Agenda and minutes

An apology for non attendance was received from Councillor Chegwyn.

Councillor Casey advised that he was the Chairman of the Friends of  Stokes Bay but that this was a non pecuinary interest.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on the 31 August 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 3 October 2022. The total time for deputations in favour and against shall not exceed 10 minutes)

There were deputations on agenda items

(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 question(s) shall have been submitted to the Borough Solicitor by 12 noon on Monday 3 October 2022)

There was none.

To consider a proposal to designate Stokes Bay as a Conservation Area, as set out in Appendix A.

To consider the adoption of the Stokes Bay Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan, as set out in Appendix A.

Consideration was given to a report of the Principal Conservation and Design Officer consider a proposal to designate Stokes Bay as a Conservation Area, as set out in Appendix A.

The Board was advised that the consultant engaged by the Council had found that the designation of the area was appropriate, that public consultation had been undertaken and that it was now proposed that the designation be approved.

The Board was advised that the boundary had been slightly realigned to remove properties that were not appropriate to be included, and to define some boundary lines close to properties.

Members sought clarification as to whether there was any cost implication to the Council. The Board was advised that there was no additional burden on the Council to spend additional money on Stokes Bay and that the recommendations within the document were simply that.

The signage improvements were recommendations without the Conservation Area, though this was not essential the survey had given an independent view of the area and was suggesting ways to enhance and preserve it. It was suggesting ways that improvements can be made in a more cohesive way.

The suggestions were aspirational and not onerous, intended to enhance the area and the character of it.

The Board was advised that if the proposal was passed it would need to be reported to the Secretary of State as well as being advertised in the London Gazette and in the local paper. This process would be completed within weeks.

The Board was advised that no responsibility for the Sea Wall would be shifted to Gosport Borough Council, and Fort Monckton remained the responsibility of the MOD.

Members acknowledged that some of the plants on the shoreline were unique to Stokes Bay and welcomed the report, its contents and thanked the officers for their hard work.

RESOVLED:

That the Board agrees to formally designate Stokes Bay as a Conservation Area, as set out in Appendix A.

That the Board resolve to adopt the Stokes Bay Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan to support Policy LP12 of the adopted Gosport Borough Local Plan 2011 to 2029 and as a material consideration when determining planning applications.

Consideration of the report of the Development Manager

21/00370/FULL-ERECTION OF 1NO. BUILDING TO FORM AN EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT (USE CLASS B2 /B8 / E(G(ii)(iii)), WITH ACCESS AND EGRESS, CAR PARKING, LANDSCAPING AND ASSOCIATED WORKS AND IMPROVEMENTS (AMENDMENT TO PART OF PLANNING PERMISSION 19/00316/FULL) (DEPARTURE FROM LOCAL PLAN) (as amended by plans received 02.08.22, highways technical notes received 17.02.22 and 29.07.22 and ecology information 05.04.22 and 05.07.22)

Land At Brockhurst Gate  Cotsworth Road  Gosport  Hampshire   

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager detailing application 21/00370/FULL.

The Board was advised that the application was a slight amendment to a previously granted application that had  expired and the amendment was as a result of the acquisition of additional land which would extend the size of the units slightly

The Board was advised that in addition to the £277,000 secured for the improvement of Football facilities within the Borough as mitigation for the loss of the pitches to be provided on the site, there was to be an additional Section 106 of £25,000 for highway improvements and white line painting improvements which would modify the northbound turning into Heritage Way to accommodate more vehicles and reducing the impact on the congestion.

Mr Harris was invited to address the Board. He advised that the key points of the revision were to the northern part of the application which would increase the floor space of the units and clear the scrub that bordered the road and help to address some highway matters. The Board was advised that the proposed unit size was much more attractive to potential occupiers and would support an increase in industrial capacity in the Borough. In addition, the proposal would create 200 jobs, and although some maybe as a result of transfer platforms of businesses, there would also be 100 construction jobs as part of the build.

There was no Highway objection and improvement would be made to the A32, the delay in the construction as a result of the pandemic and the subsequent resubmission of an application had been productive as it had allowed a better scheme to be presented.

The Board was advised that the applicant was committed to delivering the development within 2 years.

The Board was advised that there were to be no physical changes to the road, but amendments would be made to the line layout to improve the capacity for cars turning right into Heritage Way.

Members were advised that the white lining would be secured so it was in place before the first occupation of the buildings, when the harm would occur.

Members were advised that construction traffic would have to use the existing access points into the site as an additional access from Heritage Way was unlikely, but a construction management plan is to be secured by condition.

Members expressed concern at the current situation regarding the A32, but it was acknowledged that this was an agreement that would be made with Hampshire County Council as the Highway Authority.

RESOLVED: That application 21/00370/FULL be approved, subject to the conditions in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

There were none