Planning applications for Rockbourne

You can search planning applications in the village, follow their progress and submit comments through the New Forest District Council's online planning application system. Access allows you to:

  • search and view details about planning, listed building and tree works applications
  • comment on planning, listed building and tree works applications
  • save searches and track applications
  • receive email alerts.

To visit the NFDC online planning application system please click HERE.

 

Questions & Answers:

 

What powers does Rockbourne Parish Council have with respect to planning applications?

Rockbourne Parish Council is consulted by the relevant Planning Authority (which is usually New Forest District Council) on all planning applications.  Any views expressed by the Parish Council will be taken into account by the Planning Authority before a decision is made, providing the points made are relevant to the determination of a planning application. 

 

The final decision is made by the Planning Authority, not the Parish Council.

Rockbourne Parish Council will only comment on what are known as “material considerations” – issues, for example, such as boundary disputes between neighbours or loss of views will not be considered.

 

Do parish councils grant planning permission?

  • Town and parish councils are not Planning Authorities. Town and parish councils are only statutory consultees in the planning process.
  • This means that they only have the right to be informed of planning applications within the parish.
  • They cannot approve or reject planning applications.
  • They can only comment on planning applications in the same way that individuals can comment.
  • Consequently the length of time taken to determine a planning application is governed by the local planning authority not the parish council.
  • A parish council can request that it be given extra time to comment on an application.
  • The decision whether this is granted rests solely with the planning authority and its own deadlines for decision making.

How do parish councils comment on planning applications?

  • Parish councils can only agree to comment on planning applications in properly called council or committee meetings which the public can attend.
  • The comments agreed in the council meeting are submitted in writing by the parish clerk to the relevant planning authority.
  • The process is exactly the same as that of an individual wishing to comment on a planning application.
  • Parish councils are statutory consultees and have no powers to approve or reject planning applications, they can only comment or not on applications.

Valid reasons for comment on a Planning Application

Comments that are clear, concise and accurate stand more chance of being accepted than those that are not. When planning applications are considered, the following matters can all be relevant. These are sometimes referred to as ‘material planning considerations’:

  • Central government policy and guidance - Acts, Circulars, Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPGs) etc. 
  • The Development Plan - and any review of the Development Plan which is underway.
  • Adopted supplementary guidance - for example, village design statements, conservation area appraisals, car parking standards.
  • Replies from statutory and non-statutory agencies (e.g. Environment Agency, Highways Authority). 
  • Representations from others - neighbours, amenity groups and other interested parties so long as they relate to land use matters. 
  • Effects on an area - this includes the character of an area, availability of infrastructure, density, over-development, layout, position, design and external appearance of buildings and landscaping 
  • The need to safeguard valuable resources such as good farmland or mineral reserves. 
  • Highway safety issues - such as traffic generation, road capacity, means of access, visibility, car parking and effects on pedestrians and cyclists. 
  • Public services - such as drainage and water supply 
  • Public proposals for using the same land 
  • Effects on individual buildings - such as overlooking, loss of light, overshadowing, visual intrusion, noise, disturbance and smell. 
  • Effects on a specially designated area or building - such as green belt, conservation areas, listed buildings, ancient monuments and areas of special scientific interest. 
  • Effects on existing tree cover and hedgerows. 
  • Nature conservation interests - such as protection of badgers, great crested newts etc. 
  • Public rights of way
  • Flooding or pollution. 
  • Planning history of the site - including existing permissions and appeal decisions. 
  • A desire to retain or promote certain uses - such as playing fields, village shops and pubs.
  • Need for the development - such as a petrol station 
  • Prevention of crime and disorder 
  • Presence of a hazardous substance directly associated with a development 
  • Human Rights Act 
  • Precedent - but only where it can be shown there would be a real danger that a proposal would inevitably lead to other inappropriate development (for example, isolated housing in the countryside) 

Irrelevant reasons for objection

There are certain matters which do not amount to ‘material planning considerations’ under current legislation and guidance. These matters cannot be taken into account in considering a planning application and should not be included in objections as they weaken your case: 

  • Speculation over future use
  • The identity of the applicant or occupant 
  • Unfair competition 
  • Boundary disputes 
  • Breach of covenants and personal property rights, including personal (not Public) rights of way 
  • Loss of a private view 
  • Devaluation of property 
  • Other financial matters 
  • Matters controlled by other legislation - such as internal space standards for dwellings or fire prevention
  • Religious or moral issues - such as betting shops and amusement arcades 
  • The fact that the applicant does not own the land to which the application relates 
  • The fact that an objector is a tenant of land where the development is proposed 
  • The fact that the development has already been carried out and the applicant is seeking to regularise the situation.  People can carry out development at their own risk before getting planning permission) 
  • The developer’s motives, record or reputation

Other Matters – “concerns and issues”

The person making a planning application has to provide enough information for the application to be determined. They do not have to provide every single detail before an application can be approved because certain matters can be resolved by way of conditions included as part of the permission. 

Because of this, certain issues may not be considered as ‘objections’ but it is entirely reasonable for you to raise concerns on such issues and to ask to be kept informed before they are approved. These include: 

  • The proposed type and colour of the materials to be used 
  • The exact nature of any proposed planting or boundary treatment

 

For further planning information please visit: https://www.newforest.gov.uk/planning

 

 

 

Planning Archives:

-

October 2017

 
Application 17/11328 for Court Orchard House
Cllr Kirkcaldy and Cllr Hall declared an interest in this application as they are both neighbours and Cllr Watt took over as Chairman The application is to replace the current timber house with a much larger brick house. The Councillors had concerns about the increase in size as this is against NFDC policy and could set a precedent, and the effects the new building would have on the surrounding area particularly as it would be close to Grade 1 Listed Buildings and an ancient monument.  Cllr Ash proposed that the Parish Council recommend refusal of the application under Option 4 which was seconded by Cllr Watt, and approved unanimously. The reasons for this were:
  1. The proposed property is much larger than the current house, which breachesthe District Council’s30% limiton increasing the size of existing buildings
  2. The village Parish Plan proposes increasing the amount of affordable housing in the village but this application is to replace a relatively low value property with a much higher value property. This would set a precedent for replacement of other village properties
  3. The proposed property is out of character with the surrounding buildingsand is of a different architectural styleto any existing houses
  4. The site is very close to the Grade 1 Listed buildings of Manor Farmand an ancient monument.
 

Page

2

of

3

6

. Planning

and Tree

Application

s

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windows

at

Cruck

Cottage

Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings

could have

double glazed windows installed

.

There was no Case Officer Review available yet.

Cllr

Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NF

DC

under Option 5

as

this decision required

specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors

Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm

Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed prope

rty could be altered and there was no

Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to

NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windows

at

Cruck

Cottage

Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings

could have

double glazed windows installed

.

There was no Case Officer Review available yet.

Cllr

Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NF

DC

under Option 5

as

this decision required

specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors

Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm

Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed prope

rty could be altered and there was no

Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to

NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this

June 2017

 
Application for Brook Cottage Arena
The applicants explained they wanted to create an all year round riding surfaceby cutting into the ground to form a level area. There will be machinery on site for about two weeks to carry out the work, and the facility is only for the use of the owners. Councillors had no concerns and recommended permission under Option 3 as it will mean the horses will not need to use the road.
 

Page

2

of

3

6

. Planning

and Tree

Application

s

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windows

at

Cruck

Cottage

Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings

could have

double glazed windows installed

.

There was no Case Officer Review available yet.

Cllr

Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NF

DC

under Option 5

as

this decision required

specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors

Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm

Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed prope

rty could be altered and there was no

Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to

NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windows

at

Cruck

Cottage

Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings

could have

double glazed windows installed

.

There was no Case Officer Review available yet.

Cllr

Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NF

DC

under Option 5

as

this decision required

specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors

Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm

Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed prope

rty could be altered and there was no

Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to

NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this

April 2017

 

Application 17/10336 for Roof Alterations at Charities
The applicant, Mr R Carrington, had joined the meeting and explained about the proposal to raise the roof in part of a first floor attic room so this could be used as a bedroom.The alterations would use bricks and tiles to match the current building and the raised roof would not be visible from the front. Councillors asked about the window alterations. There would be a new dormer window, but an existing dormer would be removed. NFDC had confirmed there were no concerns about the increased floor area. Councillors voted to recommend Permission under Option 3, as this would improve the utility of the house without any impact on other propertiesCouncillors thanked Mr Carrington for attending and he left the meeting
 
Application 1710324 for Alterations at Nicada
The application is to enclose an open loggia at the front of the house, and extend the dormer at the rear, with other window alterations. Councillors had no concerns about this work and voted to recommend Permission under Option 3 as the work would improve the appearance and not impact on any neighbours
 

Page

2

of

3

6

. Planning

and Tree

Application

s

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windows

at

Cruck

Cottage

Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings

could have

double glazed windows installed

.

There was no Case Officer Review available yet.

Cllr

Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NF

DC

under Option 5

as

this decision required

specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors

Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm

Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed prope

rty could be altered and there was no

Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to

NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windows

at

Cruck

Cottage

Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings

could have

double glazed windows installed

.

There was no Case Officer Review available yet.

Cllr

Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NF

DC

under Option 5

as

this decision required

specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors

Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm

Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed prope

rty could be altered and there was no

Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to

NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this

March 2017

 

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windowsat CruckCottage
Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings could have double glazed windows installed. There was no Case Officer Review available yet. Cllr Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NFDC under Option 5 as this decision required specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors
 
Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm
Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed property could be altered and there was no Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this.

 

Page

2

of

3

6

. Planning

and Tree

Application

s

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windows

at

Cruck

Cottage

Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings

could have

double glazed windows installed

.

There was no Case Officer Review available yet.

Cllr

Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NF

DC

under Option 5

as

this decision required

specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors

Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm

Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed prope

rty could be altered and there was no

Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to

NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this

Applications 17/10158 and 17/10159 for Replacement Windows

at

Cruck

Cottage

Councillors discussed the details submitted with the application and were unsure if listed buildings

could have

double glazed windows installed

.

There was no Case Officer Review available yet.

Cllr

Ash proposed the decision was referred back to NF

DC

under Option 5

as

this decision required

specialist information, which was seconded by Cllr Broadbridge and agreed by all Councillors

Application 17/10250 for Window Alterations at Malthouse Farm

Councillors were unsure if the windows on a listed prope

rty could be altered and there was no

Case Officer Review available yet. It was agreed this application should also be referred back to

NFDC under Option 5 as Councillors were not aware of the legal requirements on this

Print Print | Sitemap
© Rockbourne Parish Council