Report Item 1 – 26/00202/FULL – Tintagel, Newbridge Road, Cadnam, Southampton SO40 2NX

1. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish view

2. POLICIES

Development Plan Designations

• Conservation Area
• Flood Zone

Principal Development Plan Policies

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

Supplementary Planning Documents

• Design Guide SPD
• Copythorne Parish Design Statement SPD

NPPF

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

3. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

4. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

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

5. CONSULTEES

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

6. REPRESENTATIONS

None received.

7. RELEVANT HISTORY

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

8. ASSESSMENT

Application Site

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

Proposed Development

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

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

Planning Background

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

Consideration

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

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

Policy Background

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

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

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

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

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

Consideration

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

8.25 It is therefore recommended that permission be refused.

9. RECOMMENDATION

Refuse

Reason(s) for refusal:

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

Location Plan

Ivy Cottage

The Gables

Brook View

Foxwood

Oakmoor

Hollybank Cottage Hawthorne Cottage

Squirrel Cottage

St Austen

Backways

Denehurst

Homesteads

Cottage

Stump

Tintagel

The Kaws The Black

Moor Lea

Renfield NEWBRIDGE ROAD

24.4m 00m 01 43 00m 02 43 430100m 430200m

114200m

43

114400m

114200m

43

114400m

New Forest National Park Authority

Lymington Town Hall, Avenue Road, Lymington, SO41 9ZG

Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Scale

1:1250

Ref

26/00202FULL

©

Crown copyright and database rights 2026 Ordnance Survey 100014703

Date

04/06/2026