Planning Committee Full Reports 13 October 2026

Planning Committee - 13 October 2026 Report Item 1

Application No:

26/00618FULL Full Application

Site:

Hollybank, Gorley Lynch, Hyde, Fordingbridge SP6 2QA

Proposal:

Outbuilding (demolition of existing outbuildings)

Applicant:

Mr & Mrs Purdy

Case Officer:

Julie Blake

Parish:

Hyde Parish Council

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view.

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

Conservation Area

Principal Development Plan Policies

• DP2 General development principles
• DP18 Design principles
• DP37 Outbuildings
• SP6 The natural environment
• SP7 Landscape character
• SP15 Tranquillity
• SP16 The historic and built environment
• SP17 Local distinctiveness

Supplementary Planning Documents

Design Guide SPD

NPPF

• Sec 3 - Decision-making policies
• Sec 4 - Achieving sustainable development
• Sec 14 - Achieving well-designed places
• Sec 19 - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment
• Sec 20 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Hyde Parish Council: Recommend refusal.

Initial comments: Refusal for the following reasons:

• Details of materials listed on the application form are inadequate.
• Two distinct outbuildings are proposed, and the proposal should not be classed as one.
• Combined size is too large and of no benefit or enhancement to the parish.
• Inappropriate location within a conservation area with SAC & SSSI areas bounded by Avon Valley.
• Larger outbuildings are increasingly used to circumvent restrictions on residential extensions and could easily be converted in the future.
• Inappropriate position within the site alongside the roadside.
• Dwelling would become crowded and overdeveloped with the addition of a large building.
• The mass, scale and size of the combined buildings do not comply with Policies DP2, DP18, DP37, SP7 and SP17.
• Any proposed lighting to be controlled by condition.

The Barn

• Inappropriate siting in relation to the dwelling and proximity to the road. It should be further away from the house similar to the approved outbuilding granted under application 26/00333.

Wood framed glass building

• Not appropriate in a rural parish as it has a suburbanising effect.
• Excessive amount of glazing causing tranquillity issues in terms of light pollution being detrimental to dark skies.

Revised comment received after receipt of amended plans and agent comments:

• Remains a refusal for the same reasons as previously listed.

5. CONSULTEES

Building Design and Conservation Team: Comments: The proposed outbuilding will cause no harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

• Application for a Certificate of Lawful Development for proposed single storey extension and rooflight (26/00121LDCP) – Planning permission required on 09 June 2026
• Outbuilding (26/00333FULL) granted on 19 May 2026
• Erection of a playroom (demolish existing outbuilding) (NFDC/90/45905) granted on 09 January 1991
• New roof forming bedroom/bathroom/store. Porch/2 bay windows (NFDC/87/34425) granted on 01 May 1987

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 The application site is located on the south east side of Gorley Lynch with dense woodland adjacent to the north west. It contains a detached dwelling and four existing outbuildings. Vehicular access is from Gorley Lynch and the site lies within the Western Escarpment Conservation Area. Ground levels slope away from the dwelling on the south and south east sides.

Proposed Development

8.2 This application seeks planning permission for a replacement outbuilding and associated landscaping. The outbuilding would be located within the curtilage of the dwelling, mostly utilising the same footprint of two existing outbuildings to be demolished, albeit slightly forward of them. An existing concrete apron and steps would be replaced with a new terrace which would extend into the garden. The new mid-height terrace would be around 0.6m lower than the upper terrace at the rear of the dwelling with steps down. The outbuilding would comprise of two separated elements identified by a stepped ridge line and would utilise much of the existing hardstanding.

8.3 The outbuilding would be approximately 4.5m high at its highest point, allowing for changes in ground level that slope away from the dwelling on the east side. The larger portion of the outbuilding would be 8.3m in length with the smaller recessed portion being circa 6.8m long. In its entirety, the total length of the building would be 15.7m. In terms of width, the building would be approximately 8m including a front overhang and 5.5m for the smaller section. The outbuilding would comprise of two defined spaces for incidental use (gym / studio/ music room and storage). The outbuilding would have a combined internal floorspace of circa 76.6sq.m. Internally there would be no connecting doorway between the areas and no habitable accommodation or external lighting is proposed.

8.4 The existing outbuildings to be demolished comprise of a garage/ store and a further outbuilding originally permitted in 1991 as a playroom, both alongside the north boundary. The combined existing floorspace of the buildings is 66.7sqm.

8.5 The existing buildings lie adjacent to the high-level roadside. The replacement building would be set further within the site and further away from the tree-lined roadside by around 4m at its nearest point and by 4.7m at the recessed point. This would be 2.5m further away from the roadside boundary than the existing buildings.

Policy Context

8.6 Policy N4 (1) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (August 2026) states that substantial weight should be placed on the importance of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of Protected Landscapes, and to conserving and enhancing wildlife and cultural heritage in National Parks and the Broads.

8.7 Policy HE4 of the NPPF states that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource that should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. It further states that development proposals should avoid (or if not possible, minimise) harm to the significance of heritage assets, and conserve their significance.

8.8 Policy SP16 of the New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016- 2036 (herein after referred to as "the Local Plan") requires development proposals within the National Park to conserve and enhance the significance or special interest of designated or non-designated heritage assets, i.e. 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; 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.

8.9 Policy DP37 of the Local Plan states that domestic outbuildings will be permitted where they are proportionate and clearly subservient to the dwelling they are to serve in terms of design, scale, size, height and massing; located within the residential curtilage; are required for purposes incidental to the use of the main dwelling; are not providing additional habitable accommodation; and will not reduce private amenity space, including parking provision, around the dwelling to an unacceptable level.

8.10 Policy SP15 of the Local Plan sets out that new development should avoid, or provide mitigation for, proposals that will lead to noise, visual intrusion, nuisance and other unacceptable impacts upon the National Park and its special qualities. Policy SP17 resists any development that cumulatively erodes the local character or results in a gradual suburbanising effect.

Consideration

8.11 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, paragraph 3 and Decision-Making Policy DM3 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2026) require that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

8.12 The key issues under consideration are compliance with Policy DP37; the impact on the landscape and character of the area; the impact on heritage assets; the impact on neighbouring amenity; and the impact on ecology.

Principle of Development

8.13 The replacement outbuilding would be for incidental uses and when compared to the dwelling on site, would appear clearly proportionate to it in terms of its size, scale, height and massing given the difference in land levels. The application includes the demolition of two existing outbuildings and an overall net increase in floorspace in the outbuilding of less than 10 square metres. The new outbuilding would be a traditional form of timber-framed building, having a gentle pitched roof of an appropriate design and quality of materials. It would be located in the residential curtilage, would not provide habitable accommodation (which would be secured by condition) and would not reduce private amenity space around the dwelling, including parking provision, to an unacceptable level. The proposal would comply with Policy DP37 and is acceptable in principle, subject to further policy considerations below.

Design and Impact on Landscape and Character of Area

8.14 The outbuilding would be constructed of a timber frame, feather edge cladding left to weather naturally with timber window casements. Amended plans have been received which reduced the amount of glazing by removing the high level apex glazing. The proposed materials as described are appropriate for an outbuilding and have been permitted within the western escarpment and within the wider National Park. The level of detail is adequate to assess the design, and it would be reasonable to condition the provision of samples before commencement. In this respect, the proposal would accord with Policies DP2 and DP18 of the Local Plan and the Authority’s Design Guide 2022.

8.15 In terms of its setting within the site and visibility from outside of the site, the replacement would be appropriate to the site context. In comparison with the existing, visibility from the immediate roadside is unlikely to be discernible. Although no specific numerical ground level datum has been provided, the heights of the proposal would be 3m above the land level which is comparable to the existing buildings. The outbuilding would be set further within the site away from the road and trees, minimising the visual impact on this part of the conservation area. The increased space at the rear of the building would enable additional planting. Cumulatively, it is not considered that the development would erode the local character or result in a gradual suburbanising effect and would accord with Policy SP17.

Heritage

8.16 Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 as amended requires that with respect to development affecting buildings or other land in a conservation area, ‘special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.

8.17 Hollybank is a modern detached dwelling located within character area H of the Western Escarpment Conservation Area, an area which is defined by its dispersed common edge settlement pattern and encroachment into the open forest. The Authority's Building Design and Conservation Team has been consulted and has commented that, although of notable scale, the proposed structure would be set down on a lower level than both the roadway and the adjacent dwelling, reducing its visual presence. The stepped roof form would provide a clear distinction between the incidental residential element and the more agricultural component, creating a deliberate visual break and ensuring an appropriate degree of subservience. In relation to the extent of glazing, glazing is already present on the existing outbuilding. The proposed overhang will provide shading, and the glazed element itself is modest, with a clear and coherent relationship to the main dwelling. For these reasons, the proposal is not considered to materially harm the dark skies or the tranquillity of the area. It is considered that the proposed outbuilding will cause no harm to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Overall, it is considered that the proposal will preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and complies with Policy SP16 and Section 20 of the NPPF.

Impact on Neighbour Amenity

8.18 There are no adjoining or near neighbours and therefore there would be no impact on neighbouring amenity. As such there would be no prospect for overlooking, shading, visual intrusion or any other impacts on neighbouring amenities and no objections have been received.

Natural Environment

8.19 It is recognised that there are several trees along the north boundary; that they would be protected by way of the conservation area status; and noted that the removal of trees and hedgerows is not proposed. Some small ornamental trees at the front of the existing outbuilding would be removed and replanted elsewhere within the garden. The applicant has submitted a tree protection plan and this would be secured by condition.

8.20 The preliminary roost assessment report undertaken by Hampshire Ecological Services Ltd (dated October 2025) concluded that suitability for bat roosts in the outbuildings to be demolished is low to negligible and no evidence of bat roosts were found. Mitigation and enhancement measures have been identified within the report and it is reasonable and necessary to secure these by condition, in accordance with Policy SP6.

8.21 It is recognised that biodiversity net gain is now 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. 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 (as amended).

Conclusion

8.22 The proposed outbuilding would comply with Policy DP37 and is acceptable in principle. It would preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area; the proposed design would be appropriate; and it would not erode the local character or results in a gradual suburbanising effect. There would be no adverse impact on neighbour amenity, trees or ecology. Permission is recommended subject to conditions as the proposal would comply with Policies DP2, DP18, DP37, SP6, SP7, SP15, SP16 and SP17 of the Local Plan, the Design Guide and sections 14, 19 and 20 of the NPPF.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Grant 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 Drawing WTP2, AM033-03a (Tree Protection Plan), AM033-01a (Location Plan), AM033-11 Rev a (Proposed ground floor plan), AM033-12 Rev a (Proposed elevations SHT 1 of 2), AM033-13 Rev a (Proposed elevations SHT 2 of 2), AM033-14 Rev a (Block Plan, Roof Plan & Section Plan), AM033-05a (Existing elevations SHT 1 of 2) , AM033-06a (Existing elevations SHT 2 of 2).

   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. No development shall take place above slab level until samples or exact details of the facing and roofing materials 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).

4. The trees/hedges on the site which are shown to be retained on the approved plans shall be protected during all site clearance, demolition and building works in accordance with the recommendations as set out in BS5837:2012.

   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. All materials, machinery and any resultant waste materials or spoil shall be stored within the red line application site unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

   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. 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 Preliminary Roost Assessment Report by Hampshire Ecological Services Ltd (Dated October 2025) hereby approved. 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).

7. The building the subject of this permission shall only be used for purposes incidental to the dwelling on the site and shall not be used for habitable accommodation such as kitchens, living rooms and bedrooms.

   Reason: To protect the character and appearance of the countryside in accordance with Policies DP36 and DP37 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019).

8. No external lighting shall be installed on the building 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 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.

Planning Committee - 13 October 2026 Report Item 2

Application No:

26/00670FULL Full Application

Site:

Bramdene, Main Road, Dibden, Southampton SO45 5TD

Proposal:

Two-storey and single-storey side extension

Applicant:

Mr A Gleeson

Case Officer:

Lindsey Chamberlain

Parish:

Hythe and Dibden Parish Council

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

None

Principal Development Plan Policies

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

Supplementary Planning Documents

Design Guide SPD

NPPF

• Sec 3 – Decision-making policies
• Sec 4 – Achieving sustainable development
• Sec 14 – Achieving well-designed places
• Sec 19 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received.

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Hythe and Dibden Parish Council recommend permission. If the comment by Council is against the Planning Officer recommendation, the application is likely to be considered at full Planning Committee

5. CONSULTEES

Ecologist: No objection.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

• Change of materials to extension and garden building (15/00675) to match dwelling (15/00846) granted on 11 December 2015.
• Application for a Certificate of Lawful Development for Proposed single storey extension and detached outbuilding (15/00675)- certificate issued (permitted development) on 21 September 2015.
• Single storey extensions; balcony; detached garage; access alterations; (demolition of existing garage and conservatory) (15/00538) granted on 20 August 2015.
• Addition of a conservatory (NFDC/93/51972) granted on 21 May 1993.
• Addition of a utility room and covered way (NFDC/84/26910) granted on 10 July 1984.
• Alterations and extension to lounge and addition of lobby with bedroom over (NFDC/80/16849) granted on 24 June 1980.
• Dwelling house and garage (NFR/XX/01680) granted on 07 March 1952.

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

8.1 This application site is located to the north of Main Road in Dibden. It contains a detached, two-storey dwelling and associated outbuildings. The rear (north east) and east boundaries are adjoined by open fields, whilst the west boundary is adjoined by a detached, residential property of a similar size.

Proposed Development

8.2 The application is for a ground and first floor extension with balcony. The proposal would increase the ground floor area by 15 square metres and the first floor by 28 square metres.

8.3 With regards to the design, the dwelling currently has two matching shallow pitched hipped roofs to the rear, the eastern elevation. It is proposed to add a further gable end on the eastern elevation between these two existing ends which would have apex glazing to the newly formed gable end. In addition, the existing hipped roof to one gable end would be altered to replicate the additional gable end, again with apex glazing. To the northern elevation two further windows would be added.

8.4 All the materials proposed would match that of the existing dwelling that has a brick plinth with an off white rendered finish with white uPVC windows and doors.

Policy Context

8.5 Policy N4 (1) of the National Planning Policy Framework ("the NPPF") (August 2026) states that development proposals within Protected Landscapes should be limited in scale and extent and sensitively located and designed to avoid harm to the statutory purposes and special qualities of the Protected Landscape. Substantial weight should be placed on the importance of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of Protected Landscapes, and to conserving and enhancing wildlife and cultural heritage in National Parks and the Broads.

8.6 Policy DP3 of the NPPF sets out key principles for well-designed places. Policy DP3 1. states that development proposals should respond to their context (the history, character and features of their site and its setting), so that they integrate with and enhance their surroundings. Policy DP3. 3. states that development proposals should be refused if, without clear justification, they conflict with paragraph 1 of this policy or relevant aspects of the principles in paragraph 2, or with any explicit design standards set out in the development plan (including those in locally-specific policies, guides, codes or masterplans). It further states that substantial weight should be given to compliance with relevant development plan policies when assessing the design quality of proposals.

8.7 Policy DP36 of the New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016- 2036 (herein after referred to as "the Local Plan") sets out that extensions to existing dwellings will be permitted provided that they are appropriate to the existing dwelling and its curtilage. In the case of other dwellings (not small dwellings) outside of the Defined Villages, the extension must not increase the floor space of the existing dwelling by more than 30%.

8.8 Policy SP15 of the Local Plan sets out that new development should avoid, or provide mitigation for, proposals that will lead to noise, visual intrusion, nuisance and other unacceptable impacts upon the National Park and its special qualities. Policy SP17 resists any development that cumulatively erodes the local character or results in a gradual suburbanising effect.

8.9 The New Forest National Park Local Plan Regulation 19 consultation stage has just closed. Further details are available at Local Plan review 2025-27 - New Forest National Park. Policy DM4 of the NPPF (2026) confirms that relevant policies in emerging development plans may be given weight according to the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given). The draft plan has not yet been submitted for examination and therefore, in accordance with Policy DM4 of the NPPF, very limited weight can be given to its draft policies.

Planning Background

8.10 The dwelling was granted permission in 1952 (application reference: NFR/XX/01680) and comprised a three-bed dwelling. As set out in the planning history in section 7 of this report, the property has been subject to a series of extensions and alterations since 1980 through both planning applications and permitted development. The dwelling has been increased significantly more than the 30% restriction contained within Policy DP36 of the Local Plan.

Consideration

8.11 Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, paragraph 3 and Decision-Making Policy DM3 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, 2026) require that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

8.12 The key considerations in this case are:

• The principle of the proposed development;
• The proposed design;
• The impact on landscape and character of the area;
• The impact on neighbour amenity;
• Ecological considerations; and
• Any other material considerations.

Principle of Development

8.13 The property is located outside of the defined New Forest villages and is not a small dwelling. Policy DP36 of Local Plan restricts the enlargement of existing dwellings. For dwellings that are not small dwellings, outside of the defined New Forest villages, an extension must not increase the floorspace of the existing dwelling by more than 30%. For the purpose of this policy, existing dwelling means the dwelling as it existed on 1 July 1982, or as the dwelling was originally built or legally established, if the residential use post-dates 1982 (paragraph 7.82 of the supporting text). This policy approach was found 'sound' at the Local Plan Examination in 2018-19 and endorsed in the final Inspectors' Report (2019).

8.14 From a review of the planning history, it has been calculated that the current dwelling on site has already been increased in floor area by 51% from the 1982 base date. The current application would comprise a further enlargement beyond this and would comprise a 78% increase on the 1982 floor space. This is clearly further beyond the 30% limitation and contrary to the limitations of Policy DP36. Clear conflict has been found with Policy DP36.

8.15 The applicant's Design and Access Statement acknowledges the clear conflict with Policy DP36 in this respect and references emerging Policy DP52 of the Regulation 19 consultation draft emerging Local Plan. Whilst this is a material consideration, Policy DM4 1 of the NPPF states that, when considering development proposals, relevant policies in emerging plans may be given weight according to "a. The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given)."

8.16 The emerging Local Plan has not yet been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate or subject to examination. Therefore, the weight to be afforded to its policies, including Policy DP52, is very limited and this does not outweigh the conflict identified with Policy DP36 above.

8.17 Policy DP36 also requires extensions to be appropriate to the existing dwelling and its curtilage and paragraph 4.12 of the Authority's Design Guide SPD sets out that extensions should ensure the character of the original building is preserved. It further states that an extension should be in scale with the existing dwelling and always be subservient in size and height. Its form, elevation treatment and detailing should complement the original dwelling.

8.18 The proposed design, with two-storey gable end, would not be subservient in height and the extensions would dominate the rear elevation incorporating prominent apex glazing. This is expanded on further in the following paragraphs. Overall, the proposed design is considered to be contrary to Policy DP36, the Authority's Design Guide and Policy DP3 of the NPPF.

Design and Impact on Landscape and Character of Area

8.19 In respect of the proposed design, as well as the requirements of Policy DP36, Policy DP2 requires new development proposals to demonstrate high design quality, including ensuring development is appropriate and sympathetic in terms of its scale, appearance, form, siting and layout.

8.20 The existing dwelling has a relatively coherent architectural character, including two matching shallow-pitched hipped roof forms on the eastern elevation. These provide a consistent and balanced appearance to the rear of the property. The proposal would introduce a further gable-ended roof form between the existing hipped roof forms. In addition, one of the existing hipped roofs would be altered to form a further gable end. The proposal would result in a more complex and visually prominent roof form which would not be consistent with the established architectural character of the dwelling. The increase in scale and massing would result in a substantially bulkier appearance not reflective of the original dwelling. Whilst the materials would match the existing and are considered appropriate, this would not sufficiently mitigate the overall visual dominance of the additions. The proposal would result in a substantial further addition to a dwelling which has already been significantly enlarged and would be contrary to Policy DP2 of the Local Plan.

8.21 In addition, the proposal would incorporate apex glazing both in gable ends. This would introduce a prominent architectural feature which is not characteristic of the existing dwelling. The existing building does not exhibit comparable glazed gable features and the proposed glazing would consequently appear as a dominant addition to the architectural composition of the property. Whilst the glazing would face away from neighbouring properties, open fields lie to the east with resultant adverse impacts on tranquillity, contrary to Policy SP15. Policy N4 (1) of the NPPF (2026) states, "…development proposals within Protected Landscapes [including National Parks] should be limited in scale and extent and sensitively located and designed to avoid harm to the statutory purposes and special qualities of the Protected Landscape." The defined special qualities of the New Forest National Park include its relative tranquillity and the increased glazing in the proposal would not further the Park purposes or avoid harm to the special qualities, as required by primary legislation and national planning policy.

8.22 In addition, Policy SP17 identifies that whilst the vast majority of applications within the National Park entail minor development, increasing amounts of such small-scale development can result in a creeping suburbanisation of the National Park, slowly eroding the Forest's distinctive character. It therefore sets out that built development which individually or cumulatively results in the erosion of the Park's local character or result in a gradual suburbanising effect within the National Park will not be permitted.

8.23 Taken in isolation, the impact of the proposal would be localised. However, the incremental increase could, taken together with other similar development, incrementally undermine the objectives of Policy with potential to undermine both the character and appearance of the National Park and thereby undermine its purposes. Overall, there is conflict with Policies DP2, DP36, SP15 and SP17 of the Local Plan and Policy DP3 of the NPPF.

Impact on Neighbour Amenity

8.24 Given the proposed siting in the plot and separation distances, there would be no unacceptable adverse impacts on neighbouring amenity in terms of visual intrusion, overlooking or shading, in accordance with Policy DP2.

Natural Environment

8.25 It is recognised that biodiversity net gain is now 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. 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 (as amended).

Other Material Considerations

8.26 The applicants Design and Access Statement references various appeal decisions relating to other sites. Each case is considered on its own merits in the context of the site. The referenced appeal decisions are not directly comparable to the appeal site. The current proposal would add approximately 42 square metres to an already substantial dwelling. The development is therefore not a minor or incidental addition. In addition, the proposed works would materially alter the architectural form of the dwelling through the introduction of additional gable-ended roof forms and prominent apex glazing, giving rise to a separate design objection. This element of the scheme would also detrimentally impact on the defined special qualities of the New Forest National Park, contrary to the requirements of Section 245 of the Levelling Up & Regeneration Act 2023 and Policy N4 of the NPPF (August 2026).

8.27 The Authority has considered whether there are material considerations of sufficient weight to justify departing from the quantitative restriction in DP36. No compelling evidence has been identified which demonstrates that the substantial further enlargement proposed would nevertheless preserve the underlying objectives of Policy DP36. The proposal would represent a significant further cumulative enlargement of an already substantial dwelling beyond the maximum increase contained in Policy DP36 and, as set out above, conflict is also identified in respect of the proposed design.

Conclusion

8.28 The proposed development would result in an increase in habitable floor space substantially in excess of the 30% restriction contained within Policy DP36. In addition, the proposed design would fail to respect the established architectural character of the dwelling and would give rise to adverse impacts on tranquillity.

8.29 The identified conflicts are not outweighed by any material considerations sufficient to justify a departure from the development plan. The proposal would not accord with the Development Plan as a whole and would also conflict with Policies N4 and DP3 of the NPPF (2026). Planning permission should therefore be refused.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Refuse

Reason(s) for refusal:

1. In order to help safeguard the long term future of the countryside and the intrinsic character of the National Park, the Local Planning Authority considers it important to resist the cumulative effect of enlargements being made to rural dwellings. Consequently, Policy DP36 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan 2016 - 2036 (August 2019) seeks to limit the proportional increase in the size of such dwellings in the New Forest National Park recognising the benefits this would have in minimising the impact of buildings on a nationally important landscape and activity generally in the countryside as well as maintaining a balance in the housing stock.

   The proposal would result in an extension that would further increase the floor space of the existing dwelling by more than 30% and in doing so would add to pressures for change and larger extensions in the countryside which, individually and cumulatively, would result in a gradual suburbanising effect and erode the National Park's special character. The proposed development is therefore contrary to Policies DP36 and SP17 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan (August 2019) and Policy N4 of the NPPF (2026).

   Furthermore, the proposed development would not seek to further the purposes of the National Park, contrary to the requirement of Section 245 of the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023, which amended Section 11A of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949.

2. The proposed extensions, by reason of their scale, form and architectural detailing, including roof forms and glazing, would fail to respect the established architectural character and proportions of the existing dwelling and would fail to achieve a high standard of design sympathetic to the character and identity of the existing building and its surroundings. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies DP2, DP36 and SP15 of the adopted New Forest National Park Local Plan (August 2019), the Design Guide SPD and Policies N4 and DP3 of the NPPF (2026).

NEW FOREST NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY

PLANNING COMMITTEE – 13 OCTOBER 2026

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ENFORCEMENT NOTICE

QU/21/0053 DALE FARM, MANOR ROAD, DIBDEN, SOUTHAMPTON, SO45 5TJ
Report by: Katherine Pullen – Enforcement Officer

1 Summary

1.1 This report concerns a breach of planning control at Dale Farm, Manor Road, Dibden, Southampton, SO45 5TJ. In March 2021 the Authority received a complaint initially regarding the erection of a stable building, a solarium and aquarium in association with the equestrian use, as well as queries concerning the use of the site. A site visit found no evidence of any of the concerns raised but a building was in the process of being erected for which no permission had been sought. Despite being provided with the opportunity to take remedial steps by either submitting an application or demolishing the building, the owner took no action and as a result an Enforcement Notice was issued on 26 November 2024 requiring the development to be demolished and removed from the land.

1.2 An appeal was lodged against the Notice on 05 January 2025 on the basis that the building was immune from enforcement action (ground (d)) and the appeal was subsequently dismissed on 09 March 2026. As a result, the Notice took effect the date of the Inspector’s decision and provided a compliance period of four months. The Enforcement Notice was due to be complied with on or before 09 July 2026.

1.3 To date, the requirements of the Notice have not been complied with and there has been no engagement from the owner with no plausible defence put forward. In addition, there has been no evidence noted during the compliance site visits of 13 July and 18 September to suggest that there has been any attempt to comply with the requirements of the Notice. This report therefore seeks Members’ approval to proceed to prosecute those responsible for the continuing breach of the requirements of the Enforcement Notice (endorsed by the Planning Inspectorate at appeal) - to the detriment of the landscape of the New Forest National Park.

2 Background

2.1 Following complaints received by the Enforcement team, an initial site visit on 18 November 2021 found that a building was in the process of being erected. Officers subsequently entered into correspondence with the owners in an attempt to secure that remedial steps be taken voluntarily, including either the submission of a planning application in an attempt to regularise the building, or taking voluntary remedial steps to remove the building. Building works ceased, however no remedial steps were taken by the owners and an Enforcement Notice was issued on 26 November 2024 which identified the breach of planning control as being ‘Without planning permission the erection of an incomplete building.’

2.2 The Notice required the owners to:

1. Demolish and remove from the Land the building shown in the approximate location shaded green.
2. Remove all material and debris resulting from compliance with step (i) above from the Land.
3. Restore the Land to the level of the immediately adjacent ground levels and finish with topsoil.

2.3 An appeal was lodged against the Notice in January 2025 with the Planning Inspectorate, and a decision was issued on 09 March 2026. The Inspector directed that the words ‘incomplete building’ be removed and replaced with ‘building’, but, subject to this correction, the appeal was dismissed and the Enforcement Notice was upheld.

2.4 The Notice therefore took effect on 09 March 2026 and provided a compliance period of four months until 09 July 2026 to allow sufficient time for the requirements of the Notice to be complied with.

2.5 Following a site visit on 13 July 2026, it was clear that the Enforcement Notice had not been complied with and the building in its entirety remained. A further visit on 18 September 2026 has established that the situation has not changed, no attempts to comply with the Notice have been made and the owner has not engaged with the Authority. The building remains in the same condition it was in at the point the Notice was served. Over seven months have gone since the requirements of the Enforcement Notice were upheld by the Planning Inspectorate.

2.6 Following the first compliance site visit on 13 July, the Authority notified the owners of its intention to commence prosecution proceedings. No response has been received to this correspondence.

2.7 The Authority’s Enforcement Officers have provided the owners with clear and comprehensive advice throughout the enforcement investigation and have taken all reasonable steps to encourage the owners to comply with the Enforcement Notice. Should members feel it necessary to discuss the particulars of the enforcement investigation in more detail it is likely to require the matter to be taken to Part II of the meeting due to the sensitive nature of such investigations.

3 Next Steps

3.1 The Authority may now choose to prosecute the owners for non-compliance with the Notice which is an offence under section 187A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended (the ‘Act’). All owners are responsible for ensuring compliance with the Notice.

3.2 Prior to commencing a prosecution, the Authority needs to be satisfied firstly that there is a realistic prospect of success and secondly that commencing prosecution proceedings would be in the wider public interest. The Authority is satisfied that there is an adequate prospect of success given the evidence available. As to the public interest in taking action, the enforcement of planning control is in the wider public interest of the community by preventing inappropriate and harmful development within a special landscape of national significance, the New Forest National Park.

3.3 The Authority’s prosecution of the respective landowners would be in accordance with the powers conferred upon it by the Act and also appears to be both proportionate and supported by the wider public interest, especially in view of the harm caused by this breach. Allowing the building to remain would undermine the Authority’s strong stance that the building results in an unjustified proliferation of buildings within the designated New Forest National Park landscape contrary to policies DP2 (General development principles), SP7 (Landscape character), SP17 (Local distinctiveness), DP18 (Design Principles), DP45 (Extensions to non-residential buildings and uses), DP50 (Agricultural and forestry buildings) and DP52 of the New Forest National Park Local Plan (2016-2036), Guidelines for Horse Related Development SPD and Policy N4 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.4 Non-compliance with an Enforcement Notice leaves the owner liable, on summary conviction, to an unlimited fine. It is therefore considered expedient, necessary, and proportionate to commence proceedings as outlined above.

RECOMMENDATION:

Members authorise the Authority’s Planning Enforcement Manager, in consultation with the Solicitor and Monitoring Officer to:

1. consider the further evidence, if any, submitted in respect of the purported impediment to compliance and form a view as to the appropriate course of action to achieve compliance with the Enforcement Notice; and
2. if officers are in agreement that it is appropriate to do so, in light of any further information referred to in paragraph (i) above, take all action as necessary to commence and conduct the prosecution of the owners of Dale Farm, Manor Road, Dibden, Southampton, SO45 5TJ in respect of their non-compliance with the Enforcement Notice issued 26 Novebmer 2024; or
3. if it is not considered appropriate to commence a prosecution, to consider and take such other action as necessary to achieve compliance with the Enforcement Notice including taking direct action and any other steps as necessary to recover the costs of so doing from the owners, including arranging for a charge to be placed on the land.