16 homes at 42-52 Gosport Street, Lymington

Planning history

The site had been used as a builders’ merchant since about 1958, and there was no recent relevant planning history.

“The site, which is approximately 0.18 hectares, comprises a vacant employment site that has been used since approximately 1958 as a builders' merchants, with warehouse style buildings on the site and a range of offices fronting Gosport Street. The site is industrial in appearance, particularly when viewed from Cannon Street. The immediate surrounding area mainly consists of residential uses, primarily in the form of terraced housing.”

“There is a significant change in levels across the site, with the lowest parts of the site fronting Gosport Street, and with levels progressively rising by up to 4 metres within the site to the highest point of the site on its western boundary adjacent to the Cannon Street car park.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the scheme would provide sustainable brownfield housing, improve the site and conservation area, and have acceptable impacts subject to mitigation.

“Whilst the proposal would conflict wit h t he final part of policy IMPL1, it must be recognised that the Council cannot demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites. The proposal would deliver a sustainable form of d evelopment, redeveloping a vacant brownfield site with 16 well-designed and much-needed new dwellings within the built-up area, significantly enhancing the visual amenities of the area, including the character and appearance of the Lymington…”

Officer report

Main concerns considered

The assessment considered affordable housing, housing mix, parking, heritage, neighbours, highways, drainage, ecology, archaeology, contamination and protected habitats.

“1) The principle of development 2) Design, layout and impact upon the street scene and heritage assets 3) Affordable housing 4) Residential amenity of adjacent neighbouring properties, in respect of noise, light, visual intrusion, privacy and bin storage and collection 5) Access, parking and highway safety 6) Drainage 7) Ecology and BNG 8) Archaeology 9) Contaminated Land, Air Quality and Sustainability 2 SITE DESCRIPTION”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The town council recommended permission, while consultees raised no objections subject to conditions covering matters including heritage, highways, drainage, ecology and contamination.

“7 8 Neighbourhood Plan Lymington and Pennington Neighbourhood Development Plan 2026 National Planning Policy Framework National Planning Policy Guidance Plan Policy Designations Built-up Area Town Centre Boundary Employment PARISH / TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS Lymington & Pennington Town Council: Recommend Permission but would accept a delegated decision.”

“NFDC Environmental Health (Environmental Protection) No objection in relation to noise and construction subject to conditions NFDC Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) No objection in relation to the previously developed nature of the site, subject to conditions relating to contaminated land and remediation required NFDC Ecology No objection in relation to ecological matters subject to conditions HCC Highways No objection in relation to the impac t upon the surrounding…”

Officer report

What residents said

Two local residents supported the application but raised concerns about a party wall, privacy and the need for additional screening trees.

“Archaeologist No objection based upon the submitted Written Scheme of Investigation subject to c onditions 9 REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED 2 letters of support received from local residents: one letter generally supports the application but with concerns regarding the party wall; the other letter generally supports the application but with concerns regarding privacy to existing properties in North Close and suggesting the addition of trees would help to screen the development.”

Officer report

Who spoke

No public participants were recorded for the application.

Committee discussion

The case officer referred members to the update sheet and explained that the recommendation changed after the unilateral undertaking was completed.

“Cllr J Davies declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 25/10306 as he is a member of Lymington and Pennington Town Council. He had not expressed a view in relation to the application and therefore concluded there were no grounds under common law to prevent him from remaining in the meeting to speak and to vote.”

“The Case Officer referred to the update sheet and the change in recommendation as a result of the Unilateral Undertaking having been completed.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee granted permission subject to conditions set out in the report and written update.

“As set out in the report and written update.”

Minutes