►
Description
If there is buffering on the YouTube stream, the webcast can be viewed through the council's website https://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/webcast
A
Good
evening,
everybody
and
welcome
to
the
planning
committee
this
evening,
I'm
councilor,
Paul,
Harvey
and
I'm-
the
vice
chair
of
the
committee
in
the
chair
this
evening,
just
to
begin
with
some
housekeeping.
If
that's,
okay,
the
fire
evacuation
procedures
for
this
evening's
meeting,
there
are
no
scheduled
fire
alarms.
But
if
you
hear
the
fire
alarm
this
evening,
can
we
please
evacuate
the
building
through
the
doors
at
the
back
of
the
room
down
the
fire
exit?
A
That's
behind
you
go
out
of
the
main
doors
there
and
please
meet
and
congregate
in
the
War
Memorial
Park
the
web
meets
the
meeting
is
being
webcast
so
for
both
counselors
and
members
of
the
public.
You
are
being
recorded
and
live
streamed
this
evening
on
YouTube
and
can
I.
Please
ask
all
of
you
in
the
room
to
turn
off
your
mobile
telephones
or
please
move
them
to
silent
so
that
we
can't
hear
them
for
the
benefits
of
the
members
of
the
public
watching
and
for
the
meeting
just
to
clarify.
A
A
The
DC
committee
is
a
regulatory
committee
and
it
is
not
a
political
meeting.
The
committee
will
be
considering
the
published
papers
before
us
this
evening
examining
the
evidence
brought
before
us
tonight
and
we
will
make
the
decisions
this
evening
based
on
planning
reasons.
We
are
Guided
by
both
the
national
and
local
planning
policy
guidance
at
the
appropriate
time.
I'll
ask
speakers
to
come
forward
to
contribute
to
the
meeting
in
the
order
that's
been
set
out
on
the
update
paper.
That's
been
published
and
I'll.
A
Ask
all
speakers,
please,
including
visitors
from
the
public,
to
speak
clearly
and
to
keep
points
made
to
material
reasons.
Only
there'll
be
no
further
dialogue
between
members
of
the
committee
and
speakers
permitted.
Once
the
questioning
is
finished,
all
speakers
will
be
reminded
of
their
permitted
speaking
time
and
I'll.
Advise
you
when
you've
got
a
minute
left
of
the
time
that
you've
been
allotted.
A
Can
I
ask
all
the
committee
members
to
avoid
any
repetition
and
to
avoid
and
to
basically
keep
comments
to
within
four
minutes
when
you're
making
them
please
on
each
item?
There
are
five
items
on
the
agenda
this
evening,
so
I
genuinely
do
anticipate.
We
can
do
it
in
the
three
hours
we
usually
set
ourselves
and
be
surprised
if
we
can't
tonight
I
understand
that
planning
can
be
a
motive,
but
I
do
ask
that
everybody
remain
polite
and
professional.
A
Throughout
the
meeting
we
have
five
items
as
I
say
on
the
agenda
this
evening,
because
item
four
has
been
removed
and
withdrawn
from
the
agenda.
So
the
items
one
two
and
three
and
five
and
six
of
the
published
agenda
are
those
will
be
considering
and
just
for
clarity
item
one
is
listed
as
being
in
which
urgent
Overton
when
it
came
to
committee
when
it
came
through
the
process.
A
Of
course,
we've
had
boundary
changes
since
then,
so
it
is
now
in
adding
our
Waters
councils
have
rightly
pointed
out
this
evening
and
that's
clarified
on
the
update
paper
in
terms
of
apologies
for
absence
this
evening.
I
have
councilor
Robinson
and
councilor
Court,
as
apologies
I,
have
no
substitutions
for
those
members.
Unless
anybody
knows
anybody
else
is
arriving
during
the
meeting,
but
they're
not
here.
Thank
you.
Do
I
have
any
Declarations
of
interest
on
any
item
on
the
agenda
this
evening.
Nope
there
are
no
urgent
matters.
A
The
minutes
of
the
meeting
that
was
held
on
the
7th
of
September
will
be
presented
to
the
meeting
on
the
12th
of
October.
There
are
no
minutes
for
us
to
approve
this
evening,
so
we
can
go
to
the
applications
that
are
actually
on
the
agenda,
starting
with
item
one,
which
is
cressington
Stoke
Lane
Hurstbourne
priors
in
Epping
car,
and
can
I
ask
the
officers
to
introduce
the
application.
Please.
B
After
closing
to
this
world
four
dwellings
Landscaping
Associated
parking,
the
members
should
note
that
the
wrong
elevation
and
layout
internal
layout
plans
for
plot
three
are
incorrect
within
the
agenda.
But
for
obviously
for
tonight's
discussion.
The
correct
plot,
3,
elevations
and
internal
air
will
be
shown
on
on
the
visualizer,
which
shows
a
two-bedroom
dwelling
and
not
a
three-bedroom
dwelling,
which
is
what
the
error
was.
There's
nothing
to
report
on
the
update
and
the
recommendation
is
for
approval,
subject
to
conditions
within
the
agenda.
Foreign.
A
A
A
Thank
you.
First,
one
down
item
two
is
the
gangritch
House
Cambridge
house
Cottage
in
Saint,
maryborn
adingar?
We
have
two
speakers
this
evening.
Could
I
ask
Mr
pettic
to
please
come
forward
to
the
speaker?
Stand
you
know
which
one?
It
is
don't
you
thank
you
I
could
ask
the
officers
to
introduce
the
application.
Please.
C
This
is
a
full
planning
application,
with
a
description
of
development
for
demolition
of
the
existing
dwelling
and
outbuilding
and
erection
of
a
replacement
dwelling.
There's
a
small
update
on
the
update
papers,
just
confirming
that
the
members
visited
the
site
and
viewed
the
relationship
with
the
adjacent
listed
building
and
it's
and
it's
setting
in
the
conservation
area
noted
that
the
outbuilding
was
already
demolished
and
just
to
confirm
that
the
pre-commencement
competition,
which
is
14
on
page
97
of
the
main
papers
relating
to
dust
suppression,
has
been
agreed
by
the
applicants.
Agent,
foreign.
D
D
The
existing
house
is
not
listed
locally,
listed
or
cartilage
listed,
and
it's
not
considered
to
make
a
particularly
positive
contribution
to
the
character
and
appearance
of
the
Conservation
Area.
Its
removal
is
therefore
considered
acceptable
from
a
planning
and
conservation
point
of
view,
and
no
objection
has
been
raised
by
the
council's
historic
environment.
Team
historically
England
have
been
consorted,
but
they
have
not
offered
any
advice.
D
D
Indeed,
we've
amended
the
scheme
a
number
of
times
to
overcome
conservation
concerns
and
worked
with
officers
to
find
an
appropriate
solution
for
the
site.
This
has
included
noticeably
reducing
the
size
and
scale
of
the
proposed
dwelling,
altering
its
form
and
changing
its
overall
appearance,
so
that
it
is
cottage-like
in
its
character.
D
D
There
are
no
technical
reasons
why
this
application
should
not
proceed
and
no
objection
has
been
raised
by
biodiversity
or
environmental
health
from
a
flood
risk
point
of
view.
The
proposed
dwelling
is
cited
wholly
within
flood
zone,
one
and
in
terms
of
trees.
Only
two
category,
C
Laurels,
will
need
to
be
removed.
As
part
of
this
application,
the
applicant
is
happy
to
accept
all
the
suggested
conditions
to
turn
the
committee
report,
including
those
relating
to
materials
and
Landscaping,
electric
vehicle
charging
provision,
Window
and
Door
details
and
the
removal
of
Permitting
development
rights.
D
In
summary,
the
proposed
development
is
considered
to
record
with
the
relevant
policies
when
the
within
their
development
plan
and
the
national
planning
policy
framework,
in
particular
local
plant
policy
ss6d,
which
requires
a
replacement
dwellings
to
be
of
a
size
that
is
appropriate
to
the
plot
and
not
significantly
visually
intrusive
in
the
landscape.
The
proposed
dwelling
meets
both
of
these
requirements
and
will
make
a
positive
contribution
to
the
character
and
appearance
of
the
of
the
area
and
The
Wider,
AO
and
B.
D
E
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you
very
much
for
coming
on
tonight
and
speaking
I.
Just
have
one
question.
You
were
very
descriptive
about
the
fact
that
the
building
is
1.4
meters,
wider
okay
than
the
existing
and
20
centimeters
higher,
so
yeah
20
centimeters
higher,
but
you
then
suddenly
weren't
very
vague
on
the
size
of
the
Second
Story.
Okay,
could
you
please
just
enlighten
me.
D
A
F
F
I
want
to
make
clear
tonight
that
residents
of
St
maryborn
do
not
feel
that
this
application
has
developed
sufficiently
to
be
acceptable
at
this
time.
Residents
accept
that
the
cottage
will
be
redeveloped
but
they're
clear
that
the
current
proposal
is
too
large
and
too
inappropriate
for
its
context.
F
Our
case
is
that
this
game
conflicts
with
our
policy
em
11
on
Heritage
breaches,
protections
afforded
by
this
maryborn
Conservation
Area
and
would
detrimentally
impact
the
protected
Landscapes
of
our
aonb,
our
conservation
officers
change.
The
paths
on
this
is
unsound
and
unreliable
when
he
first
reviewed
the
first
and
second
iterations
of
these
plans.
He
accurately
noted
that
the
delivery
of
a
larger
property
in
this
area
would
course
harmed
the
setting
and
context
of
the
grade.
Two
listed
gang
Bridge
house
Indie
further
recognized
that
the
conservation
area
in
this
area
is
premised
on
a
settlement.
F
The
frontage
of
the
home
remains
tall
and
wide,
and
the
challenge,
therefore,
to
gang
Bridge
house,
and
so
my
ask
of
this
committee-
is
that
they
stick
with
the
original
view
of
the
conservation
officer
and
indicate
that
a
Grand
Executive
home
in
this
space
would
conflict
with
our
heritage
and
conservation
policies.
Now.
My
final
point
is
that
this
scheme
conflicts
with
our
duty
in
our
local
plan
to
protect
historic
and
naturally
protected
landscapes.
F
The
site
is
a
prominent
area.
It
is
visible
from
across
the
Bourne
Valley,
and
thus
any
development
here
is
particularly
sensitive,
whereas
the
current
Cottage
is
hardly
visible.
The
proposed
home
would
disrupt
the
long
views
across
the
valley
that
is
nationally
recognized
and
protected
as
an
aonb
landscape.
I
thus
argue
that
the
scheme
is
also
in
conflict
with
our
policy
EM1.
Thank
you.
A
G
C
There's
the
you
can
see
in
quite
dark
print,
the
layout
of
the
existing
house.
Sorry,
the
proposed
house,
with
the
dot
with
the
roof
plan,
and
to
the
front
of
that
you
can
see
the
outline
of
the
building
that
actually
has
been
demolished.
When
we
went
on
site,
that's
the
outbuilding
and
then
between
the
so
the
South
would
be
elevation
there.
There's
the
dotted
outline
of
the
existing
building,
that's
to
be
demolished,
so
there
is
an
overlap,
and
so
you
can
follow
that
through
and
you
can
see
the
the
building.
That's
been
demolished.
C
C
Can
you
point
to
it
again
so
yeah?
So
it's
the
existing
building
at
the
front
that
was
projecting
forward.
That
was
a
single
story.
Outbuilding
that
that's
gone
now
then
the
existing
house,
you
can
just
see
the
blue
dotted
line
coming
Under
The
Canopy
of
that
tree,
the
boundary
with
gang
Bridge
house,
so
that
the
property
overlaps
the
existing.
And
if
you
just
go
along
the
ridge
line,
you
can
see
the
end
of
the
house
is
sort
of
at
the
sort
of
the
spine
of
the
back
extension.
A
C
G
You
for
my
explanation,
I'm
just
wondering
it's
been
alluded
to
that
this,
this
development
is
is
proportionally
too
big
for
the
plot
and
I
and
I
was
wondering
if,
if
the
built
form
was
16
of
the
plot
or
20
of
the
plot,
if
you
don't
know
those
figures,
that's
not
the
problem.
I
just
want
to
try
and
understand
the
proportionality
of
the
built
form
in
a
plot
that.
H
H
H
Am
I
right
am
I
wrong
because,
if
they're
not
to
the
same
scale,
I'm
sorry,
but
that's
not
very
useful
to
this
committee
and
I
notice.
In
the
report,
we've
got
some
scales
whether
this
is
the
applicant
and
whether
this
is
something
we
as
a
Council
should
be
clarifying
he's
getting
things.
So
we
can
all
actually
compare
sort
of
apples
with
apples
because
I
mean
that
is
a
massive
house.
The
window
is
a
huge,
much
much
bigger
in
scale.
The
front
door
is
bigger,
so
I
don't
know
unless
I'm
Dreaming.
C
The
plans
that
you
have
aren't
to
scale
because
they
are
just
Snips
of
the
to
scale,
plans
that
we
just
put
on
for
information.
If
you
give
me
just
a
moment,
I
can
I've
got
a
package
here,
so
I
can
literally
just
measure
the
the
height
of
the
existing
building
and
the
proposed
building,
because
I
don't
think
it's
compared
in
the
report.
So
just
prepare
with
me.
A
J
K
C
K
Between
seven
and
seven
point,
two,
the
proposed
dwelling
is
7.4
meters,
so
I
think
when
the
agent
reference
0.2
meters
is
taking
that
distance
of
the
the
greatest
the
smallest
amount,
if
you
like,
because
of
the
ground
level,
changing
I,
think
the
key
issue
here,
the
numbers
is
obviously
you're,
not
just
looking
at
the
height
of
a
building.
I
know
height
is
very
important.
K
You
are
assessing
what
you
see
in
in
terms
of
what
you
see
on
site
in
terms
of
the
viewing
plus
you
can
look
at
the
photographs
of
the
of
the
site
as
well.
So
again,
if
you
look
at
the
property,
as
is
that's
existing,
that
is
the
one
that
is
between
seven
and
seven
point,
two
meters,
depending
on
which
part
of
the
ground
level
it's
measured
from
because
there's
a
slight
slope
as
I
understand.
The
proposaling
is
7.4
meters,
so
0.2
meters,
higher.
H
H
We're
supposed
to
be
looking
at
the
sort
of
impact
we
can
visualize
numbers
in
our
head,
but
we've
got
you
know
a
much
reduced
existing
site
elevations,
so
we've
got
proposed
elevations,
which
I'm
sure
are
a
bigger
scale,
but
there's
also
a
proposed
elevation,
that's
smaller
than
the
other
three
elevations
on
pages
104
and
105..
So
my
point
is
I
think
we're
we
can
work
this
out
for
ourselves,
but
going
forward.
Please
can
we
have
them
to
the
same
scale?
Thank.
A
L
C
Going
through
the
list
on
page
87
that
the
conservation
officer,
details
of
proposed
materials,
windows
and
doors
is
condition
16
on
page
97,
landscape
and
Boundary
treatments
are
conditioned,
four
is
landscaping
and
Boundary
treatments
was
agricultural
dust
material.
It
was
conditioned
15
on
97
and
the
permitted
development
rights
is
the
sort
of
quite
technical
one.
On
page
98
condition
17,
which
removes
a
and
a
a
which
is
extensions.
B
is
Loft,
conversions
C
is
alterations
to
the
roof.
C
G
I,
wonder:
could
I
see
the
picture
of
of
gang
Bridge
house
again
that
one
yeah
I
I
mean
I,
knew
and
I
I
sense.
It
is
a
notable
building,
but
that
that
rear
extension
with
that
window.
There
looks
very
modern
to
me
and
is
an
incongruous
piece
of
additional
development
on
on
a
grade.
Two
house
I
have
to
think
it's
already
been
spoiled
by
that
Edition
and
I.
A
A
C
A
C
Okay,
this
is
a
full
planning
permission
again
for
the
erection
of
a
new
dwelling
in
the
side
Garden.
There
is
an
update
to
confirm
that
members
visited
the
site,
viewed
the
existing
buildings,
the
character
of
the
area,
and
it
was
pointed
out
that
there
was
an
extant
approval
on
the
site
across
the
road
and
we've.
It's
more
information
was
asked
about
that.
C
So,
if
you
go
to
the
approved
scheme,
so
the
planning
application-
that's
extant
across
the
road,
you
see
the
red
outline,
that's
the
outline
of
the
approved
dwelling
and
then
to
the
north
of
that
on
the
other
side
of
the
road.
That
is
the
property.
The
dwelling
that
exists
on
this
prop
house,
which
is
on
page
33
of
the
main
paper.
So
you
can
see
the
L
shape
of
holly
bush.
So
that's
to
state
that
that's
that
was
just
for
information.
That's
exact,
stand
extant
and
can
be
built.
C
On-Site
members
asked
why
what
what
part
of
ss6
that
had
been
allowed
under
and
having
lots
of
the
officers
report
it
didn't
comply
with
ss6e,
but
the
Tilted
balance
and
the
planning
history
of
the
site.
Taking
note
that
they'd
been
applications
refused
and
dismissed
at
appealed,
the
officers
considered
that
this
was
a
scheme
that
was
acceptable
in
the
Tilted
balance.
The
harm
of
the
previous
schemes
had
been
addressed
that
was
allowed
on
a
20
application,
and
then
this
was
modified
in
21,
and
so
this
is
extant.
C
It
was
approved
this
year,
so
that
was
the
history
of
of
the
site
across
the
road.
There's
then
additional
information
that
was
asked
for
which
is
confirmation
of
where
the
plot
split
is.
The
applicants
have
centers
through
a
plan
showing
where
the
the
split
between
the
two
properties,
the
existing
and
proposed
is
the
Caravan
that
was
on
the
site
is
shown
there.
C
The
applicants
agent
has
confirmed
that
the
applicants
had
been
living
in
it
whilst
they
were
renovating
holly
bush
and
they
intend
to
remove
it
once
they
occupy
this
house
is
occupied,
so
there's
a
condition
been
added
to
require
that's
removed
or
following
the
first
occupation
of
this
dwelling,
there
was
also
we
saw
clarification
because
the
plans
show
an
upstairs
kitchen
as
well
as
a
downstairs
kitchen,
but
they've
confirmed
that.
That's
because
there's
the
wrap
around
first
floor
balcony
that
looks
over
the
countryside.
C
They've
confirmed
that's
just
a
small
kitchen,
so
they
can
prepare
food
without
having
to
go
downstairs
to
enjoy
the
elevated
open
space.
So
it
is
one
it
is
one
dwelling,
but
with
a
smaller,
upstairs
kitchen
as
well
as
a
downstairs
kitchen
and
then
there's
some
tidying
up
of
the
Caravans
because
of
the
reduction
in
the
site
area
to
that
there
not
including
holly
bush
garden
and
the
the
condition
14
has
been
removed.
And
then
there
was
a
miss
a
Miss
typo
on
condition
15,
which
is
now
conditioned
14.
But
there's
there's
no
huge
change.
M
Yeah,
just
a
short
note:
I,
don't
think
we
can
do
much,
but
there
was
when
we
visited.
There
was
some
I
think
there
were
layland
eye
bushes,
that
as
ugly
as
leylander
is,
but
in
the
middle
there
was
a
rather
stupendous
Hawthorne
bush.
Is
there
any
way
we
can
recommend
that
that
be
kept?
I
think
it
fell
with
outside
the
parameter
of
the
new
building,
but
it
says
okay,
can
we
request
that
it
be
kept.
C
C
It's
not
in
a
Conservation
Area,
it's
in
a
garden,
so
it
wouldn't
qualify
for
protection
through
through
those
it
could
be
removed.
We
could
add
an
informative
to
our
sort
of
best
Endeavors
if
it
if
it
could
be
retained,
but
there's
no
issue
on
removing
the
landi.
It's
the
yeah.
Okay,
we
can
add
an
informative
just
just
the
best
Endeavors
and
for
the
yeah.
A
C
C
A
A
B
B
Members
should
note
on
the
update
that
there's
a
change
to
the
recommendation,
which
involves
the
expiry
of
enablement
notification
period.
It
doesn't
change
the
recommendation
for
approval,
but
it's
just.
We
have
to
wait
for
the
expiry
of
that
neighbor
notification
period
and
then
so
the
recommendation
is
subject
to
no
new
adverse
comments
that
have
not
been
previously
considered
that
the
application
be
approved
subject
to
conditions.
B
Also
within
the
update.
A
member's
attention
is
drawn
to
the
fact
that
the
details
and
samples
of
the
materials
to
to
involved
in
the
construction
of
the
extension
Etc
have
been
submitted,
which
are
now
considered
to
be
acceptable
by
the
planning
Authority
and
as
such
conditions.
Three
within
the
agenda
has
now
been
changed
to
reflect
that
approval,
the
approval
of
those
material
condition
and,
and
that
and
that
that's
it
in
terms
of
recommendations
for
approval,
subject
to
the
expiry
of
the
labor
notification
period.
A
O
O
Prior
to
this,
we
lived
in
Penwood,
also
within
High,
clear
parish
for
eight
and
a
half
years,
our
children
of
school
age
and
both
attended,
attended
the
local
infinite,
Junior
schools,
I
coached,
the
under
10s
Wilson
football
team,
and
through
these
and
other
activities,
we've
made.
Many
good
friends
of
local
area
have
grown
to
feel
very
much
part
of
the
community.
O
It's
a
fabulous
place
to
live,
and
we
feel
very,
very
lucky
to
call
it
our
home
property
we've
moved
into
is
an
excellent
location,
but
unfortunately,
has
not
been
well
maintained
for
a
number
of
years.
It
is
indeed
a
significant
renovation
to
match
the
high
standard
of
the
other
properties
on
pantings
Lane
and
with
both
the
means
and
passion
to
take
on
this
project.
O
O
We
bought
Liam
with
a
clear
plan
to
convert
the
roof
space
into
an
upstairs,
interrupts
its
floors
and
to
reconfigure
the
ground
floor
to
accommodate
our
family's
needs
as
they
get
older.
We
had
noted
numerous
Bungalow
conversions
in
both
High,
clear,
Rambles
and
Hill,
and
sorry.
It
is
reasonable
that
we
might
do
similar
with
leeham
we've
engaged
with
a
fully
accredited
and
well-regarded
local
architect
to
ensure
design
has
high
aesthetic
quality
using
appropriate
materials
for
the
area.
O
Our
initial
application
was
for
a
more
contemporary
design
and
although
we
felt
it
was
a
reasonable
progression
to
the
range
of
stars
in
pantings
lane
and
within
the
wider
Village,
we
respectfully
acknowledge
and
accept.
This
view
was
not
shared
by
the
planning
team
Parish
Council
on
on
Neighbors
for
our
follow-up
application.
We
engage
positively
with
these
parties
on
multiple
occasions
to
find
a
solution
that
will
both
afford
our
family,
the
space
we
require,
whilst
addressing
their
various
concerns.
O
These
discussions
ultimately
resulted
in
in
the
significantly
amended
design
we
discussed
in
this
evening
we're
delighted
that
the
planning
team
are
happy
to
support
this
application
and
thank
them
for
their
excellent
support.
During
the
process,
we've
changed
the
design
from
a
flat
roof
to
traditional
Dormer
Chalet
Bungalow
to
address
concerns
over
the
Contemporary
style.
O
We
also
flip
the
design
around,
so
the
upstairs
is
now
to
the
West
End
Of
The
Bungalow,
a
specific,
a
specific
request
in
one
of
the
objections
to
further
reduce
blocking
lights
and
the
feeling
of
bulk
and
dominance.
The
immediate
neighbor
we've
designated
the
rooms
on
the
Northern
elevation
of
the
first
floor
as
a
hallway
or
bathrooms
with
obscure
glass
to
ensure
the
privacy
of
our
neighbors
will
not
be
impacted.
O
We
feel
that,
as
a
result
of
all
these
changes,
we're
now
proposing
a
very
modest
and
reasonable
design
that
not
only
satisfies
relevant
planning
policy.
As
noted
in
the
planning
officer's
report,
but
addresses
the
concerns
raised
in
the
various
objections
you
have
a
minute
left.
Thank
you.
We've
engaged
with
local
building
firms
and
assured
that
access
for
equipment
during
the
bill
would
not
impact
on
the
shared
driveway
and
the
trees
and
power
lines
can
be
safely
avoided,
but
also
ensure
that
badly
maintained
drainage
in
the
drive
is
strengthened
and
repaired
as
part
of
The
Proposal.
O
Finally,
we've
contracted
a
local
tree
surgeon
to
remove
a
number
of
unmaintained,
Sycamore
and
Ash
that
overhang
the
property,
the
removal
of
which
will
significantly
increase
the
likes
of
surrounding
properties
as
well.
In
summary,
I
hope
you
can
see
we're
committed
to
ensuring
our
development
will
have
minimum
impact
on
our
neighbors,
whilst
offering
significant
Improvement
to
the
property
and
the
lane
and
allow
our
family
to
thrive
and
contribute
to
the
parish
for
many
years
to
come.
I'd
welcome
your
support
of
this
application
and
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have.
O
E
L
You
chair,
I've,
just
had
a
little
another
look
through
the
objections
from
the
parish
council
and
they've
specifically
mentioned
the
the
tile
that
you've
selected
for
the
roof
blue
slate
versus
they
preferred
clay
yeah
in
the
update
paper.
There's
something
called
adilian's,
phalempin
plain
tile.
Forgive
me
for
not
knowing
what
that
is.
Have
you
taken
their
considerations
into
absolutely.
O
A
B
E
Thank
you,
chair
I,
have
to
say
that
really
my
only
concern
regarding
this
application
was
one
flat
roof,
okay,
which
obviously
is
now
being
turned
into
a
a
shallow
Peak,
okay
and
also
the
Obscure
glazing.
So
you
know
I
I'm
I'm
satisfied
there
that
I
can
support
us
office
recommendation.
So
I
got
my
wife's
teeth
in
at
the
moment.
Okay
and
I'm
happy
to
make
the
motion
to
to
approve.
E
A
P
A
A
B
Concerns
the
variation
of
a
condition
attached
to
a
previous
application,
which
basically
changes
the
the
drawing
numbers
to
Show
additional
windows
in
the
northern
elevation
of
the
dwelling.
That's
currently
been
approved
and,
as
you
saw
on
site
is,
is
has
been.
It's
currently
been
constructed.
There
is
membership.
B
Note
that
there's
a
within
the
agenda
there's
a
wrong
first
floor
plan
shown
I,
think
there's
two
ground
floor
plans,
I
think,
but
the
internal
layout
for
the
first
floor
is
incorrectly
showing
again,
so
the
correct
one
has
been
provided
and
can
be
seen
on
the
visualizer
in
a
minute.
There's
the
ground
floor.
So
that's
the
correct
plan
and
we
showed
two
of
them.
B
A
Q
Q
You
very
much
my
reason
for
coming
to
speaking
today.
After
reviewing
all
the
plans
relating
to
the
clueless
property
and
this
development
is
the
confusion
within
all
the
notes
and
the
fact
that
this
property
faces
Margaret,
Weston's
old
house,
that
the
clueless
own
and
within
the
complexity
that
property
should
have
been
demolished,
but
an
oversight
by
the
planning
department
didn't
put
a
reference
into
it
and
if
you
go
through
all
the
notes,
it
ends
up
with
the
clueless
clearly
being
still
the
landowners,
not
the
people
that
are
putting
the
planning
application
forward.
Q
So,
from
our
point
of
view,
as
local
residents,
we've
had
issues
with
the
clueless,
not
with
the
people
that
live
in
this
house,
but
the
clueless
themselves
in
court
cases
having
to
go
through
Stacy's
having
to
put
fences
back
up.
We
had
to
take
the
clear
loads
to
court
because
the
deviations
they
have
in
planting
the
way
they
get
around
things
they've
still
got
an
outstanding
issue
with
Basingstoke
Council,
because
they've
increased
the
water
level
and
people
have
to
walk
out
in
the
road.
Q
Q
Q
A
A
R
It
will
be
my
family
home
for
myself
for
my
family
and
my
parents.
Now
the
internal
walls
have
been
constructed.
We
are
nearing
the
completion
of
the
roof.
We
have
noticed.
The
rooms
in
the
north
of
the
property
are
quite
dark
during
the
daytime.
The
current
Center
design
of
the
exterior
of
the
property
is
a
large
expanse
of
Staffordshire
blue
bricks.
R
A
A
N
Unfortunately,
that
was
maybe
an
oversight,
but
it
is
there
and
we
have
to
deal
with
it
as
it
is
because,
obviously,
if
the
planning
has
moved
on,
there
are
now
two
properties
on
this
site,
both
of
which
are
invisible
from
view
from
the
road
on
your
site
visit.
You
would
have
seen
that
the
original
Bungalow
is
still
there
and
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
dividing
boundary
between
that
and
the
new
property.
N
Okay,
if
it's
the
same
site
owner,
but
one
assumes
that
Mr
brinkey's
is
going
to
move
into
this
house
and
therefore
there'll
be
two
separate
properties.
I
think
it
was
us
that
something
would
be
looked
at
as
to
whether
or
not
the
boundary
is
going
to
be
produced
and
whether
there
is
anything
sympathetically
going
to
be
done.
Otherwise,
the
new
the
new
house
will
considerably
Overlook
the
old
one.
N
A
Thank
you
chair.
Can
you
tell
your
microphone
off
for
a
second
members,
any
questions
to
councilor
slimming?
No
thank
you
Joe.
Just
to
clarify
I
understand.
There
is
a
condition
on
the
application
relating
to
boundary.
Treatment
and
members
can
I
draw
your
attention
to
the
actual
proposal
that
is
in
front
of
us.
We
are
here
this
evening
to
decide
whether
the
variation
of
condition
one
permission
for
the
extant
planning
permission
to
amend
the
plan
to
allow
the
installation
of
the
windows.
B
E
Thank
you,
chair
can
officers,
please
just
confirm
the
position
of
the
landing
from
reading
the
puns
and
I
may
have
become
confused.
Okay,
it
seems
that
the
landing
seems
to
be
in
the
middle
of
the
house.
Okay
and
these
big
windows
are
effectively
forming
a
light.
Well,
okay,
in
into
the
hallway,
would
I
be
correcting
that
foreign.
B
Plan
that
you
can
see
where
you've
got
the
the
central
bit
where
you've
got
the
stairs.
Oh
there
we
go
the
magic
of
Technology
yeah
so
and
then
so,
if
you
zoom
yeah
go
to
the
bottom
to
the
South.
So
that's
the
new
windows
yeah
there.
So
that's
the
that's!
That's
what's
shown
on
the
the
front
elevation
other
than
the
Apex
of
of
the
the
main,
the
with
the
door
underneath
so
the
apex
of
the
roof.
So
that's
that
element
there.
B
H
L
A
S
E
P
A
A
E
A
K
Thank
you
so
in
essence,
the
application.
The
report
is
to
seek
authorization
to
enter
into
a
section
106
agreement
in
relation
to
the
outdown
farm
appeal.
Members
will
recall
refusing
planning
permission
for
the
outdown
farm
development
for
it's
mainly
in
relation
to
landscape
impact.
But,
as
is
always
the
case
when
there's
a
overturning
officer
recommendation
where
the
section
106
has
not
been
completed
a
if
you
like
relatively
standard
reason
for
refuse
would
put
on
to
say,
and
in
the
absence
of
a
section,
106
agreement,
there
will
be
an
additional
reason
for
refusal.
K
The
purpose
of
that
is
to
ensure
that,
if
you
get
to
the
appeal
stage,
the
requirements
that
you
would
have
required
would
still
be
secured
by
a
section
106
agreement
in
normal
circumstances.
That
is
then
taken
forward
through
a
unilateral
undertaking
so
we're
effectively.
The
appellant
brings
forward
their
own
legal
agreement.
K
In
this
particular
instance,
because
of
the
section
106
agreement
was
very
Advanced
at
the
time
of
the
application,
the
decisions
are
being
taken
to
take
forward
the
section
106
agreement,
as
opposed
to
you
lateral
undertaking,
and
it's
simply
the
fact
that
we
do
not
have
authorization
through
the
scheme
delegation
to
do
that.
So
we
would
need
your
authorization
to
enter
into
the
section
106
agreement
as
a
technical
point.
H
K
That
could
be
the
case,
although
I
think
in
this
instance
there's
never
been
any
there's
never
been
any
really
po
draw
away
from
what
has
been
required.
So
what
was
set
out
in
the?
If
you
recall
the
resolution
that
the
recommendations-
sorry
for
approval,
we
normally
have
a
a
list
of
section
106
requirements.
Ultimately,
that
is
what
has
been
taken
forward
in
the
section
106
for
the
appeal,
so
there's
no
real
difference.
It's
simply
the
the
method.
K
If
you
like
in
some
instances
appeal
a
developer
May
submit
a
unilateral
undertaking
to
deviate
if
you
like
away
from
what
was
originally
being
sort
of
the
application
stage,
because
obviously
it
set
the
appeal
and
the
the
authorities,
then
the
planning
inspection
making
that
decision,
but
I
think
in
this
instance,
it's
fair
to
say,
is
actually
reflecting
what
was
sought
to
be
secured
at
the
application
stage.
Casa
Tomlin
thank.
H
Now,
how
would
that
fit
when
we
are
seeing
that
the
county
have
done
cabinet
decisions
to
move?
If
you
like,
a
change
that
we
were
not
aware
of
at
the
planning
condition
that
if
we
went
for
106
that
did
Highway
works,
that
in
fact
were
subsequently
either
not
required
or
that
removed
and
improved
and
changed
completely.
K
Hey
Council,
I
think
the
key
issue
here
is
that
the
the
appeal
in
relation
to
Oak
down
Farmers
as
a
as
a
development
as
opposed
to
The
Wider
issues
around
Junction
7
Hampshire
County
council's
position.
Is
they
still
maintain
no
objection
to
that
proposal.
So
they
have
entered
into
a
statement
of
Common
Ground
effectively
in
the
at
the
appeal
stage,
which
is
normal
practice
to
confirm
what
they
said
at
the
application
stage,
which
is
that
they
have
no
objections.
A
Anybody
else
can
I
just
explore
that
just
a
little
bit,
so
if
the
situation
is
that
at
the
time
of
the
application,
Hampshire
County
Council
would
have
proposed
X,
Y
and
Z
works,
and
that
was
that
which
we
would
have
considered
the
time
now
we're
going
to
face
a
situation
where
fire
the
proposals
coming
forward.
That
is
different.
A
Does
that
have
any
material
elements
of
the
reasons
and
effect
of
the
section
106?
If
we're,
if
effectively,
we
would
be
agreeing
now
works,
we
would
not
have
considered,
as
Chris
Riley
says
at
the
time
of
the
application
when
we
considered
it
and
in
fact,
by
agreeing
to
this
106
we
might
will
be
enabling
County
Council
to
do
works.
That
we
may
well
disagree
with.
K
K
I
guess
the
key
issue
is
that,
if,
if
authorization
wasn't
given
to
do
this
through
the
106,
then
the
simple
position
would
be
that
a
unilateral
undertaking
would
be
submitted
to
achieve
the
same
thing
yeah
so
effectively
the
authorization
this
committee
did
give
that
this
evening
won't
really
impact
on
all
the
content
of
the
106.
Is
it's
more
about
whether
we
have
the
authorization
to
enter
into
it
as
the
as
the
method
for
securing
what
the
mitigation
is
proposed?.
A
K
The
whole,
the
first
reason
for
refusal
come
the
second
reason
for
refusal,
which
was
effectively
that
one
simply
one
wasn't
secured
in
the
event
that
the
appeal
was
allowed.
It's
absolutely
normal
practice
for
for
all
appeals
and
and
in
the
same
way,
that
we
would
recommend
a
decision
being
made
to
allow
an
appeal.
K
Do
you
want
to
come
back,
I
said
just
to
be
absolutely
clear,
we're
defending
the
appeal,
and
it
was
exactly
the
same
robustness
as
everything
else
on
every
single
appeal
we
deal
is
where
there
is
a
section,
106
agreement
issue.
We
would
go
through
the
process
of
putting
for
whatever
evidence,
to
explain
why
the
requirements
of
the
section
106
are
still
valid.
E
E
S
I
attended
my
first
appeal
hearing
yesterday.
That
was
an
exciting
way
to
spend
the
day,
and
this
subject
came
up
exactly
as
Mike
has
described.
It
was
seen
as
part
of
the
procedure
that
needed
to
be
considered
in
in
the
overall
process
of
the
hearing.
So
when
the
inspector
questioned
both
parties
as
to
what
has
been
going
on
with
the
s106,
it
didn't
in
any
way
imply
that
it
would
affect
the
decision
she
was
going
to
make,
but
to
make
sure
things
were
in
place
properly.
I
I,
don't
think
we
forgot,
we
could
have
actually
had
a
slightly
different
recommendation,
but
the
the
truth
was.
The
106
agreement
was
so
Advanced
at
that
stage
that
the
applicant
just
wanted
to
proceed
with
an
agreement
rather
than
changing
the
whole
document
into
unilateral
undertaking,
which
would
have
been
a
lot
more
drafting.
Etc.
H
K
So
Council
I
think
the
the
key
issue
here
is
that
there's
a
timing
issue
the
appeal
the
inquiry
starts
on
the
18th
of
October,
so
the
authorization
to
enter
into
that
is
is
required
this
evening
or
I.
Guess
the
only
alternative
would
be
at
this
late
stage.
You
would
have
to
change
it
to
you.
National
undertaking,
there's
absolutely
no
issue
in
us.
K
Sharing
that
106
it'll
be
a
public
document
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
what's
being
progressed
so
more
than
happy
post
meeting
to
take
it
offline
and
and
provide
that
that
copy
to
the
committee
members.
If
that
would
be
of
assistance,
but
it
will
be
part
of
the
appeal
submissions
that
will
go
in
ahead
of
the
the
18th
of
October,
which
is
when
the
seven
day
inquiry
commences.
G
I
I'm
thinking
no,
you
know
I
think
if
we
didn't
approve
this
tonight,
then
they
would
just
make
it
unilateral
and
but
what
we
could
do
before
the
appearance.
Just
give
you
a
summary
of.
What's
in
it,
you
know
because
you're
probably
not
interested
in
reading
the
whole
agreement,
but
you
want
to
know
what
the
exact
obligations
are
and
we
could
probably
arranged
if
you'd
have
that
foreign.
E
A
I
have
a
second
for
the
recommendation,
councilor
Faulkner
and
just
to
be
clear,
I
think
from
the
debate
this
evening.
I
think
we'd
like
to
see
the
whole
section.
106
agreement
share
with
members
and
does
that
satisfy?
Are
you
happy
with
that?
As
the
Mover?
A
second
Graham
you
happy
with
that,
I
see
the
whole
section
106
agreement
yeah!
Thank
you.