Boat shed and warehouse at Victoria Quay, Weevil Lane, Gosport

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Gosport Regulatory Board on 3 Jun 2026.

26/00007/FULLApproved

What was proposed

A new boat shed and fabrication warehouse with staff facilities would be built, alongside new access doors for existing building 48.

“ERECTION OF NEW BUILDING TO FORM A BOAT SHED AND FABRICATION WAREHOUSE WITH ASSOCIATED STAFF FACILITIES, AND ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING BUILDING (48) TO INSTALL NEW DOOR OPENINGS TO PROVIDE ACCESS (CONSERVATION AREA) (as amplified and amended by information received 31.03.26 and 16.04.26) Victoria Quay Weevil Lane Gosport Hampshire…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a marine employment area with boat storage, buildings, a slipway and boat hoist, within a conservation area and flood zone 3.

“The site is within the former Royal Clarence Yard site, and wider Victoria Quay site. The Victoria Quay site comprises various marine related uses, including boat repairs, storage and has a number pontoons within the Harbour. The site projects further into the harbour than the adjacent land to the south and north. The wider site is primarily hard surfaced and includes a number of buildings. There is a slipway to the harbour and an existing boat hoist.”

“The site is within the Royal Clarence Yard Conservation Area and there are a number of Listed Buildings within Victoria Quay, along with non-designated heritage assets. The site is situated within the designated Waterfront and Town Centre area, which has its own Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), with Victoria Quay, noted as the Royal Clarence Retained Area, and is also located within Flood Zone 3.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval, finding that public benefits from marine employment, jobs and investment outweighed less than substantial heritage harm.

“However, it is also recognised that the height of the building cannot be reduced further, as noted above.. Given its scale and massing and the proposals would lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of designated heritage assets, and as per advice set out in the NPPF, para 215, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use.”

“Given this acknowledged harm, it is important to consider the planning balance and whether there are any public benefits for these proposals. As noted both the current and emerging Local Plans, and the CAAMP seek the continuation of the site for marine employment, and acknowledge that additional development would be appropriate, given proximity to deep water access. The constraints of the use have dictated its overall scale and form, as set out above.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

consultees raised no objections, subject to conditions covering matters including contamination, construction, ecology, flooding, drainage and highways.

“Environmental Health No objection, subject to an unexpected contamination condition being imposed.”

“HCC Ecology No objection, subject to conditions. The application site is covered by areas of hardstanding. It is however located immediately adjacent to the Solent and Dorset Coast SPA and Solent Waders and Brent Goose Strategy Low Use Site G59.”

Officer report

Members’ discussion

Members discussed parking, travel choices, apprenticeships, job creation and whether the proposed cladding would suit coastal conditions.

“It was also confirmed to Members that there was no parking available as part of the proposal and that this would be taken into account as part of the travel plan including links to cycle paths and bus routes.”

“A Member questioned whether the proposed cladding material would be suitable, as the manufacturers website indicates that the material underperformed in coastal areas.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The Board approved the application subject to the conditions in the report.

“RESOLVED: That application 26/00007/FULL be approved, subject to the conditions in the report of the Head of Development Management.”

Minutes

The members' reasons

“Members felt that the applicant had considered any risk and that it was a private investment into the site.”

Minutes

Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.

Sources

  • Gosport Regulatory Board minutes, 3 June 2026
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Gosport's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Council
Gosport
Date
Wednesday 3 June 2026
Recommendation
Officers recommended approval
Committee decided
Approved
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)

This committee's year

24 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →