►
B
Welcome
to
development
control
committee
on
Wednesday
night,
9th
of
August
2023,
just
a
few
words
for
housekeeping
and
then
we'll
get
started
fire
evacuation.
There
are
no
fire
alarms
scheduled
for
this
evening.
So
if
the
fire
alarm
sounds
it's
for
real,
please
evacuate
the
building
by
the
nearest
available
exit,
so
you've
got
fire
exit
at
the
back
of
the
public
chamber
and
fire
exits
either
side
of
where
I'm
sitting
go
down.
The
stairs
we've
got
a
master
point
in
the
more
immoral
part
where
we'll
meet.
B
B
B
The
councilors
who
are
seated
to
my
rights
are
effectively
jurors
operating
in
a
quasi-judicial
capacity.
To
my
right
is
the
vice
chair
of
the
committee
and
then
we've
got
legal
advice
on
the
right
just
to
make
sure
everything's
all
done
above
board
and
to
my
left.
We've
got
planning
officers
and
Democratic
Services
officers
who
are
going
to
provide
the
relevant
expertise
at
the
time
we
require
it
so
without
further
Ado.
Apologies
for
absence
item,
one
apologies
for
absence
and
substitutions.
B
B
B
Do
I
have
a
mover
Council
back
again
secondary
councilor
Miller?
Will
greed
excellent,
so
I'll
initial
and
sign
those
later
on
right,
which
brings
us
to
the
proper
business
item?
Five
applications
for
planning
permission
and
public
participation
thereon
and
the
first
one
of
the
evening
is
kennel
Farm
bakerwood
Lane
Dumber
officer
presenting
if
you'd
like
to
lead
on
that.
D
D
There
is
an
extensive
planning
history
at
the
site
and
The
Wider
site
at
kennel
farm,
and
this
is
listed
on
page
60
to
62
of
the
main
agenda.
The
use
of
the
stable
building
and
Associated
land
for
private
equestrian
uses
was
secured
in
a
previous
was
tied
to
a
previous
permission
through
legal
agreements.
D
We've
also
received
some
further
consultation
responses.
The
building
control
team
have
now
commented
on
the
application
and
they
advise
that
the
building
would
appear
to
be
suitable
conversion
with
minimal
repairs
and
the
highways
Authority
have
also
confirmed
that
their
previous
comments
apply
and
which
are
reported
in
in
the
main
agenda.
D
A
further
representation
has
also
been
received
from
a
neighbor
who
raises
concerns
over
loss
of
privacy
and
in
their
representation.
They
have
requested
that
offense
is
erected
along
the
southwestern
boundary
of
their
property,
which
is
barley,
house
or
Barn
two,
in
accordance
with
the
the
plans
that
are
in
the
agenda.
D
In
addition
to
the
update
paper,
there
is
also
a
verbal
update
with
further
comments
being
received
from
Natural
England
and
the
joint
waste
client
team.
The
Joint
waste
client
team
have
now
confirmed
that
their
refuse
vehicles
are
able
to
access
the
property
via
the
private
access
track
and
therefore,
bins
can
be
collected
from
the
cursage
of
the
property
and
not
garlic
Lane,
as
reported
in
the
agenda
and
also
noted
at
site
visits.
E
E
E
The
conversion
of
this
building
will
create
a
single
story.
Smaller
dwelling,
a
one
bedroom
with
a
office
space
as
well,
which
does
offer
a
more
accessible
form
of
of
accommodation
and
of
a
scale
which
is
identified
in
the
council's
housing
market
assessment
has
been
required
to
meet
a
local
need.
The
conversion
of
this
disused
building
will
also
allow
for
the
conservation
of
this
locally
listed
building
to
be
undertaken
in
a
in
a
manner
appropriate
to
its
significance.
E
We
are
also
aware
of
some
of
the
other
third-party
comments
that
have
been
submitted,
and
we
just
wish
to
to
add
that
and
the
building
conversion
wouldn't
result
in
additional
urbanization
of
the
site.
It
will
use
existing
building
form
and
is
located
between
other
existing
residential
developments.
E
F
Thank
you
German.
Yes,
one
question:
when
we
came
on
the
viewing
panel,
it's
a
lovely
old
building,
just
to
confirm
one
thing
that
the
ridge
line,
the
roof
I
think
is
fairly
spectacular.
I
think
we
all
noted
that
you
will
not
be
raising
the
Ridgeline
of
the
roof.
Well,
it
is
a
rhetorical
question,
but.
E
G
G
Is
on
page
59,
the
top
part
of
that
paper
is
quite
a
should
we
say
damning
condemnation
by
the
inspector
of
that
site,
whereas
on
this
application
we
seem
to
be
recommending
approval
in
stark
contrast
to
what
the
inspector
stated
so
I'm,
not
quite
sure
which
ones
would
I
would
I
believe
and
I'm.
Also
mindful
of
the
fact
that
eight
and
a
half
years
ago,
one
of
one
of
my
first
involvements
was
very
born,
an
exact
sort
of
situation
like
this
was
approved
and
once
it
started
after
30
000
pounds
worth
of
construction.
G
The
our
building
control
team
went
along
and
condemned
the
foundations
and
had
to
stop
and
had
to
be
demolished
in
an
application
put
in
for
a
new
build,
which
was
refused
quite
bizarrely,
so
I
I
wouldn't
want
to
get
into
that
situation
again.
So
I'm
not
quite
sure
how
to
weigh
the
officer's
recommendation
against
what
the
inspector
said
some
years
ago.
D
D
On
top
of
that,
we
also
can't
cannot
demonstrate
a
five-year
housing
land
Supply,
which
influences
the
the
context
in
which
this
application
needs
to
be
considered.
Turning
to
the
previous
previous
applications,
the
proposed
conversion
does
differ
in
its
detail,
noticeably
the
previous
application
was
for
the
conversion
to
two
dwellings.
This
application
is
for
one,
so
the
Scopes
of
works
for
the
conversion
were
different,
so
where
the
inspector
had
concerns
that
the
the
previous
applications
wouldn't
preserve
the
intrinsic
features
of
the
locally
listed
building
the
conversion.
D
This
time
around
is
considered
to
be
a
lot
more
sympathetic
in
its
detail.
A
lot
of
the
the
features
would
be
retained
and,
in
particular,
the
existing
open
Bays,
which
you
saw
on-site
visits
they
are
supposed
to.
The
proposed
conversion
would
be
enclosing
them,
but
with
Windows,
rather
than
solid
walls
as
per
the
previous
application.
So
it
officers
considered
that
it
would
be
a
much
more
sympathetic
conversion,
which
relates
better
to
the
historic
interest
of
the
site.
D
The
in
terms
of
the
inspector's
comments
on
how
the
building
could
be
converted
with
obviously
this
time
around
being
provided
with
updated
structural
information,
and
it
has
also
been
confirmed
by
our
building
control
team
that
that
conversion
is
likely
to
be
able
to
be
facilitated
without
extensive
Works
occurring.
So
there
have
been
changes
in
circumstances
since
the
previous
applications.
H
You've
considered
that
close
board
fencing
might
be
applicable
for
screening
I,
wonder
if
it
could
be
a
more
natural
screen,
so
something
like
even
Laurels,
but
you
know
something
better
than
just
a
close-boarded
fence
because
it
will
be
very
Stark
in
the
beginning
and
I,
don't
think
aesthetically.
It
looks
particularly
good.
Have
you
any
thoughts
on
on
that
as
your
one
of
your
conditions,
foreign.
J
A
Now
the
conversion
itself
wouldn't
impact
on
the
local
listed
status
and,
as
Gemma
has
said,
the
alterations
have
been
considered
by
officers
and,
in
particular,
the
historic
environment
team,
to
be
a
sensitive
conversion,
maintaining
that
historic
character
for
which
the
building
is
locally
listed.
So
it's
not
anticipated
there'll,
be
any
change
in
that
local
listing.
Thank
you.
A
B
K
Thank
you,
chair
I'm,
fully
in
support
of
the
recommendation.
There
was
lots
of
questions
there,
but
I
think
the
fact
of
the
matter
is:
we've
got
a
five-year
land
Supply
issue.
There
are
concerns,
maybe
around
the
the
listing
aspect,
but
I
think
it's
a
fairly
sensitive
conversion
that
we're
looking
at
it's
it's
a
beautiful
old
building
that
will
become
a
beautiful,
slightly
more
modern
building
and
I'm
perfectly
happy
with
all
aspects,
including
the
conditions
that
have
been
put
in
the
update
paper.
F
Thank
you
Joe.
Yes,
quite
have
it
a
second,
because
I
think
it's
very
sympathetic
Improvement
for
the
building?
It
also
will
preserve
it
a
lot
longer
if
it's
left
on
its
own,
it's
gonna
just
gonna
deteriorate,
so
I
think
this
is
a
very
good
example
of
how
we
can
keep
these
Heritage
buildings
for
want
of
a
better
expression
in
the
borough,
for
probably
as
long
as
everybody
in
this
room
is
going
to
be
around,
but
quite
having
a
second,
the
officer's
recommendation.
D
B
A
B
L
L
There
is
an
update
on
page
five
of
your
update
papers,
the
members
viewed
the
site
on
the
4th
of
August
There's,
a
summary
of
there
of
what
was
considered
the
update
since
the
viewing
panel.
There
has
been
some
more
information
provided
by
the
applicant,
but
that
is
based
on
their
working
up
of
a
possible
TDC
and
it
goes
beyond
the
considerations
of
a
pip,
so
we
haven't
publicized
it
and
we
haven't
considered
it
within
this
evaluation
of
the
PIP.
It's
it's
for
the
next
stage.
L
The
technical
detail
consent
the
rest
on
indicative
site
plan
there,
but
we
have
to
say
it
is
indicative
because
it's
a
pick
for
a
minimum
of
one
and
a
maximum
of
four
and
it
could
come
in
in
any
variation
of
flats
or
houses
or
big
houses
or
small
houses.
That's
just
one
indication
of
how
it
could
be
delivered.
M
Thank
you
councilors.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
chair.
Thank
you
officers
for
your
time
in
dealing
with
this
application
and
for
your
attendance
at
the
site.
Visit
on
Friday
I
speak
tonight
as
chairman
of
Noonan
Parish
Council,
not
as
a
wall.
Counselor
lots
of
the
barracks
is
a
conservation
area
and
is
separated
from
the
main
village
of
Newnan
by
a
railway
line.
As
such,
it
has
continued
as
a
secluded
offshoot
to
the
main
village,
with
mainly
historic
farm
Cottages,
an
area
of
common
land
and
a
Carter's
yard
access
via
an
unmade
track.
M
M
M
In
the
past
10
years,
the
Newton
Parish
has
added
at
least
25
new
dwellings
to
basingstoke's
windfall
figures.
This
is
over
10
percent
of
the
parish's
housing
stock,
and
this
does
not
include
the
additional
Homes
at
Water
end
Park,
where
we
have
approximately
50
Park
Homes
The
Villages
within
the
parish
have
mainly
grown
by
means
of
additional
single
dwellings
built
on
larger
plots
or
residential
development
on
former
Brownfield
sites.
This
site
is
currently
its
current
state
is
Greenfield
in
terms
of
social
pillars
of
sustainable
development,
as
discussed
by
the
applicant
noonam.
M
M
M
Adding
a
further
four
hours
is
alongside
those
built
on
the
site's
Highview
Business
Park,
which
was
formed
a
former
Carter's
yard.
One
minute
left
we'll
create
a
Suburban
style
development
of
eight
dwellings
out
keeping
with
the
area
and
dominantly
urbanizing
with
urbanizing
influence.
The
prevailing
character
of
the
barracks
remains
rural.
The
parish
council
fundamentally
disagrees
with
the
applicant
that
this
is
a
clearly
built
up
area,
but
speculative
applications
such
as
this,
if
approved,
will
make
this
a
self-fulfilling
prophecy.
M
In
ppf,
chapter
11
notes
the
desirability
of
maintaining
an
area's
prevailing
character
and
setting
local
planning
policy.
Ss6
notes
the
aims
of
the
local
plan
2
resist
the
encroachment
of
development
into
rural
areas.
Em1
landscape
says
it
is
also
important
to
be
aware
of
the
broader
implications
of
gradual
change
through
the
cumulative
effects
of
character.
M
B
B
C
M
B
M
M
M
B
O
O
O
The
barracks,
the
area
in
which
the
application
site
is
located
is
accessed
by
a
very
narrow
single
track
and
made
privately
owned.
Lane.
This
Lane
is
in
part
a
public
right-of-way.
This
is
beneficial
to
the
Barrett's
Community,
as
it
helps
provide
a
rural
feel
to
the
area.
The
increased
levels
of
traffic
were
this.
Application
to
be
approved
will
create
a
conflict
between
vehicles
and
users
of
the
public
rights
of
way.
The
rural
feel
of
the
barracks
is
created
in
part
by
the
mix
of
residential
buildings
and
Open
Spaces.
O
The
application
site
is
on
one
of
these
Open
Spaces,
allowing
the
infill
of
open
Countryside
between
Residential
Properties
will
remove
this
mix
and
destroy
that
Rural
and
open
field.
As
I
said,
this
is
simply
not
an
acceptable
location
for
development.
Secondly,
this
is
not
a
good
use
of
land.
The
application
side
is
productive,
Farmland
that
provides
natural
drainage
for
the
area
and
helps
prevent
localized
flooding.
It
is
a
biodiverse
site
that
hosts
the
usual
range
of
Flora
and
Fauna
that
you
would
expect
to
find
in
the
open,
Countryside
plus,
of
course,
plenty
of
sheep.
O
At
least
they
wear
until
they're
removed
a
few
weeks
ago.
If
the
application
were
granted,
this
Farmland
will
be
lost
to
Future
Generations
forever.
The
application
is
simply
not
an
acceptable
use
of
land.
Thirdly,
the
application
has
no
support
from
the
local
community.
None
of
the
residents
surrounding
the
application
support
site,
support
to
the
proposed
development.
There
were
22
individual
objectors
and
nobody
in
favor
this
included
almost
all
of
the
12
households
that
make
up
the
balance.
Fourthly,
the
application
would
lead
to
the
overdevelopment
of
the
barracks.
O
Until
recently,
the
barracks
was
made
up
of
eight
households,
and
around
five
years
ago,
planning
was
granted
for
further
four
houses
towards
the
end
of
the
Access
Lane.
If
the
application
were
to
be
approved,
this
will
bring
the
number
of
houses
to
16
a
100
increase
in
dwellings
in
just
five
years.
This
is
an
unsustainable
level
of
development
that
again
risks
destroying
what
has
always
been
a
close-knit
rural
community.
O
Finally,
the
application
would
lead
to
a
loss
of
immunity
for
neighboring
properties.
Many
of
the
current
residents
fear
that,
if
approved
their
loss
of
immunity
will
destroy
their
Lifestyles
forever,
whatever
they
design,
replacing
Farmland
with
houses
will
see
a
significant
increase
in
noise,
coupled
with
a
significant
loss
of
problems
at
one
minute
left.
There
is
no
denying
that
if
your
house
sit
backs
onto
Farmland,
you
have
a
greater
level
of
privacy
than
if
it
backs
onto
your
neighbor's
houses.
O
I
hope
you
can
see
fit
to
reject
this
application.
Whilst
I
appreciate
you
must
judge
this
on
the
balance
of
benefit
and
harm.
I
hope
you
can
agree
with
me
and
the
many
other
objectives
that
the
loss
of
valuable
Farmland,
the
over
development
and
subsequent
distraction
of
a
rural
community
and
the
loss
of
immunity
to
neighboring
households
will
create
significant
harm.
That
far
outweighs
the
benefit
to
basingstoke's
housing
targets
that
this
application
would
bring.
Thank
you
for
listening.
B
K
O
O
Yes,
I
think
the
key
difference
between
this
application
and
the
previous
application
for
the
neighboring
site
is
that
was
on
a
Brownfield
site
say
previously.
There
was
a
small
industrial
unit
there
and
although
there
were
objections
to
the
houses,
primarily
that
was
around
the
number
of
houses
that
were
previously
going
to
put
there
and
with
negotiations
with
the
developer,
it
was
reduced
to
a
level
where,
to
be
perfectly
honest,
and
it
was
probably
better
having
the
houses
there
than
the
industrial
units
that
were
previously
there.
B
P
Adam
I've
got
it.
Thank
you.
Okay,
the
members.
This
application
seeks
to
establish
the
principal
for
new
homes.
However,
you'll
see
from
the
illustrative
site
out
that
we've
submitted
and
to
confirm
the
intention
absolutely
would
be
to
provide
four
detached
family
homes.
The
paper
application
deals
with
the
principal
initially
and
your
officers
have
obviously
provide
a
very
detailed
report,
I'm
confirming
that
the
principle
is
acceptable.
P
However,
the
applicant
has
been
Keen
to
go
a
step
further
and
provide
reassurance
regarding
the
design
at
the
detailed
design
that
we
intend
to
submit
for
for
dtab
measures,
as
shown
on
the
layout
plan.
At
this
stage,
it's
envisaged
that
it
will
be
broadly
a
mirror
image
of
the
very
successful
development
which
it
Neighbors,
which
was
built
in
the
recent
years.
In
this
respect,
the
proposal
would
therefore
be
entirely
in
keeping
with
the
established
character
and
and
very
sensitive
to
the
area.
P
This
is
considered
to
be
a
very
sustainable
location
for
a
small
scale,
Housing
Development,
that
this
is
being
located
within
walking
distance,
nearby
bus
stops
and
the
train
station
in
Hook,
all
of
which
is
reachable
by
pavement
and
as
members
of
we
wear
hook,
contains
day-to-day
and
weekly
shopping
needs.
For
for
the
residents
of
this,
this
development,
it's
also
worth
pointing
out
that
we
did
as
I
showed
you
on
site.
Those
who
attended
the
site
visit
would
have
seen.
P
There
was
an
OS
extract
from
1967,
and
this
site
has
been
developed
previously
and
was
effectively
the
same
as
the
site
to
the
West.
At
that
time,
both
actually
contained
a
handful
of
buildings.
Since
then,
obviously,
those
Boons
have
been
removed,
as
you
would
have
also
seen
during
the
panel
visit
the
site
Falls
within
a
well-established
residential
area
and
forms
a
rather
natural
infield
plot
for
a
small
scale
development.
The
site
is
exceptionally
well
enclosed
and
benefits
from
a
mature
tree-lined
boundaries
that
would
almost
entirely
prevent
views
within
the
wider
landscape.
P
There'll
be
no
loss
of
trees
and
new
tree
planting
is
proposed
to
be
provided
as
part
of
the
comprehensive
landscape
scheme
to
come,
given
the
layout
even
from
the
highway,
the
development
would
have
very
limited.
Visual
impacts
plots
one
and
two
would
be
set
back
while
back
behind
trees
and
our
plots
three
and
four
over
50
meters
away
from
the
highway
following
letters
received
from
the
public.
P
I
believe
we're
able
to
address
many
of
the
main
issues
with
this
application
and
following
that
feedback,
a
key
issue
here
has
been
the
access
road
and
the
condition
and
the
applicant
has
offered
to
resurface
that
access
road,
along
with
a
handful
of
other
benefits,
which
I
know,
is
very
well
received.
We've
engaged
very
closely
with
the
parish
council
and
councilor
Gaskill,
and
especially
with
the
chair,
because
obviously
he
lives
along
here
and
having
met
the
neighboring
residents.
P
We
subsequently
were
entire
were
invited
to
attend
the
parish
council
meeting,
as
were
indeed
all
of
the
residents
during
that
meeting.
I'm
very
pleased
to
say
that
no
objections
were
received,
which
I
think
councilor
gas
school
would
confirm
and
I
believe
that
is
Testament
to
the
fact
that
the
the
merits
of
The
Proposal
really
and
the
local
benefits
that
we've
offered
the
applicant
has.
G
P
Thank
you.
The
applicants
this
week
shared
an
early
draft
of
the
technical
details
with
the
parish
council
for
consultation
and
circulation
to
the
community,
and
now
the
planning
office
has
also
been
provided
a
copy
in
early
early
consultation.
The
applicants
approach
to
design
is
highly
sustainable
and
is
it
we
also
intend
technical
details
to
include
on-site
renewable
Technologies.
It
is
not
served
by
gas,
nor
do
we
want
it
to
be.
P
We
would
look
at
Airsoft
heat
pumps
powered
by
solar
PB
panels
here,
and
the
intention
is
to
Future
proof
these
homes
for
future
generations
to
come
overall.
I.
Very
much
hope
that
members
agree
that
this
is
a
small
scale,
sensitive
and
sustainable
addition
to
the
Village,
which
will
enable
genuine
Community
benefits
that
would
not
cause
any
material
detriment
to
exist
in
labor
and
Immunity,
as
well
as,
as
with
the
existing
neighboring
development.
These
homes
would
have
a
high
level
of
architecture,
complementing
the
character
of
the
area.
P
I
would
just
finish
on
the
point
of
the
adjacent
development.
At
that
time.
That
did
receive
a
lot
of
objection.
It
did
have
a
sort
of
low-key
commercial
use
going
on
there,
but
now
that's
widely
lauded
by
residents
and
many
of
those
actually
who
raised
comments
on
this
application
reside
in
those
houses,
but
it's
a
very
successful
development
you're
out
of
time
now.
Thank
you,
but
if
you
have
any
questions,
please
do
ask
me.
P
In
hindsight,
we
wouldn't
have
the
reason
we
went
for
a
pip.
Application
is
because
we
knew
at
that
time,
which
this
was
by
the
recommendation
was
made
on
this,
and
it
was
initially
ready
to
go
to
panel
over
four
months
ago.
We
knew
that
there
was
a
delay
on
on
on
panel
before
we
submitted
and
that
there
was
a
bit
of
a
backlog.
The
intention
was
to
establish
the
principle
then
work
with
residents
on
the
detail.
P
In
hindsight,
obviously
we
missed
about
four
committees
in
a
row
just
waiting
to
get
onto
the
agenda
and
again
you
know
Lessons
Learned.
We
wouldn't
have
done
that.
We've
we've
purposely
provided
the
extra
Above
and
Beyond
on
terms
of
level
of
detail
to
everybody
just
to
reinforce
what
we
actually
intend
to
do.
And
yes,
if
we
hadn't
done
a
paper
application,
we
could
have
done
that
from
the
outset.
But
that
was
our
reason.
It
was
primarily
in
in
the
interest
of
time
to
speed
things
up
established.
H
I
mean
I
you've
gone
before
one
I.
Remember
one,
a
maximum
of
four
I
mean.
Couldn't
you
have
changed
the
application
just
say
for
four
Pips,
rather
than
just
give
us
some
nebulous
number,
because
you
know
we're
looking
at
it
and
our
decision
would
be
based
on
location,
land
use
scale
and
all
that,
if
we've
had
a
a
technical
details,
consent
in
front
of
us,
we
would
be
able
to
judge
those
far
better.
P
Yes,
thank
you
cancel
that
again,
absolutely
in
truth,
the
the
planning
officer
hasn't
offered.
You
know
it's
well
established
that
we
were
going
football.
The
whole
dialogue
has
always
been
that
it
will
be
four
family
housing.
The
panels
didn't
offer
that
we
could
change
the
description
I'm,
not
aware
whether
the
offer
would
have
been
comfortable
with
that
anyway,
because
it
would
have
been
a
change
to
the
actual
description
of
the
proposed
development.
B
L
So
that's
why
the
red
line
was
extended
to
include
all
of
the
access
it
wasn't
to
consider
whether
the
access
was
acceptable
or
not,
because
the
T,
the
PIP
stage,
doesn't
include
any
requirement
just
to
provide
any
ownership
certificates,
whereas
with
a
planning
application,
you
have
to
declare
that
you
own
all
the
land
within
the
red
line
or
you've
served
notice
on
owners.
I.
K
L
Condition
Pips:
that's
why
the
tdc's?
All
the
information
we
want
in
tdcs
is
informatives
and
because
we
don't
know
anything
about
ownership.
We
couldn't
say
that
the
applicant
had
to
do
something
on
land
that
we
don't
know
if,
if
they,
because
we
don't
have
to,
they,
don't
have
to
provide
evidence
at
pip
stage.
So
there's
no
conditions,
but
it's
certainly
something
that
would
be
an
issue
at
TDC
to
be
considered.
F
F
Now,
that's
a
lot
easier
when
you
have
something
like
a
pit,
because
the
encouragement
is
in
this
day
and
age
that
we
use
Brownfield
sites
prior
to
Greenfield
science
on
page
107
in
the
report
on
the
second
paragraph,
it
states
that
there's
.64
hectares
of
grade
three
good
to
moderate
agricultural
land
that
is
German
through
the
Natural
England
assessment
now
and
it
okay.
It
also
goes
on
in
that
paragraph
to
say
that
there's
other
agricultural
land
around
so
there's
no
significant
loss
with
the
0.64
hectares.
F
But
in
this
particular
case
this,
as
was
described
by
the
chairman
of
the
parish
council,
is
a
significant
plot
of
land
within
a
small
village
containment
settlement
and
it's
up.
This
is
subjective
and
I.
Ask
the
officers
who
made
that
subjective
decision
that
there's
a
significant
amount
of
other
green
area
because
most
of
the
land
that
I've
seen
that
come
through
this
particular
committee
over
many
years,
has
been
so
grade.
One
down
at
the
lower
level,
not
grade
three
good
to
moderate
and
I.
F
A
A
So
the
consideration
is
whether
there
is
a
significant
development
of
agricultural
land
and
the
officer
assessment
is
that
the
development
itself
is
0.64
hectares
and
The
Wider
area,
there's,
obviously
a
much
greater
amount
of
Agriculture
or
land,
and
that
this
development,
therefore
of
0.64
hectares,
is
minor
in
scale
in
comparison
to
the
National
policy
preference
for
significant
developments
of
agricultural
land
to
be
safeguarded.
Thank
you.
Q
Thank
you
one.
If,
if
we
granted
a
this
pip
is
this
for
one
between
one
and
four
houses
were
the
applicant
notwithstanding
what
she
said
this
evening
to
come
forward
and
build
one
house:
would
that
be
considered
a
suitable
use,
land
use?
And
secondly,
if
they
built
the
one
house,
could
they
still
at
a
much
later
date
come
forward
with
the
three
other
houses
to
be
built,
or
once
the
one
has
been
built
and
that's
they've
got
technical
details,
consent
on
that
one?
Does
that
then
override
the
PIP.
L
Or
the
technical
detail
consent
has
to
match
the
red
line
of
the
PIP,
so
I
actually
don't
know
if
you
could
put
four
in
with
the
same
line
and
each
have
a
a
separate
bit
that
was
available.
You
know
to
be
converted
at
some
stage,
but
yes,
they
can
could
come
in
with
one
application
and
one
dwelling,
but
then
that
one
dwelling
would
then
be
a
material
consideration
for
any
two
three
or
four
dwelling
that
came
in
in
the
future,
because
it
would
be
an
existing
dwelling.
Q
L
There's
a
time
limit
to
submit
your
TDC
after
your
pip
is
approved.
So
if
you
don't
do
it
in
time,
then
it
falls
away,
but
but
you
couldn't
just
build
the
houses
they
would
have
to
have.
A
team
they'd
have
to
have
permission
because
a
pip
isn't
a
planning
permission.
You
can't
build
anything
with
a
pip,
it's
only
half
the
planning
permission.
L
You
need
the
TDC
on
top
of
it,
because
the
TDC
is
what
comes
forward
with
the
ownership,
the
access
all
of
the
details,
but
no,
you
couldn't
build
houses
two
and
three
and
four.
If
you
didn't
have
more
permission,
whether
that
be
a
TDC
or
a
full
in
the
future,
or
something
else
like
that,
you
can't
build
anything
from
a
pip.
H
H
K
K
So
so
could
they
come
back
with
one
TDC
say
in
2026
and
then
that
would
reset
the
clock
on
the
PIP
expiring
and
then
come
back
another
three
years
later
and
so
on
and
so
on
and
stretch
out
over
many
years,
I,
don't
know
why
they
would,
but
that
seems
to
be
the
question.
Council
ball
was
asking
so
I
just
want
Clarity
on
that.
K
N
I
Thank
you,
chair
I
know
it's
a
bit
of
an
odd
one,
we're
going
to
start
with
the
access
we
drove
four
cars
down
there.
We
parked
four
cars
off
the
site
with
no
problems
whatsoever,
but
it's
actually
relevant
because,
as
we
heard
earlier,
access
is
not
a
consideration
on
a
pep,
as
as
I
say,
neither
is
the
ownership
of
that
plane.
I
I
I
H
Thank
you
chair.
When
we
have
things
in
front
of
us
and
there
is
no
neighborhood
plan,
we
have
to
think
I
think
a
little
bit
deeper.
We
have
to
be
the
Protectors
of
some
parishes
when
they
don't
have
a
neighborhood
plan,
or
in
some
cases
they
haven't
made
the
effort
themselves,
or
sometimes
they
haven't,
got
the
capability
or
ability
to
to
bring
forward
a
neighborhood
plan.
H
So
what
we're
looking
at
tonight
is
the
location,
the
land
use
and
the
scale
I
I
didn't
go
on
the
the
side
view,
but
I
have
I've
taken
the
time
to
to
look
on
Google
Maps
and
to
to
realize
where
the
site
is
and
what
it
is.
I
have
to
be
really
honest
with
you,
the
location,
the
land
use,
which
obviously
is
different
from
its
current
agricultural
use.
H
It
fills
me
with
a
little
bit
of
dread
and
I
can
see.
This
would
be
an
urbanization
of
the
Green
Field
that
it's
it.
It
sits
and
and
I
can't
concur
with
councilor
Robinson
on
this.
So
on
the
three
issues
of
location,
land
use
and
scale,
I
think
it
is
unacceptable
to
me
as
an
individual.
Thank
you,
Council.
B
F
F
In
this
context
of
this
small
village,
and
one
thing
that
also
concerns
me
is
we
had
a
discussion
in
this
Council,
not
so
long
back
about
biodiversity.
It
was
in
this
chamber
now.
The
the
problem
is
that
we
have
the
dichotomy
of
planning
and
the
use
of
land,
and
then
we
got
just
stop
planning
building
houses,
but
the
right
use
of
the
Brownfield
site
on
the
mirror
of
this
proposal
was
the
right
thing
to
do.
F
This
is
a
gradual
encroachment.
It's
been
mentioned
this
evening.
That
is
oh,
it's
a
residential
area
now!
Well,
it
wasn't
X
years
ago,
and
this
is
another
one
of
these
creeps.
A
planning
creep
that
we
have
of
somebody
gets
a
the
Brownfield
site,
put
some
houses
on
it,
quite
rightly,
because
that's
a
good
use
for
it
and
then
starts
to
to
creep
across
into
the
useful
agricultural
area
and
I'm
on
that
point
of
the
land
use
I'm,
afraid
I
cannot
agree
with
the
officer's
recommendation.
K
K
Q
You
Ken
I
agree
with
councilor
Hal
Sorrell
and
councilor
Robinson
I
mean
if
it
had
been
I'm
still
not
very
happy.
If
it
were
only
come,
were
to
come
forward
with
one
house.
I
think
it
would
be
gross
under
use
of
that
area
of
land,
so
I
think
the
the
fall
that
was
spoken
of
by
the
developer
will
be
more
to
my
sort
of
inclination
in
terms
of
what
would
suitably
fit
on
the
site.
Q
I
think
the
problem
as
far
as
I'm
concerned
is
that
as
Council
Robinson
said,
we
could
park
quite
conveniently
where
we
parked
we
could
get
to
it
from
the
the
main
road.
Quite
conveniently,
but
more
to
the
point.
The
development
next
door
seemed
to
me
to
have,
along
with
the
with
the
houses
on
the
on
the
Eastern
side
and
all
I,
agree
that
it's
just
an
infill.
R
R
C
Well,
I'm
totally
against
this
I'm
in
support
of
the
council
councilman
again
and
councilor
Miller.
When
is
Greenfield
site,
not
a
Greenfield
site,
I'm
really
unhappy
with
this
flooding
situation,
because
only
at
TDC
as
it
the
assessment
got
me
made
now,
if
that's
made
in
a
negative
manner.
How
can
we
prove
that
tonight
I
mean
I
feel
uncomfortable
with
that
I
feel
very
uncomfortable
with
the
biodiversity
issues,
as
as
supporting
what
councilman
Miller
had
said,.
G
Yeah
and
the
the
joy
of
Pips
has
already
been
mentioned,
and
I've
had
some
bitter
and
bloody
experience
when
you
cut
through
it
all
I
think.
If
we
refuse
this
I
think
we
would
lose
an
appeal
I
have
no
doubt
we
were
losing
a
pill
so
whether
we
like
it
or
not,
I
think
we
have
to
accept
that
reality
on
a
pip.
B
A
D
The
proposed
changes
to
the
wording
would
require
the
submission
of
details
for
each
plot
before
Works
comment
on
each
plot,
rather
than
the
development
as
a
whole.
In
addition,
the
application
is
accompanied
by
proposed
surface
water
and
fat
and
water,
drainage,
details
and
access
construction
details,
and
these
have
been
submitted
to
satisfy
conditions,
12,
13
and
21
of
the
technical
details,
consent.
D
These
conditions
secure
the
submission
of
further
details
for
consideration,
and
it's
therefore
proposed
to
them
to
amend
the
wording
of
those
conditions
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
details,
provided
the
site,
location
and
the
development
itself
remain
as
granted
by
the
previous
technical
details
consent
by
way
of
update.
The
council's
drainage
engineer
has
provided
comments
to
confirm
that
the
submitted
drainage
strategy
is
acceptable
and
to
provide
some
additional
background
to
members.
Officers
have
also
included
some
further
commentary
and
explanation
on
the
process
of
self-build
exemption
still
purposes
in
the
update
paper.
D
B
E
You
very
much
the
planning
officers
report
committee
is
very
clear
on
the
history
of
the
site
and
the
legislative
reasons
for
this
application.
I,
don't
propose
to
repeat
these
points,
but
I
do
wish
to
provide
you
with
some
context.
The
application
is
twofold:
firstly,
to
allow
still
phasing,
secondly,
to
take
the
opportunity
to
provide
technical
information
to
the
council,
which
is
required
to
discharge
the
conditions
attached
to
the
previous
technical
detail,
consent
effectively
using
this
application
to
satisfy
the
pre-commencement
conditions
applied
to
the
TDC
in
respect
of
cell.
E
Self-Build
exemption
remains
open
to
the
applicant
on
the
site
as
a
whole,
irrespective
of
of
this
application
this
evening,
what
the
application
applicant
is
seeking
is
the
phasing
of
the
development
to
allow
each
of
the
new
homes
to
come
forward
independently
in
the
absence
of
phasing
any
subsequent
variation
to
the
permission
or
non-compliance
would
mean
that
each
owner
of
the
four
houses
would
be
jointly
and
severally
liable
for
cell.
If
self-build
is
not
sought
or
not
granted
by
the
council,
then
sill
monies
would
remain
payable
to
the
council.
E
The
applicant
has
submitted
this
now
so
that
the
additional
discharge
or
condition
process
can
be
avoided.
The
grant
of
this
section
73
application
this
evening,
would
allow
for
the
development
to
be
implemented
immediately.
Following
the
Civil
self-built
exemption
request
being
completed,
each
dwelling
would
need
to
comply
fully
with
all
of
the
conditions
that
are
listed
on
the
report
and
the
update
sheet.
E
Q
Hello
again,
third
paragraph
on
page
one,
two
five
of
the
officer
report
mentions
says
this.
This
was,
however,
not
taken
into
consideration
by
the
LPA
or
the
planning
inspector
in
determining
the
application.
I
think
you
have
just
said
that
it
was
always
the
intention
of
the
applicant
that
these
should
be
brought
forward.
As
self-built
and
I
thought,
you
said
that
the
lp
that
the
local
planning
Authority
and
the
inspector
knew
that.
E
E
The
the
point
that
was
being
made
is
that
the
development
description
wasn't
considered
as
a
phasing
for
sale
purposes.
It
was
considered
for
four
houses.
The
purpose
of
of
this
application
is
to
phase
that
so
that
it
can
still
come
forward
a
self-built
as
entirely
envisaged,
but
it
allows
each
plot
to
come
forward
individually.
D
B
Okay,
so
I
think
it's
worth
adding
at
this
point.
On
page
eight,
the
update
paper,
it
is
noted
that
in
principle,
5.1
of
the
housing
SPD
that
states
that
where
development
is
acceptable
in
all
other
respects,
the
delivery
is
self-built
and
Custom
Homes,
including
plots
for
such
homes,
will
be
supported.
So
the
question
of
self-build,
but
you
can't
object
it
in
terms
of
its
self-built-
do
I
have
any
more
questions.
Council
of
ratkin
thank.
H
D
Yes,
so
upon
the
granting
of
the
technical
details
concerning
that
is
what
happens
tonight,
then
the
individuals
would
have
to
apply
to
the
council
for
self-build
exemption
through
that
process.
That
would
either
be
agreed
or
not
agreed.
If
it's
agreed,
then
they'd
be
exempt
from
playing
any
sale
payments.
If
not,
then
it
would
be
chargeable
on
that
specific
plot.
Likewise,
they
could.
Then
one
of
the
plots,
for
example,
could
not
cut.
Not
an
application
could
not
be
made
on
a
specific
plot.
D
So,
under
the
previous
technical
details,
concern
Ed
conditions,
for
example,
materials,
soft
Landscaping,
that
sort
of
thing
we
would
have
expected
to
see
site
wide,
so
what
materials
would
be
for
all
of
the
four
properties,
the
way
that
the
proposed
phasing
would
work
and
and
how
the
conditions
have
been
reworded
is
that
that
it
would
enable
them
to
submit
it
for
each
plot
individually.
So,
rather
than
one
application
for
materials,
we
could
have
four.
F
D
I
think
it's
also
worth
noting
that
a
lot
of
the
representations
that
were
received
and
raised
matters
which
are
outside
of
the
scope
or
and
or
perhaps
misunderstood
the
intention
of
this
application,
for
example,
some
of
the
representations
thoughts
that
the
application
was
to
remove
the
conditions.
So,
whilst
an
objection
has
been
received,
it
doesn't
directly
relate
to
what
is
actually
being
proposed.
D
B
L
This
is
a
variation
of
condition,
application
seeking
to
vary
condition,
one
of
planning
permission,
bdb
56185,
and
that
is
to
allow
the
surgery
to
conduct
other
dental
procedures
and
facial
Aesthetics
and
to
align
with
the
current
use.
Class
groups
specifically
use
Class
E.
There
is
no
update
for
this
application.
B
S
Good
evening
and
thank
you
for
giving
us
this
opportunity
to
speak
at
the
meeting
tonight,
my
name
is
docs
Beth
Richardson
I'm
here
tonight,
with
my
husband
Bertie
and
we
run
and
own
Basingstoke
Orthodontics
I'm,
a
specialist
orthodontist,
have
been
a
dentist
for
25
years
and
I've
dedicated
my
clinical
practice
to
Orthodontics.
For
the
past
13
years
we
took
over
a
basing
folk
Orthodontics
in
chemshot
Lane
eight
years
ago,
from
a
retiring
colleague
and
since
then
have
continued
to
deliver
both
NHS
and
private
Orthodontic
Care
to
the
families
of
Basingstoke
and
the
surrounding
area.
S
S
Our
work
addresses
a
much
wider
remit,
including
managing
children
and
adults,
with
complex
oral
health
issues,
sleep
and
breathing
disorders
and
problems
with
bite
and
Facial
Pain.
Many
of
these
issues
require
adjunctive
treatments,
such
as
the
use
of
Botox
and
dermal
filler
under
one
under
our
current
planning
status.
We're
not
able
to
offer
the
comprehensive
care
we
would
like
to
deliver
to
our
patients.
S
S
24
of
five-year-olds
in
England
have
visible
tooth
decay
tooth
decay
is
a
completely
preventable
disease
with
correct
education
and
access
to
dental
health
professionals
in
North
Hampshire.
The
waiting
time
for
a
child
to
be
seen
in
the
Community
Dental
Service
is
currently
five
years
and
for
removal
of
rotten
teeth
under
general
anesthesia.
The
waiting
time
is
over
12
months.
S
There
are
very
few
Dental
practices
in
Basingstoke,
accepting
children
for
routine
Dental
Care
and
many
children
are
expected
to
travel
to
reading,
Portsmouth
or
Southampton
to
see
a
dentist
anecdotally.
Today,
I
had
a
four-year-old
in
my
surgery
who
has
never
seen
a
dentist
because
they
can't
register
with
one
four.
S
In
terms
of
specialist
Pediatric
Dental
practices,
the
closest
to
Basingstoke
is
a
practice
in
Twickenham.
We
understand
the
frustration
of
our
neighbors
regarding
parking
around
the
practice.
I
have
been
in
contact
several
times
with
Basingstoke
and
Hampshire
highways
departments.
They
are
aware
of
the
issues
and
Hampshire
Council
will
be
visiting
the
practice
to
see
if
any
parking
restrictions
could
be
implemented
to
ease
the
situation.
S
However,
we
are
not
a
priority.
This
change
of
use
will
not
increase
the
volume
of
patients
visiting
the
practice
or
the
number
of
Staff.
We
have
three
surgeries
and
we
don't
have
space
for
any
more
operating
rooms
at
any
one
time.
There
can
only
be
one
patient,
one
dentist,
one
dental
nurse
and
a
guardian
in
each
surgery,
regardless
of
the
procedure
being
performed
I.
Thank
you
all
for
your
time
and
consideration
of
our
case.
F
Thank
you
chairman.
Yes,
hello,
good
evening,
doctor
everything
you
said
about
dentistry
and
general
resonates
I.
Think
with
all
of
us
in
the
room.
Let's
go
back
to
parking.
You've
got
six
parking
spaces
according
to
the
block
plan
in
our
paperwork.
Tonight,
I
have
to
ask
you,
because
most
of
the
objections
in
the
report
are
about
parking
six
spaces.
What's
on
average
and
another
problem,
is
you
get
three
surgeries
occupied,
I
presume,
that's
three
cars.
Possibly
you
can
correct
me
on
on
any
of
this
and
then
for
the
next
changeover.
F
S
You're,
absolutely
right,
Council
that
we
do
have
six
parking
spaces.
We
try
to
limit
the
number
of
staff
that
are
parking
off-site
on
site
and
off-site
by
using
one
or
two
of
those
parking
spaces
for
staff.
We
do
encourage
staff
also
to
use
local
transport
I
myself
come
from
Surrey,
but
I
come
on
public
transport
and
bicycles.
S
We
have
a
bicycle
rack
in
the
back
of
the
practice
as
well
to
try
and
encourage
people
to
use
public
transport
or
using
bicycle
or
walking,
but
most
of
our
patients
are
teenagers
they're,
often
coming
from
school,
delivered
by
the
parent
and
will
often
stop
curbside,
and
we
can't
stop
them
from
doing
that.
We
have
put
up
signage.
We
send
out
an
email
every
at
the
bottom
of
every
email
we
send
out.
There
is
a
paragraph
asking
people
not
to
park
outside
the
practice
on
the
road
opposite:
The
Junction
in
gracemere
Crescent.
S
S
They
are
I
can't
do
any
more
I've
contacted
highways
because
there's
not
been
an
accident,
we're
not
a
priority
for
them
to
come
out
and
I
actually
would
like
them
to
put
yellow
lines
around
the
junction
and
people
to
park
in
the
car
park,
because
it
would
make
my
life
easier
because
then
I
wouldn't
have
to
deal
with
angry
neighbors.
But
I
can't
stand
out
on
the
road
all
day.
Every
day
telling
people
not
to
park
opposite
a
junction
they've
all
got
driving
licenses,
they
all
pass
their
test.
I
K
K
G
B
L
N
L
L
B
T
You
for
having
us
as
you're
aware
the
application
is
currently
recommended
for
refusal
based
on
an
overbearing
impact
on
the
neighbor.
We
are
here
to
contest
the
notion
that
the
proposal
is
overbearing.
It's
our
contention
the
first
instance
the
distance
from
the
neighboring
property
should
be
measured
from
the
existing
line.
The
existing
dwelling
line
of
the
rear
boundary,
the
rear
elevation
to
the
side
of
the
garage
that'll
be
10
meters.
T
We
don't
feel
that
the
side
of
the
garage
would
measure
to
the
conservatory
any
part
of
a
house
that
can
be
expended
under
permitted
development.
I,
don't
feel,
should
impact
on
the
ability
of
my
applicant
to
improve
their
own
property
in
which
church
we
have
numerous
examples
of
two-story
Gable
elevations,
where
they
are
within
10
meters
or
closer
than
10
meters.
As
we
are
here,
The
Proposal.
Thank
you.
The
elevation
was
just
there
is
for
a
store
and
a
half
height
extension.
T
Not
a
full
Gable
I
could
list
off
a
numerous
numerous
situations
in
which
church,
within
one
square
mile
of
the
application
site,
Park
View,
you
have
a
two-story
gamer
within
9.2
meters
or
the
other
neighbor
that
diminishes
to
5.75
meters
with
a
single
story.
Outrigger
existing
situation
not
overbearing,
receive
that
information,
Cal
soup
drive
and
whip
Church,
7.85
meters,
two-story
Gable
to
the
rear
of
a
neighbor
Marsden,
Court,
nine
meters,
race
of
rear
elevation
to
a
two-story
side,
Gable,
there's
no
clear
definition
of
overbearing
and
there's
no
specific
distances
that
we
should
work
to.
T
The
published
document
that
business
I
can
Dean
have
refers
simply
back
to
the
planning
portal
definition.
The
word
overbearing,
therefore,
is
subjective
and
must
be
related
to
context.
This
specific
context,
we
have
to
say
that
the
the
owner
of
number
six
web
Swan,
close,
has
been,
has
been
notified
and
consulted
on
two
plan
applications
and
has
not
objected.
So
the
very
property
that
we're
being
told
is
going
to
receive
an
overbearing
impact
is
not
objected,
they're
fine
with
it.
T
In
addition,
within
a
mile
of
this
property
at
Groves
Orchard,
we
have
a
two-story
Gable,
eight
meters
in
height
8.4
meters
in
height,
that
is
10
meters
away
from
enabling
property
rear
elevation.
Who
themselves
would
build
a
conservatory,
that's
much
bigger
than
the
conservatory
here
and
they've
also
built
a
big
flat
roof
Dormer
extension
on
the
top
further
encroaching
the
garden
space.
T
That's
an
existing
precedent
that
situation
has
happened.
It's
there.
It's
right
there,
a
mile
away
from
the
site,
if
that's
existing
precedent
that
we're
dealing
with.
Surely
that's
the
context
we
have
to
work
with
when
there
is
a
clear
precedent,
it's
the
most
obvious
reason
for
an
appeal,
particularly
in
a
absence
of
specific
guidance
and
where
there's
a
subjective
word.
That
is
the
cause
for
refusal.
We
don't
feel
that
by
raising
the
height
of
that
elevation
by
a
couple
of
meters
for
a
barn
hip
will
be
overbearing
on
the
neighbor.
C
L
Draw
your
attention
to
page
165
in
the
printed
papers.
The
officer
has
considered
the
six
meter
distance
from
the
conservatory
extension
and
the
10
meter
distance
from
the
original
back
of
the
dwellings.
They
have
considered
both
situations
and
on
the
second
to
bottom
paragraph,
the
officer
has
considered
the
use
of
the
amenity
space
as
well
with
six
Webb's
Farm
close
includes
a
patio
area,
immediate
illegations,
the
existing
garage
and
the
first
floor
extension
would
dominate
this
area
appearing
overbearing.
F
I
think
this,
thank
you,
chairman,
I,
think
this
is
a
good
example
of
the
use
of
the
viewing
panel,
because
we'd
sat
down
and
looked
at
these
papers.
We
wouldn't
have
gotten
what
I
term
a
real
appreciation
of
what
the
situation
is
on
the
ground
and
standing
in
the
road
and
looking
at
the
collection
of
houses
in
the
context
of
the
street
scene.
F
Certainly,
from
my
perspective,
I
won't
speak
for
anybody
else,
but
it
was
obvious
if
you
just
visualize
what
was
going
to
happen
and
we
had
the
diagrams
in
front
of
us,
it
was
and
I
would
use
it.
Certainly,
in
my
experience
as
a
certainly
creating
overbearing
picture
within
the
street
scene,
it
really
was
a
sort
of
one
step
too
far.
That
would
probably
be
another
form
of
extension
proposed
on
that
that
wouldn't
be
yeah.
F
There
are
all
kinds
of
ways
you
can
extend
a
property,
but
as
proposed
we
do
not,
and
as
was
mentioned
by
officers,
we
treat
everything
on
its
merits.
We
don't
take
precedence
too
much
into
consideration
and
setting
the
household
world.
We
look
at
each
case
in
its
context
and
as
far
as
I'm
concerned,
the
context
here
was
I
fully
support.
The
officer's
recommendation
give
them
what
we've
got
in
front
of
us.
Are
you
therefore
happy
to
move
I'm
happy
to
move
support
the
office
recommendation?
Thank
you.
Council
Robinson.
I
Councilor
Meadows
really
said
90
of
what
I
was
going
to
say.
We
must
take
everyone
in
context,
and
the
context
of
this
is
if
I
walked
out
of
the
back
of
that
Conservatory
of
the
neighbor,
which
is
there
and
we
can't
say
well
what,
if
it
wasn't
there,
it
is
there
you
would
walk
out
and
you
would
look
up
and
you
would
see
a
massive
expansion
brickwork
and
that
it
would
be
overbearing
so
I.
Second
councilor
Meadows
proposal.
K
You
chair,
it
is
just
to
say
that
we
haven't
received
many
objections
or
any
objections.
I
don't
think,
and
the
existing
neighbor
might
not
have
issues
with
it,
but
we're
also
having
to
make
decisions
based
on
potential
impact
on
on
future
occupiers
of
the
properties
in
question.
So,
whilst
I
have
sympathies
that
there
aren't
objections
and
the
applicant
might
feel
that
they
therefore
should
have
it
approved,
it's
it's
the
wider
context
and
it's
the
the
future
context
as
well.
So
I
agree
with
what
the
others
have
said.
B
B
A
B
D
Thank
you
chair
item
six
seats
planning
permission
for
the
erection
of
a
single
story,
front
extension,
replacement
of
an
existing
rear
flat
roof
with
a
pitched
roof
and
a
proposed
Rich
pitched
roof
canopy
over
a
side
door
at
97,
Derwent,
Road
Basingstoke.
The
proposed
development
is
identical
to
that
previously
approved
in
2020,
but
that
permission
has
now
expired
and
the
applicant
is
just
seeking
to
renew
that
permission.