Travellers caravan site at Land Off Trotts Lane, Marchwood

What was proposed

The application sought a travellers caravan site with two day rooms, two mobile homes and two touring caravans.

“Planning Committee08 October 2025 Application Number:25/10429Full Planning Permission Site:Land off TROTTS LANE, MARCHWOOD SO40 4UE Development: Change of use of land to a travellers caravan site; erection of x2no. day rooms and placement of x2no. mobile homes and x2no.”

“Within the application site at the at the south-east corner is a protected Oak tree (TPO/0028/13). Additionally, beyond the rear boundary of the site is Spraggs Copse an established SINC (Site of Interest for Nature Conservation) woodland. The strip of this woodland along the north-east boundary is covered by a group Tree Preservation Order (trees of all species, also under the reference TPO/0028/13).”

Officer report

Earlier application

An earlier application for two dwellings was refused, and an appeal was dismissed after identified policy conflicts and limited benefits.

“4PLANNING HISTORY ProposalDecision Date Decision Description StatusAppeal Decision 22/11334 Provision of two dwellings (Outline application) 06/01/2023RefusedAppeal Decided Appeal Dismissed Summary of Appeal Decision Appeal Ref: APP/B1740/W/23/3316930 Land Adjacent Wrenwood, Trotts Lane, Marchwood, Hampshire SO40 4UE ·The Inspector concluded that the proposal didnot accord with Policies STR1, STR3, ENV3, ENV4 and HOU5 of the New Forest District Council Local Plan Part 1:…”

“The Inspectoracknowledged that the proposal would deliver housing to help address the shortfall in housing land supply and that, pursuant to Paragraph 69 [as it was] of the Framework, small and medium sized sites can make an important contribution and be built out very quickly. ·The Inspector also concluded thatthe contribution in this case would be very limited and as such, the socio-economic benefits derived from the proposal would be similarly limited.”

Officer report

What consultees said

The parish council, ecology, environmental design and tree officers objected, while planning policy and highways raised no objection on their stated grounds.

“There are no drainage or sewage facilities at the proposed development site and no waste management/storage or collection outlined in the application. Furthermore Trotts Lane (a narrow single file lane in places) is wholly unsuitable for the regular movement of any articulated vehicles. For the numerous reasons detailed above I therefore urge planning officers (and if necessary, the planning committee) to refuse permission on this application.”

“As this application is on an unallocated site, then if is agreed the need is fully demonstrated by the applicant, then the provision of the 2 pitches proposed in can count towards meeting objectively assessed needs, based on the current position in respect of the Local Plan review. Therefore at this point in time, no objection is raised on the policy grounds of need.”

Officer report

Public speakers

No public participants attended the committee meeting.

The committee vote

The committee decided to refuse the application, and one councillor who briefly left the room did not vote.

“The Case Officer provided a short verbal update, with reference to the Committee Updates published 7 October 2025, and explained that a corrected ‘Red Line’ site plan was circulated.”

“Cllr Rickman left the room briefly during the item and therefore did not vote.”

Minutes