long-Eared, all recorded in the south of the site means light spillage on the surrounding woodland needs to be considered. The new windows proposed in the changes to the old stables will need specialist glazing to reduce excess light spillage." The Authority's Ecologist has commented that the application remains silent on this matter and the ecology report provides no quantitative assessment. Given that there are rare bat species present in the surrounding area, and potential for additional fenestration as a result of the proposal, with consequent impact, precaution is suggested.

Conclusion

8.19 The amendments since the previous refusal have not overcome the objection from the Building Design and Conservation Team. The proposed development, by virtue of its scale, siting and design would not be in keeping with or appropriate to the existing building. The proposal would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of a heritage asset. It has not been sufficiently demonstrated that the harm has been outweighed by public benefit. The proposal would be contrary to the requirements of Policies DP2, DP18 and SP16 of the adopted Local Plan, the Design Guide SPD and the NPPF.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Refuse

Reason(s) for refusal:

1. The proposed development, by virtue of its scale, siting and design would not be in keeping with or appropriate to the existing building and its setting. The proposal would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of a non-designated heritage asset and it would fail to be appropriate or sympathetic to its setting within a historic parkland. It has not been sufficiently demonstrated that the harm has been outweighed by public benefit. The proposal would be contrary to the requirements of Policies DP2, DP18, and SP16 of the New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016-2036 (August 2019), sections 12, 15 and 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework and the Design Guide SPD. 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.