The Lymington Society

 

Weekly Planning Search - Mar 3rd 2010

95187 - CO-OP PETROL STATION, AMPRESS PARK

registration date:  17/02/2010

Location:  Ampress

Proposal:  Display 3 illuminated fascia signs; various non illuminated signs

Statutory Class: Advertisements

Consulted:  neighbours 6, others 9

History:  None

Comment:  The signs appear to be labels for the various facilities on the site - eg EXIT, CAR WASH and so on

Recommendation:  No action

 

95233 - 8 CLINTON ROAD

registration date:  22/02/2010

Location:  Off Ellery Grove, near Marsh Lane

Proposal:  First floor side extension; rear conservatory

Statutory Class: Householder developments

Consulted:  neighbours 6, others 3

History:  94796 (similar application) - refused 1 Jan 2010:  "By reason of its prominent siting and poor design incorporating a flat roof, the proposed first floor side extension would appear out of keeping in the street scene to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area. For this reason, the development is contray to policy CS2 of the Core Strategy for the New Forest District outside the National Park"Comment:   I commented "A comparatively modest extension to a substantial two-storey house.   Given the density of the local housing the number of neighbours consulted seems small.   None has objected so far".   (One subsequently entered what was classified as a comment).

Comment:  This is a second try at a similar extension (refusal of which was recommended by the Town Council planning committee).   The reason for refusal, which owes nothing to neighbourly complaint, suggests that the NFDC are taking a fairly strict line in interpreting the new Core Strategy.   It will be instructive to see the fate of this follow-up 

Recommendation:  No action

 

94792 - LYMINGTON SPORTS GROUND, ST THOMAS PARK

registration date:  25/02/2010

Location:  well known

Proposal:  Temporary siting of a portable cabin for a period of 2 years

Statutory Class: Minerals Processing  (how they arrive at this is a mystery!)

Consulted:  neighbours 6, others 3

History:  None

Comment:  This application is identical to an earlier one with the same reference number but dated 3 Feb 2010.   I commented then "The Town Council want to put a portacabin near the pavilion "for the storage of equipment ancillary to the sports ground" until the pavilion itself can be adapted for such use".   Nothing else appears to have changed

Recommendation:  No action

 

94822 - 89-90 HIGH STREET (Conservation Area)

registration date:  24/02/2010

Location:  The main Boots on the corner with New Street

Proposal:  Display 2 internally illuminated fascia signs; 1 non-illuminated fascia sign; 2 internally illuminated projecting signs

Statutory Class:  Advertisements

Consulted:  Neighbours 30, others 7

History:  None

Comment:  Boots want some new fascias, with two inset illuminated BOOTS "lozenge" logos and one illuminated green cross plus two small flanking lit signs.   This is presumably contrary to High Street policy, but if so the anomaly of the illuminated 99p store fascia must be confronted at the same time.   Views needed.

Recommendation:   Discuss at March meeting with a view to objection?

 

95226 - GLEVINS, 38A HIGH STREET (Conservation Area)

registration date:  19/02/2010

Location:  Substantial but inconspiuous house approached by narrow lane between Lloyds and Natwest.

Proposal:  Single-storey front extension; single-storey side extension

Statutory Class: Householder developments

Consulted:  neighbours 9, others 14

History:  None recent

Comment:  I was surprised to learn that this house, which is almost invisible from outside its high surrounding walls (which date from "the1800 period"), was built as recently as 1968, since when it has been much extended and modified in what the Heritage Statement well describes it as an "unsympathetic" way.   It has no historical significance and the current proposals look like a sensible attempt to enhance its visual contribution to the character of the Conservation Area.   The archaeologists are unconcerned and the garden's trees are not threatened.

Recommendation:  No action