Agenda and minutes

Apologies for non attendance were received from Councillor K Bradley and Councillor M Bradley.

All Members are required to disclose at this point in the meeting, or as soon as possible thereafter, any disclosable pecuniary interest or personal interest in any item(s) being considered at this meeting.

There were none.

To sign as a true and correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 6 April 2022.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on the 6 April 2022 be signed as a true and correct record.

(NOTE: The Board is required to receive a deputation(s) on a matter which is before the meeting of the Board provided that notice of the intended deputation and its object shall have been received by the Borough Solicitor by 12 noon on Monday 6 June 2022. The total time for deputations in favour and against shall not exceed 10 minutes)

A deputation was received on item 22/00073/FULL – 60 St Mary’s Road.

(NOTE: The Board is required to allow a total of 15 minutes for questions from members of the public on matters within the terms of reference of the Board provided that notice of such questions (s) shall have been submitted to the Borough Solicitor by 12 noon Monday 6 June 2022)

There was none.

To elect from the Members of the Board a Vice-Chairman.  

RESOLVED: That Councillor Hammond be elected as Vice-Chairman for the Municipal Year 2022-23.

The Council is required to review its Gambling Statement of Principles every three years, the current three-year period ended in February 2022. The purpose of this report is to bring the draft statement of Principles, together with the consultation responses, to this Board for approval for recommendation so that it can be adopted at Council. The statutory consultation exercise in respect of this Statement has been completed. 

Consideration was given to a report of Head of Environmental Health. The Council is required to review its Gambling Statement of Principles every three years, the current three-year period ended in February 2022. The purpose of the report is to bring the draft Statement of Principles, together with the consultation responses, to the Board for approval for recommendation so that it can be adopted at Council. The statutory consultation exercise in respect of this Statement has been completed. 

The Board was advised that it was a document introduced in 2005 that had to be reviewed every 3 years. The Board was advised that there were few changes and that there were seldom any issues with premises licensed for gambling within the Borough.

The Statement of Principles needed to be considered every 5 years and that there were currently 6 gambling premises, 3 adult shops and a family entertainment venue. The policy had been written by two barristers in 2005 and was well suited for its purpose, the only amendments had been to make some elements of it simplified.

The Board was advised that there was a small amendment to remove the word Fareham and replace it with Gosport.

It was clarified that consultations were advertised on the Council’s consultation page and that premises permit holders were contacted directly with the proposed policy for comment.

 Members recognised that there was no great amendments to be made as the Policy had served its purpose well.

The Board was advised that gambling machines had been removed from take away establishments as part of a change in the Gambling Act and that when take away premises were inspected checks were made to insure that none were present.

The Board were advised that if there was doubt as to the classification of the gambling machine in situ in a venue, the Gambling Commission were very quick to offer support and guidance.

RESOLVED: That the Board:

i)     Considers the draft document and incorporates any amendments as necessary; and

ii)    Recommends to Council the final draft Gambling Act 2005 Statement of Principles for adoption by Council.

To consider the report of the Development Manager

21/00431/FULL - RETROSPECTIVE CHANGE OF USE OF UNITS 1 AND 4 FROM USE CLASSES E(G), B2, B8 (INDUSTRIAL) USE TO CLASS E(D) (LEISURE) (as amended by planning statement received 18.10.21 and parking survey received 28.1.2022)

Unit 1 & 4 Wingate Workspace  25 Wingate Road  Gosport  Hampshire  PO12 4HE

This item was withdrawn from the agenda. It was anticipated that it would be presented to a future meeting of the Board.

22/00073/FULL- ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION AND EXTENSION TO EXISTING GARAGE

60 St Marys Avenue  Gosport  Hampshire  PO12 2HX   

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager.

The Board was advised that the two principle issues identified were that of the appropriateness of the proposal in design terms and any impact on  amenity and that the proposal was recommended for approval.

Mr Beel was invited to address the Board. He advised that he was very unhappy to be at the Board because until this point there had been a good neighbour relationship.

He advised that he had concerns about the height of the proposal as there was no height listed on the plans. He advised that further investigation and contact with the planning department had indicated that the height would be 3.15m and he had made a telephone call to the planning department who had advised 3.1m but that the plan was actually higher at 3.45 metres.

He advised that the buildings had all initially been constructed in a similar way and that going by the plans the proposal was for this building to have an extension of 3.45m high and that the orientation of the properties meant there would be a loss of light to his conservatory.

In answer to a Members question the Board was advised that in addition to the flat roof there was a coping stone and a lantern which added height to the proposal and that this was the main concern as it would impact on the sun that reached the conservatory for 4 months of the year.

Mr Edney was invited to address the Board. He advised that the proposal was the same height as the existing conservatory but would now be squared off. He advised that the reason for doing this was that him and his wife were in the process of applying to be foster parents and as a result needed more space. He advised the proposed garage extension would give more storage space.

He advised that he had lived in the property for 17.5 years and had never had a cross word with his neighbour but accepted that some people did not like change. He advised that he was extending the property into an orangery and that there were far larger extensions within the street.

A Member questioned whether the applicant would agree to reducing the height of the coping stones to help with the neighbours concern about the height of the proposal.

The Board was advised that it was required to consider the application as proposed and could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

There were none.